OM 004 Walden University Improving Patient Safety and Quality of Services Paper
OM 004 Walden University Improving Patient Safety and Quality of Services Paper
Discussion
For your Competency Discussion, select a performance measure that is particularly important to you or your current healthcare organization. Next, research credible websites, and select a resource that you think would be most effective for gaining information for this metric.
To begin this Competency and meet your required engagement, post in the Discussion area a brief description of the performance metric you selected and explain why it is important to you or your organization. Then, identify the resource you selected that would be effective for gaining information for this metric. Finally, explain why you selected this resource.
Part I: Analysis of Patient Safety and Quality of Services in a Hospital
Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on OM 004 Walden University Improving Patient Safety and Quality of Services Paper done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
In an increasingly consumer-driven healthcare system that is focused on safety and quality of services, patients and healthcare professionals alike are able to access reliable data about the quality and safety records of organizations. Healthcare administrators can look at how their organizations are faring within specific categories and compare results with those of other institutions. As part of this Assessment, you will analyze this data to determine areas within a healthcare organization in need of additional improvement.
For this Assessment, select a hospital you work for or one that has been awarded the Baldridge Performance Excellence Award. In preparation for developing a patient safety plan, use data found on websites, such as the Leapfrog Group Hospital Safety Grade; Hospital Compare, maintained by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS); and the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) Hospital Survey, to review the wide range of issue-specific data aligned to patient safety, quality of services, and patient satisfaction.
In a 1- to 2-page analysis:
- Analyze three safety and quality results you found for the hospital such as: HCAHPS, pneumonia care, and emergency room treatment times.
Describe the process and procedure used to access the data including a description of at least two websites that provide the data used.
Part II: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
COMPLETE THE FMEA (FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS) TEMPLATE, THE FOURTH PDF UNDER THE “DOWNLOAD DOCUMENTS” HEADING LOCATED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE INSTITUTE OF HEALTHCARE IMPROVEMENT WEBSITE. TO ACCESS THE ACTUAL TOOL, YOU MUST COMPLETE AN IHI REGISTRATION (NO COST). USE THE TOOL TO LOOK FOR A WEAK LINK IN THE QUALITY CHAIN. LOOK BEYOND DIRECT CARE FOR THINGS THAT COULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE ERROR. THINK ORGANIZATIONALLY TO TRACE THE PROBLEM BACK TO THE ORIGINAL CAUSE. RATE POSSIBLE EVENTS THAT COULD GO WRONG.
Part III: Patient Safety Plan Proposal
Based on the results of Part 1 and Part 2, select three areas related to patient safety or quality in need of additional training or support. Then, create a 3- to 5-page proposal in which you:
- Design a patient safety plan to address three areas of focus from the results of the FMEA.
- Describe an evaluation method to assess whether the patient safety plan is successful
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Posting | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||
Don’t wait until the last minute
Fill in your requirements and let our experts deliver your work asap.