NURS 8300 Week 10: The Application of Process Improvement Models in Organizations and Systems – Part II Recommendation
NURS 8300 Week 10: The Application of Process Improvement Models in Organizations and Systems – Part II Recommendation
NURS 8300 Week 10 – What separates a successful quality improvement initiative from those that fail to meet their goals? Frequently, it is the application of the process improvement model and development of a well thought-out plan of action.
This week continues the examination of how process improvement models are applied to create and sustain change at the organizational and policy level. You also consider how evidence-based practice models can be used for these same purposes.
Learning Objectives for NURS 8300 Week 10: The Application of Process Improvement Models in Organizations and Systems – Part II Recommendation
By the end of this week, you will be able to:
- Apply evidence-based practice models to an identified clinical practice problem
- Formulate recommendations and an action plan for a quality improvement initiative
Photo Credit: [Blend Images/ERproductions Ltd]/[Blend Images]/Getty Images
Learning Resources OF NURS 8300 Week 10
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 OF NURS 8300 Week 10: The Application of Process Improvement Models in Organizations and Systems – Part II Recommendation
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 14: “Leadership for Quality”
- Chapter 16: “Implementing Quality as the Core Organizational Strategy”
Baur, C. (2011). Calling the nation to act: Implementing the national action plan to improve health literacy. Nursing Outlook, 59(2), 63–69.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
This article describes the aspects of the National Action Plan to Improve Health Literacy. It starts by covering the background and objectives of the plan and then moves to its vision and goals.
Ferrara, L. R. (2010). Integrating evidence-based practice with educational theory in clinical practice for nurse practitioners: Bridging the theory practice gap. Research & Theory for Nursing Practice, 24(4), 213–216.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
The author of this article discusses using constructivist theory to teach nurse practitioner students to use evidenced-based practice. She focuses on introducing the student’s theoretical knowledge into real-life practice.
Grant, B., Colello, S., Riehle, M., & Dende, D. (2010). An evaluation of the nursing practice environment and successful change management using the new generation Magnet Model. Journal of Nursing Management, 18(3), 326–331. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01076.x
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Health care organizations have implemented the Magnet Model as a way to successfully implement practice change. This article examines the aspects of this process.
Lavoie-Tremblay, M., Bonin, J.-P., Lesage, A., Farand, L., Lavigne, G. L., & Trudel, J. (2011). Implementation of diagnosis-related mental health problems: Impact on health care providers. Health Care Manager, 30(1), 30(1): 4-14 (50 ref). doi:10.1097/HCM.0b013e3182078a95
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
The study within this article analyzes two cases related to the implementation of diagnosis-related mental health programs.
Mark, D. D., Latimer, R. W., & Hardy, M. D. (2010). “Stars” aligned for evidence-based practice: a TriService initiative in the Pacific. Nursing Research, 59(1), S48–S57. doi:10.1097/01.NNR.0000313506.22722.53
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Nurses from a military health care system in Hawaii established ways to use and evaluate evidence-based practices. This article details the process and results of this collaborative effort between the Army, Air Force, and Navy.
Scobbie, L., Dixon, D., & Wyke, S. (2011). Goal setting and action planning in the rehabilitation setting: Development of a theoretically informed practice framework. Clinical Rehabilitation, 25(5), 468–482. doi:10.1177/0269215510389198
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
In order to develop a theory-based framework for setting goals, the authors of this article use casual modeling to determine effective patient outcomes. They identifies four major components of the framework that can be used to set effective goals.
Optional Resources FOR NURS 8300 Week 10
Schifalacqua, M. M., Mamula, J., & Mason, A. R. (2011). Return on investment imperative: the cost of care calculator for an evidence-based practice program. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 35(1), 15–20.
NURS 8300 Week 10 Discussion: Welcome to the Week 10 Small Group Discussion Area!
Note: Week 10 is a group assignment. Last week, you explored key factors that contribute to patient safety challenges using root cause analysis. This week builds on that foundational awareness with a focus on the application of evidence-based practice models as a strategy to improve patient safety and other quality dimensions. In this Discussion, consider how these strategies can sustain practice changes.
Week 10 is a group assignment. Last week, you explored key factors that contribute to patient safety challenges using root cause analysis. This week builds on that foundational awareness with a focus on the application of evidence-based practice models as a strategy to improve patient safety and other quality dimensions. In this Discussion, consider how these strategies can sustain practice changes.
To prepare:
Read: Newhouse, R.P. (2007) Diffusing confusion among evidence-based practice, quality improvement and research. JONA 37,432-535
Read: Mazurek Melynk B., Gallagher-Ford, L., English Long, L., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2014) The establishment of Evidence-Based practice competencies for practicing registered nurses and advanced practice nurses in real world clinical settings: proficiencies to improve healthcare quality, reliability, patient outcomes, and costs. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing 11(1),5-15.
We all agree that research is the highest form of reliable evidence, when implemented in an organization that provides the basis for an evidence based practice. As a group: FIND a research study published in a peer reviewed journal related to a clinical practice problem that is of interest to the group, and which would ultimately contribute to an evidence based practice.
The discussion assignment:
ANSWER the following discussion questions as a group: (as a team, post your responses by Sunday at midnight). Include the research study in your post (attach it to the post and post it in doc sharing). See page 11 #15 in Mazurek Melynk, Gallagher Ford, English Long and Fineout-Overholt. In this assignment, you are being asked to critically appraise a single research study for its relevance to a QI practice problem.
Each member of the team must participate (weekly rules for discussion) on the group discussion board in order to get full credit.
Discussion questions:
- What was the purpose of the research?
- Identify the independent and dependent variables in the study.
- Briefly describe the research design, data collection method(s), and instruments used to measure the variables under study.
- Briefly summarize study findings, conclusions and recommendations. Do you agree with these?
- As a DNP prepared nurse, would you recommend a change in nursing practice based on the study? Defend and/or justify your decision based on research evaluation principles. In other words, does the evidence generated by this research article signify a need to change nursing practice? If not, why not; if so, why?
By Day 3
Post your team’s answers in the form of a main post on your group discussion board. Each member of the group must participate in week 10 in order to receive the grade.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric: Week 10 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 7
To participate in this Discussion: Groups Area
Assignment: IHI School Modules
By Week 9 you should have completed 13 IHI Open School Modules.
There is nothing to submit this week.
Week in Review
This week you applied evidence-based practice models to an identified clinical practice problem and formulated recommendations and an action plan for a quality improvement initiative. In the final week you will appraise measurement mechanisms to evaluate change in organizations and systems, and evaluate the success of quality improvement initiatives in terms of sustainability. Additionally, you will engage in self-assessment and reflection to evaluate your own leadership skills and preferences.
Rubric Detail – NURS 8300 Week 10: The Application of Process Improvement Models in Organizations and Systems – Part II Recommendation
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONDiscussion 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 |
|---|