Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

Discussion: Quality Improvement Initiative

Discussion: Quality Improvement Initiative

https://nursingpaperslayers.com/discussion-quality-improvement-initiative/

When attempting to garner support for a quality improvement initiative, it is important to demonstrate how the initiative supports the organization’s mission, vision, and values, as well as external factors that influence an organization’s priorities. Delivering a proposal for a quality improvement initiative requires clear, concise communication of the plan.

To get ready:

Choose a QI program that has been the focus of attention in any healthcare context. Explain why your senior executives chose this initiative for special attention and concentration.
Explain how bad occurrences are handled in your organization, both externally and internally.
Find an academic article or one from the public press over the last 5 years that describes a severe inaccuracy. Connect this error to any company with which you are familiar.

 

By Day 3 OF Discussion: Quality Improvement Initiative

Post your response.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 7 OF Discussion: Quality Improvement Initiative

Respond in one or more of the following ways to two of your colleagues:

Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the replies to your first post. Take note of what you learned and/or any insights you acquired as a result of your colleagues’ comments.

 

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 7 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 7

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 7 Discussion

Assignment: Major Assessment 6

Continue to access IHI.org and complete the appropriate modules for this Assignment.

IHI Open School Modules for Week 7

PFC 101: Person and Family Centered Care Overview
Introduction to the Triple Aim for Populations (TA 101)

This week, there is nothing to submit.

Please keep the certificate you obtain after completing the course.

You will need to upload this to gradebook as proof of completion.

This Week in Review

This week, you applied SMART criteria to a quality improvement program and examined the impact of external environments on organizational priorities.

You will investigate the features of productive teams, techniques for engaging and retaining team members, and how organizational theory may guide and support these efforts next week.

 

NURS 8300 Week 7: Determining Organizational Priorities for Quality Improvement

In Week 6, you explored quality improvement models as a strategy for identifying health care and patient safety concerns. Once a quality or safety issue is identified, what is the next step to ensure the issue is improved? What internal and external organizational factors will influence the success, or failure, of a quality improvement initiative?

The concepts presented this week relate to how nurse leaders can develop quality improvement initiatives that align with the mission, vision, and values of the organization to engender success and achievement of the goals.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this week, you will be able to:

  • Assess how the mission, vision, and values of the organization determine improvement priorities
  • Apply the SMART criteria to a quality improvement initiative
  • Analyze the influence of the external environment on the priorities of the organization

Photo Credit: [Steve Debenport]/[ E+]/Getty Images

Learning Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

Joshi, M.S., Ransom, E.R., Nash, D.B., & Ransom, S.B., (Eds.). (2014). The Healthcare Quality Book, 3rd ed. Chicago, IL: Health Adminisration Press.

  • Chapter 11: “Patient Safety and Medical Errors”

Clarke, C. M., & Persaud, D. D. (2011). Leading clinical handover improvement: a change strategy to implement best practices in the acute care setting. Journal of Patient Safety, 7(1), 11–18. doi:10.1097/PTS.0b013e31820c98a8

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases. Designed for leaders who want to improve quality care, this article focuses on clinical handovers that occur within acute care facilities. It provides a model for improvement and is intended to be a supplemental resource that can be used with the existing research and literature on this topic.

Sennett, C. (2010). Healthcare reform: Quality outcomes measurement and reporting. American Health & Drug Benefits. Retrieved from http://www.ahdbonline.com/article/healthcare-reform-quality-outcomes-measurement-and-reporting

The article on this website discusses features of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), focusing on the outcomes and implications for quality outcomes measuring and reporting.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Discussion: Quality Improvement Initiative

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2011). Organizational and systems leadership for quality improvement: Organizational priorities for quality improvement. Baltimore: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 9 minutes.

This video provides an overview of organizational factors that influence quality. Lillee Gelinas discusses the importance of teamwork

Discussion Quality Improvement Initiative

Discussion Quality Improvement Initiative

and enlisting leadership to help move quality initiatives forward. Other topics addressed include the role of stakeholders in improving patient safety and the responsibility of hospital board members in setting the quality and safety agenda.

Accessible player  –Downloads– Download Video w/CC Download Audio Download Transcript

Optional Resources

Lazarus, I.R. (2011). What will It take? Exploiting trends in strategic planning to prepare for reform. Journal of Healthcare Management, 56(2), 89–93.

 

Rubric Detail

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

Name: NURS_8300_ Week7_Discussion_Rubric

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 (0%) – 3 (10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Total Points: 30

Name: NURS_8300_ Week7_Discussion_Rubric

 

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.
error: