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

NUR 752 Assignment 2.1: Critical Appraisal of Web-Based Tools

Value: 60 points

Introduction

Your organization has set a goal to expand the use of web-based tools for their patients for your unit. As a DNP leader, you are tasked with the responsibility of selecting a web-based platform to support and improve client care within your unit at your facility. Through the lens of usability, evaluate one consumer healthcare website, consumer eHealth program aim, or electronic web-based intervention tool that you might use with your client population. Create a written proposal with your recommendation to the board.

Assignment Guidelines

Part I: Research and Identification

Step 1: Gather user experience and usability information.

Step 2: Identify one specific web-based tool to evaluate.

Types of web-based platforms include:

  • Consumer healthcare websites
  • Consumer eHealth program aims
  • Web-based intervention tools (Do not include e-visit or telecommunication tools as they were covered in the discussion posting.)

Part II: Written Proposal

Step 3: Evaluate one web-based platform.

  • Describe the client population.
  • Explain the type of web-based platform you would advise to support the care delivery.
  • Evaluate one consumer healthcare website, consumer eHealth program aim, or electronic intervention tool you might use with your patient population.
    • Evaluate for the balance between context, content, and user needs.
    • Describe the user’s experience:
      • Usefulness, Desirability, Findability, Accessibility, Credibility (and accuracy), and Value.
      • Calculate the readability level. (Select a site for calculating readability; there are many such sites out there.)
      • Advise on usability. Although you can’t complete the testing, you can address design, ease of learning, efficiency of use, memorability, and potential error frequency.
      • Appraise how well the sites support consumers’ healthcare needs.
    • Provide an overall summary of the pros and cons of the site.

Formatting and Mechanics

  • Utilize APA formatting and style.
  • Submit your paper as a Word document that includes the content for the proposal.

Submission

Submit your assignment and review full grading criteria on the Assignment 2.1: Critical Appraisal of Web-Based Tools page.


Discussion 2.1

 Briefly describe your client population. Share with your peers how the clients you interact with might benefit from telemedicine e-visits.

  • Would synchronous or asynchronous telemedicine e-visits be ideal?
  • Would these be driven by consumers or health professionals?
  • What ethical and legal barriers might you need to overcome?
  • What other technologies might dovetail into these e-visits?

 I work in a Neuro Acute Unit within a large level 1 trauma center and certified stroke center. Our patient population mainly of consists strokes, seizures, brain surgeries, spinal surgeries, and various neurological disorders, such as Guillain-Barre. One way that our patients benefit from telemedicine e-visit is when they are discharged. My hospital cares for many patients that live in rural areas, as well as surrounding states that don’t provide specialized neurological care. Due to this factor many patients are unable to travel back to the hospital for their follow-up appointments. Telemedicine provides them with the option to have their appointments within their own homes.

Synchronous telemedicine is defined by The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) as a live two-way audiovisual videoconferencing between a patient and a care provider (Resnick, 2019). Veteran affairs defines asynchronous telemedicine as acquiring medical data, then transmitting the data to a care provider at a convenient time for offline assessment (Resnick, 2019). I believe that the most ideal form of telemedicine e-visits is synchronous. Synchronous telemedicine visits can improve the effectiveness of a visit due to live communication. Live communication provides real-time assessments and interventions. Take strokes for example. The longer the timeframe is between the onset of stroke symptoms to intervention, the worse the prognosis. With synchronous telemedicine communication that critical time frame will be shortened.

I believe that having synchronous telemedicine visits is driven by both the consumer and health professionals. Having live communication not only benefits the patient, but healthcare provides as well. It benefits the patient by being able to get answers and education quickly. It benefits the providers by increasing the efficiency of communication with their patients and other healthcare providers that might be consulted.

Some legal and ethical issues surrounding the use of telemedicine are different care jurisdictions, privacy, and healthcare disparities. When there is a different standard of care jurisdiction involved it affects the regulation and legal liability of the organization (Dunn, 2004). The fast growth of technology-related healthcare and telemedicine challenges the boundaries of security and privacy (McMcbride, 2019). Healthcare disparities need to be examined when reviewing telemedicine ethical issues. Telemedicine is very useful in rural areas, however, 34% of Americans that live in a rural area lack access to the internet, compared to only 4% of Americans that live in urban populations (Pirtle et al., 2019). Without the internet, telemedicine is not able to be used.

Other technologies that might contribute to the effectiveness of telemedicine related to the neuro patient population are blood pressure machines, glucometers, and wristwatches that send data electronically to the providers, so that it may be analyzed during the telemedicine e-visit. The monitoring of blood pressure, blood glucose levels, and heart rhythm are all key factors to providing preventative stroke care.

References

Dunn, G. (2019). Legal issues confronting 21st-century telehealth. British Columbia Medical Journal. 46(6), 290-292. https://bcmj.org/articles/legal-issues-confronting-21st-century-telehealth (Links to an external site.)

McMcbride, S., & Tietze, M. (2019). Nursing Informatics for the Advanced Practice Nurse. (2nd ed.). New York: Springer Publishing Company. ISBN: 9780826140456

Pirtle, C., Payne, K., Drolet, B., (2019, June 27). Telehealth: Legal and Ethical Considerations for Success. Telehealth and Medicine Today. https://doi.org/10.30953/tmt.4.144 (Links to an external site.)

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NUR 752 Assignment 2.1: Critical Appraisal of Web-Based Tools

NUR 752 Assignment 2.1: Critical Appraisal of Web-Based Tools

NUR 752 Assignment 2.1: Critical Appraisal of Web-Based Tools

Richard Resnick. (2019, September 10). The Two Forms of Telemedicine: Synchronous vs. Asynchronous. Cureatr. https://blog.cureatr.com/two-forms-telemedicine-synchronous-vs-asynchronous

Week 2 Critical Appraisal of Web-Based Tools Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
Introduction
5 to >4 pts
Meets Expectations (>4 to5 Points)

Introduction gives is clear and concise, introducing the situation to the reader.

4 to >3 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations (>3 to 4 Points)

Introduction is brief and/or unfocused.

3 to >2 pts
Barely Meets Expectations (>2 to3 Points)

Introduction is vague or disorganized.

2 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations (0 to2 Points)

Introduction is confusing, lacks flow, and/or misleads the reader.

5 / 5 pts
Background
5 to >4 pts
Meets Expectations (>4 to5 Points)

A clear and concise explanation of the client population and type of web-based tool are given and described fully and succinctly.

4 to >3 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations (>3 to 4 Points)

Client population and HIT described fully but not succinctly.

3 to >2 pts
Barely Meets Expectations (>2 to3 Points)

Client population or HIT not described fully.

2 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations (0 to2 Points)

Client population or HIT not clearly described.

5 / 5 pts
Assessment
30 to >27 pts
Meets Expectations (>27 to 30 Points)

Clearly and concisely evaluates HIT: -Evaluates the balance between context, content, and the user’s needs. -Describes the user’s experience, including usefulness, desirability, findability, accessibility, credibility, and value. -In terms of usability, addresses design, ease of learning, the efficiency of use, memorability, and the potential error frequency. Utilizes user experience and usability information as well as assigned readings.

27 to >25 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations (>25 to 27 Points)

HIT evaluated fully but not succinctly. Utilizes user experience and usability information, but not assigned readings.

25 to >22 pts
Barely Meets Expectations (>22 to 25 Points)

HIT evaluated fully but not succinctly. Utilizes user experience, but usability information is not used as directed.

22 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations (0 to 22 Points)

HIT evaluation is incomplete. Utilizes user experience, but usability information not used as directed and assigned readings are not included.

25 / 30 pts
Readability
5 to >4 pts
Meets Expectations (>4 to5 Points)

Reading level calculated and applied to patient population. Source sited.

4 to >3 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations (>3 to 4 Points)

Reading level calculated and patient population identified. Source sited.

3 to >2 pts
Barely Meets Expectations (>2 to 3 Points)

Reading level calculated. Source sited.

2 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations (0 to 2 Points)

Not calculated (0). Source not sited or non-reliable source used.

2 / 5 pts
Appraisal
5 to >4 pts
Meets Expectations (>4 to5 Points)

Appraises how well the site supports consumers’ healthcare needs. Provides pros and cons.

4 to >3 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations (>3 to 4 Points)

Appraised but not succinctly. Pros and cons are unclear.

3 to >2 pts
Barely Meets Expectations (>2 to 3 Points)

Appraised but not thoroughly or may lack pros or cons.

2 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations (0 to 2 Points)

Lacks appraisal or pros/cons.

5 / 5 pts
Recommendation
10 to >9 pts
Meets Expectations (>9 to 10 Points)

Recommendation for HIT is supported by strong evidence, and includes value to providers and patients.

9 to >8 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations (>8 to 9 Points)

Support is given for recommendation, including assigned readings.

8 to >7 pts
Barely Meets Expectations (>7 to 8 Points)

Weak support is given for recommendation or assigned readings are not included.

7 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations (0 to 7 Points)

Support is lacking for recommendation or assigned readings are not included.

10 / 10 pts
APA style
0 pts
1. (No Deduction)

Written clearly and concisely. No errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation.

0 pts
2. (5% Deduction) -3 points

Written clearly and concisely. Few errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are noted.

0 pts
3. (8% Deduction) -5 points

Written clearly. Several errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are found.

0 pts
4. (10% Deduction) -6 points

Writing is unclear and/or rambling or brief. Numerous distracting errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are found.

0 / 0 pts
Total Points: 52
Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.
error: