NURS FPX 9904 Assessment 4
Project Summary Report
However, when evaluating this type of project, new issues emerge related to the nursing staff as well as other healthcare workers. One of these problems is how to become a team, or, in other words, how people become one on a particular project and how they organize their work in order to complete this project. Such issues would be detrimental to the patient interest as well as influence the overall quality of care that a given health center imparts.
The GUM team currently functioning at the project site has to attend all the potential bad events, make the healthcare workers more conscious of the Vice and work towards the enhancement of the quality of care. The project overview report will also briefly discuss a new project to improve quality that attempts to do the best that can be achieved.
Background and Organization Gap Analysis
It is worth noting that all or most healthcare centers aim at delivering services that are of high quality to the patients. Alternatively, the announcement can also read as follows: ‘’Communication is a critical component of health care delivery system.
Another issue is that we also do not see very often the staff of a nurse and representatives of healthcare in the room. This emerged in June 2024, following a review of patient records for March to May 2024 after receiving clearance from the quality department. The number one was twenty patients whose charts were reviewed and it revealed that the average time delay in receiving the treatment was 60%. Additionally there were nearly misses and delays in the administration and monitoring of patients’ treatment regimes.
Thus, the interpersonal relationships between staff and those who constitute the nurse staff need to improve in order that the work can be performed faster, patients need to be treated better. One of the significant issues of healthcare services is the care transition that is particularly the hand-off contact that is supposed to be smooth and brief.
As for factors that contributed to decrease the success of handoff, many informants mentioned weakness, including delayed access to expert care, critical incidents including close calls, and issues with delivering medications.
Significance of the Practice Problem
One of the many interesting things that need to happen are high dependability in HH, so patients are safer and do better. This is because of issues of national concern, quality, and legal requirements national concern as well as quality and legal matters. Complications are this situation’s negative occurrences, and it is essential to examine them. They have consequences like deaths and wrong drug use.
Therefore, you could say that increasing resilience in handoff processes might prevent such types of events and enhance patient health and the quality of healthcare services (Blazin et al. , 2020). Comparing a total of twenty patient charts in prospective and retrospective views reveal that there are about sixty percent differences in regards to the time spent on treatment, near-misses, and issues on the management of medications.
They also present cultural care where polite and assertive treatment of healthcare workers and patients is appropriate in some cultures (Humphrey et al. , 2022). For example, in involvement culture, where families can participate in the decisions affecting the patient, hand-off uniform customers engage the family appropriately and convey sufficient details about the patient (Nygaard et al. , 2020).
There is also a problem with another aspect of law requirements which is that people need to adhere to rules which are stated more precisely to ensure more safety of patients. For instance, the rules regarding change of information during changes across the country are provided by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act or commonly called HIPAA (Edemekong et al. , 2022). Stating with the rules It also helps the health care centers to observe the magna charta as well as guidelines given by the government.
Those whom the public trusts with panels do not necessarily have these risks controlled, which is unadhering to ethical principles of beneficence because such circumstances can lead to the occurrence of harm. It is important to recognize that the autonomy concept is broken, particularly when cross-functional care workers, getting a patient, don’t receive certain details during handoffs (Reis-Dennis, 2020).
There are individuals who may grasp what is spoken during handoffs as the doctor moves from one patient to the next. Since care delivery may be dependent on how well these types of comminication can work then patients may receive different types of care and this concern raises an ethical consideration on the question of equitable delivery of health care services.
Summary of the Evidence
Several research papers indicated that adverse outcome and even patient compromise can result from a bad handoff conversation.
Each method requiring a hand-off to be uniform reduces the chances of adverse events that could otherwise occur in patient care. The quantitative aspect The data given in the source indicates that the marked overall handoff error declined over 18 months of augmenting the I-PASS usage. The foregoing reveals how it is to use the I-PASS tool.
Having rules on how such significant information should be discussed during care transitions serves as newness and reversing the old practices. In their study of 153 cardiovascular surgery cases, Harris et al.
(2023) decide that decreasing the handoff contact pauses by implementing a warm handoff procedure was a good idea. The six week approach enhanced the delivery of patient care services; this has been supported after two years (Original publication year Keebler et al. , 2023).
Kim et al. (2020) support this concept and underscore the significance of the emphasis on the safety culture and the careful preparation of the handoff training program. In far more detail and beyond the malpractice claims, Humphrey et al. (2022) took the whole process. And they identified that concerns in communication where present in over than thirty-seven percent of them.
