Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

NRSE 6050 Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Assignment: Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template

Use this document to complete the Module 5 Assessment Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Healthcare policies and programs define the action, goals, and decisions determining the provision and access to care (Gupta & Lipner, 2020). After formulation and application, policies help in improving various aspects of care and improve health outcomes. Policies on hand hygiene and handwashing are among the many polices aimed at improving safety while enhancing outcomes (CDC, 2022). This Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation paper will discuss the hand hygiene policy under various subheadings that will help in addressing the impact of the practice on patient outcomes.

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Hand Hygiene Policy: Hand hygiene practices are the basic concepts in healthcare that every healthcare provider must understand. Hand hygiene is paramount in determining health outcomes and helps in the prevention of most hospital-acquired infections (HAI) (Gammon & Hunt, 2020). Despite hand hygiene being basic, not all healthcare workers adhere to the laid guidelines and consequently risk the health outcomes of patients whom they are tasked to protect. Hand hygiene is a paramount practice that helps in the prevention of infections. I decided to address the issue to improve knowledge about hand hygiene and enhance adherence. This move aims at reducing infection rates while improving health outcomes.

 

Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Description Hand hygiene is a basic practice yet critical to infection prevention. Healthcare workers engage in hand hygiene practices using either water, soap, or hand sanitizers. Various circumstances and surroundings determine the feasibility of undertaking hand hygiene practices (CDC, 2022). The importance of hand hygiene was further demonstrated during the surge of the Covid-19 pandemic (Gammon & Hunt, 2020). Hand hygiene was among the many directives provided by departments of health to curb the spread of covid-19 which sadly claimed many lives. Arguably, observing hand hygiene helped in preventing the spread of covid-19 (CDC, 2022). Therefore, hand hygiene is a vital practice that should be adhered to improve health outcomes and reduce transmission of preventable illnesses. Besides, clear guidelines are provided by the world health organization (WHO) regarding the moments when it is vital to carry out hand hygiene practices. According to WHO (2020), healthcare providers should observe hand hygiene in five major circumstances including before touching patients, after coming into contact with the patient`s environment or body fluids, before performing a procedure, immediately after the procedure, and after handling a patient before serving the next. Furthermore, healthcare workers must understand that wearing gloves is not a substitute for handwashing in infection prevention practices.

 

 

How was the success of the program or policy measured?

 

Measuring the success of the policy is vital when determining its effectiveness of the policy. To measure the impact of hand hygiene, weekly reports of HAI were applied. These reports provide the trends in infection rates while comparing each week. A comparison is made to determine the impact of the policy. Fortunately, healthcare workers have complied with hand hygiene practices and there has not been any alarm in the infection rate. To improve health outcomes and reduce the rate of infection, measures have been put in place to continue with sensitization and education of healthcare workers to continue with the practice.

 

How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?

 

All employees in contact with patients either directly or indirectly were the target of this program. Physicians and nurses providing direct care to patients were targeted as they are more likely to transmit infections through direct interactions. On the other hand, subordinate

staff is in contact with patients’ surroundings, equipment, and food which may act as conduits for infection transmission if vital measures are not taken into consideration (CDC, 2022). Because everyone is at risk of transmitting infections, everyone had to be involved in various capacities. After the implementation of the program, there has been significant improvement in health outcomes with a reduction in the rates of HAIs. Everyone in healthcare has realized the importance of hand hygiene and has been carrying out active campaigns to improve hand hygiene. Reduction in HAI has led to a reduction in the cost of care, reduced health burden, and improved patient wellness and satisfaction.

 

At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?

 

Evaluation of the program was performed before and after the implementation. The pre-implementation evaluation determined the knowledge level as well as the rate of infections as well as patient outcomes. A comparison of the data from the two phases helped to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. Knowledge and health outcomes improved in the post-implementation phase as compared to the pre-implementation stage. This was an indication of positive growth.
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?

 

 

The weekly audit report conducted by the organization to track the new cases of HAIs was the primary source of the data. All the new infections were tracked and differentiated from the pre-existing infections. Besides, the information from healthcare providers regarding their experience while adhering to hand hygiene practice offered qualitative data. Weekly training also continued to improve knowledge and enhance adherence.

 

What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?

 

Despite the positive impact of hand hygiene in improving patient safety, there are still gaps in the implementation of hand hygiene practices to enhance health outcomes. Some healthcare workers still fail to adhere to guidelines hence risking patients` health. Non-adherence to guidelines increases the risk of new infections and transmission of infections between healthcare providers and patients (Gupta & Lipner, 2020). Infections can further spread and affect a larger population. The surge in infection negatively impairs health outcomes and increases the cost of care, increases patient suffering, and reduces patient satisfaction levels.
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.