They also said that frequent transfer of calls was very risky. Also, Pino et al. (2019) came to the same conclusion: It also stated that following set handoff rules reduces errors by the subsequent operational team. Stakeholder views towards the same in deed support this assertion and note that the above specific handoff tools facilitate the communication of useful information (Hughes et al. , 2019).
Quality Improvement Framework
Again, the “Plan” is to utilize I-PASS, a handoff tool framed in evidence, in an attempt to prevent these kinds of occurrences. That involves a literature study as conducted by Vanderzwan et al. (2023) where the authors explore how prior to the current research, the outcomes of bad events had been assessed.
Conversely, a decrease in the number of negative outcomes reported can be seen as a positive outcome. To know this, we will focus on the direction of the change particularly the percent decrease on adverse event incidence which they suffered before as well as after the intervention.
The “Do” term indicates increasing the awareness of the nursing staff through applying the better research tool known as the WHO’s SBAR, namely Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation. This part of the study also entails categorizing the data received on the events that are one-determined to be falling under the description of bad events Newer change in this regard enables the staff to offer feedback on the new implementation of an evidence-based handoff.
Are you Looking for guidance for NURS FPX 9904 Assessment 4? Our experts are here to assist you. Reach out to us for support today.
Project Description
The main purpose of this project is to depict via frames how/reasons why Nurses and other HCWs fit into the continuity of care across different care settings? The finding was regarding the first-, second- and third-tier caregivers employed both as full time and or part-time.
The following are assistant tools which were selected to assist people to communicate well at the time of hand-off. However, they must be used alongside the legal means that are performed during normal-running business operations. They also come with monitoring, which is responsible for observing the data on average quite often.
NURS FPX 9904 Assessment 4 Evidence-Based Handoff Procedures for Nursing Staff to Reduce the Risk of Adverse Events
Whereas for others, depending on the kind of data that is measured on a daily basis, for instance, there are methods through which one can determine the efficiency of something. The strength of including staff in the development of ideas following the implementation of flexible guidelines for hand hygiene is that ideas that could be incorporated to enhance the standards of hand hygiene and set directions for minimizing the transmission of harm across many types of setting and patient populations are more easily recognized (Chien et al., 2022).
Discussion and Implication for Nursing and Health Care
Furthermore, the good results strengthen the idea of the change as something that could work in other healthcare organizations and policies. For the efficiency of the patient care services to be enhanced, this should be made permanent across all the health care facilities it operates in.
The practice of suitable research-based handoff means, however, that rules and standards defining good handoff must be still applied insofar as needed even after a project has been completed. Annual competency reassessment for at least 50% of a staff member’s competencies, inclusion of the current handoff protocol for staff, and training of new staff on handoff will make this work. Thus, the guideline suggests that uniform handoff should be adopted in other areas in order to maintain the extent of safety benefits to be longer.
According to the available research data, when healthcare organizations want to innovate handoff techniques in outpatient health offices, there are various financial implications on the modern healthcare facilities.
One of the significant impacts discussed is the cost necessary to attract and educate numerous diverse staff required to implement and watch over such tools as I-PASS and ISBAR. By choosing to take the training course, major cost of the bad event is reduced since the beginning costs of developing the training materials, investment on IT, and the time of the staff are all unnecessary. More money is needed after the project is done to ensure the training and audits will endure—leadership must focus on fundamentally transforming bottom lines.
Self-organising is needed in regard to accountability and fraud security, I believe these need to be changed, See more in points 3 of Nzinga et al. , (2021). Possible grant funding is one of the ways clinic can attain tools and they can also evaluate how these ideas can be implemented in various practices.
Summary and Conclusion
This primary qualitative figure, which compared how rates of adverse events changed from before and after the intervention, suggested that the overall proportion of adverse events has reduced from 60% at baseline to a number that is significantly less than the planned, hoped for 30% decrease. Moreover, they elicited staff about their satisfaction level, and there was an improvement in how they were being communicated in terms of hand offs, and how they perceived the new I-PASS and ISBAR systems.
They are as follows and I believe that they resulted from implementing measures that can help to reduce errors and enhance how attendees communicate with each other when transferring patients among different service providers. Perhaps subsequent research studies should follow up after two to three years as to the planned growths and identify factors that motivate them.
Expert guidelines developed for handoffs have contributed to making bad event frequency trend as a baseline.