 

 

A multi-dimensional approach was used in arriving at stakeholders. Stakeholders consisted of various populations with various roles or concerns about the health issue. They included healthcare professionals, patients, subordinate staff, and patient relatives. Their involvement was based on their various roles regarding patient safety. While everyone is likely to benefit from this policy, patients are the major beneficiaries. According to Gupta and Lipner (2020), adhering to hand hygiene practices improve health outcomes and patient safety. Furthermore, the general score of the organization is likely to improve and become a preference for most patients.

Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?

 

The program was termed a success after its implementation. The infection rate was reduced immensely and the patient outcomes improved significantly. This is in line with the primary objective of reducing HAIs. Furthermore, the skills and knowledge of healthcare workers regarding hand hygiene improved significantly as required by Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation.

 

 

 

Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?

 

 

Observing hand hygiene is a policy that I would recommend in every organization including my workplace. Hand hygiene is basic and helps in reducing the burden of infections. Implementing this policy in my workplace would help in reducing infections while improving the health outcomes of patients. This would be a positive move towards improving the quality of care as well as enhancing safety which are integral aspects of patient care.

 

Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.

 

 

In matters of hand hygiene, the nurses` role in advocacy is vital in the evaluation of the program. During implementation, nurses play a critical role in educating others about hand hygiene practices and encouraging others to participate in the practice (CDC, 2022). After implementation, the nurse can take part in evaluating the program. Evaluation can be done using questionnaires to assess the level of knowledge as well as adherence levels of healthcare workers.

 

 

General Notes/Comments  

Hand hygiene is among other critical practices that improve patient outcomes and reduce health burdens. All healthcare workers should take an active role in improving patient safety by advocating for policies that address patient concerns.

Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Conclusion

The impact of hand hygiene on reducing the rates of HAI and disease burden has been explored in the discussion. Reducing rate of infection improves health outcomes as well as reduce the cost of care. Therefore, every organization that values safety of their employees and clients must implement hand hygiene practices to enhance safety. I will apply the hand hygiene in every aspect of my interactions and encourage my workmates to adopt the same.

Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation References

CDC. (2022, July 28). Hand hygiene in healthcare settings. Cdc.gov. https://www.cdc.gov/handwashing/handwashing-healthcare.html

Gammon, J., & Hunt, J. (2020). COVID-19 and hand hygiene: the vital importance of hand drying. British Journal of Nursing (Mark Allen Publishing)29(17), 1003–1006. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2020.29.17.1003

Gupta, M. K., & Lipner, S. R. (2020). Hand hygiene in preventing COVID-19 transmission. Cutis; Cutaneous Medicine for the Practitioner105(5), 233–234. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32603385/

WHO. (2020, June 2). The WHO’s 5 moments for handwashing. SOAPY Clean Machine. https://soapy.care/the-whos-5-moments-for-handwashing/

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER!!! Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

NRSE 6050 Policy and Advocacy for Improving Population Health

Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Program/Policy Evaluation

Based on the program or policy evaluation you seelcted, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following:

·   Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
·   How was the success of the program or policy measured?
·   How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
·   At what point in time in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?

32 (32%) – 35 (35%)

Response clearly and accurately describes in detail the healthcare program or policy outcomes.

Response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the success of the program or policy was measured.

Response clearly and accurately describes in detail how many people were reached by the program or policy and fully describes the impact of the program or policy.

Response clearly and accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted.

28 (28%) – 31 (31%)

Response accurately describes the healthcare program or policy outcomes.

Response accurately explains how the success of the program or policy was measured.

Response accurately describes how many people were reached by the program or policy and accurately describes the impact of the program or policy.

Response accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted.

25 (25%) – 27 (27%)

Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate or incomplete.

Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate or incomplete.

Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the impact is vague or inaccurate.

Response vaguely describes the point at which the program or policy evaluation was conducted.

(0%) – 24 (24%)

Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing.

Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing.

Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the associated impacts is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.

Response of the point at which time the program or policy was conducted is missing.

Reporting of Program/Policy Evaluations

·   What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
·   What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
·   What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit the most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
·   Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
·   Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
·   Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after 1 year of implementation.

45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Response clearly and accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.

Response clearly and thoroughly explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation.

Response clearly and accurately explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation.

Response clearly and accurately explains in detail who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation.

Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.

Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Response accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.

Response explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation.

Response explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation.

Response explains who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation.

Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.

Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.

Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague or incomplete.

Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate.

Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate.

Explanation of whether the program/policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete or inaccurate.

Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete or inaccurate.

(0%) – 34 (34%)

Identification of the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.

Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unitended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague and incomplete, or is missing.

Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.

Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.

Explanation of whether the program or policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing.

Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing.

Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:

Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.

(5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.

(4%) – 4 (4%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

(0%) – 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation for Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

(5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
(4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
(0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Written Expression and Formatting – The Assignment: Assessing A Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
(5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
(4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.
(0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Total Points: 100