If you need complete information about class 9904, click below to view a related sample:
NURS FPX 9904 Assessment 1 CBT Sessions and Motivational Intervening
References
Abbaszade, A., Assarroudi, A., Armat, M. R., Stewart, J. J., Rakhshani, M. H., Sefidi, N., & Sahebkar, M. (2020). Evaluation of the impact of handoff based on the SBAR Technique on quality of nursing care. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, Publish Ahead of Print (3).
https://doi.org/10.1097/ncq.0000000000000498
Abuzied, Y., Alshammary, S. A., Alhalahlah, T., & Somduth, S. (2023). Using FOCUS-PDSA quality improvement methodology model in health care: Process and outcomes. Global Journal on Quality and Safety in Health care, 6(2).
https://doi.org/10.36401/jqsh-22-19
Adam, M. H., Ali, H. A., Abubaker, K., Ibrahim, M. F., Omar, R. S., Mahmoud, D. S., Mohammed Sara, O. A., Ahmed, R. A., Habib, K. R., & Ali, D. Y. (2022). I use the Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation (SBAR) form for handoff communication in the pediatric department of Sudanese teaching.
hospital. Cureus, 14(11)
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.31998
Albassam, M., & Aslam, M. (2021). Testing internal quality control of clinical laboratory data using paired t-tests under uncertainty. BioMed Research International, 2021(3), 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5527845
Balon, R., Guerrero, A. P. S., Coverdale, J. H., Brenner, A. M., Louie, A. K., Beresin, E. V., & Roberts, L. W. (2019). Institutional Review Board Approval as an educational tool.
Academic Psychiatry, 43(3), 285–289.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-019-01027-9
Blazin, L. J., Sitthi-Amorn, J., Hoffman, J. M., & Burlison, J. D. (2020). Improving patient Handoffs and transitions through adaptation and implementation of I-PASS across multiple
Handoff settings. Pediatric Quality & Safety, 5(4), 323.
https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000323
Bukoh, M. X., & Siah, C. J. R. (2019). A systematic review and meta-analysis on the structured handover interventions in improving patient safety outcomes. Journal of Nursing Management, 28(3), 744–755.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12936
Campbell, D., & Dontje, K. (2019). Implementing bedside handoff in the emergency department: A practice improvement project. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 45(2).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2018.09.007
Chien, L., Slade, D., Dahm, M. R., Brady, B., Roberts, E., Goncharov, L., Taylor, J., Eggins, S., & Thornton, A. (2022). Improving patient-centered care through a tailored intervention addressing nursing clinical handover communication in its organizational and cultural context. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 78(5).
https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15110
Edemekong, P. F., Pavan Annamaraju, & Haydel, M. J. (2022, February 3). Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Nih.gov; StatPearls Publishing.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK500019/
Elwy, A. R., Wasan, A. D., Gillman, A. G., Johnston, K. L., Dodds, N., McFarland, C., & Greco,
- M. (2020). Using formative evaluation methods to improve clinical implementation: Description and an example. Psychiatry Research, 283(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112532
Hughes, H. K., Serwint, J. R., O’Toole, J. K., Spector, N. D., & Ngo, T. L. (2019). I-PASS adherence and implications for future handoff training. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 11(3), 301–306.
https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-18-01086.1
Humphrey, K. E., Sundberg, M., Milliren, C. E., Graham, D. A., & Landrigan, C. P. (2022). Frequency and nature of communication and handoff failures in medical malpractice claims. Journal of Patient Safety, p. 18.
https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000937
Keebler, J. R., Lynch, I., Ngo, F., Phelps, E., Huang, N., Guttman, O., Preble, R., Abu Taher Minhajuddin, Gamez, N., W.-H., A., L., K., M., E., G., L., M., M., A., A. P., O., D., &
Greilich, P. E. (2023). Leveraging the science of teamwork to sustain handoff improvements in cardiovascular surgery. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 49(8), 373–383.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2023.05.006
Kim, J. H., Lee, J. L., & Kim, E. M. (2020). Patient safety culture and handoff evaluation of nurses in small and medium-sized hospitals. International journal of nursing sciences, 8(1), 58–64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2020.12.007
McNicholas, C., Lennox, L., Woodcock, T., Bell, D., & Reed, J. E. (2019). Evolving quality improvement support strategies to improve Plan–Do–Study–Act cycle fidelity: A retrospective mixed-methods study. BMJ Quality & Safety, 28(5), 356–365.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007605
Nygaard, A. M., Selnes H, H., Støre B, B., & Lind, R. (2020). Information concerning ICU patients’ families in the handover— The clinicians’ “game of whispers”: A qualitative study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 9(3).
https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15414
Nzinga, J., Boga, M., Kagwanja, N., Waithaka, D., Edwine Barasa, Tsofa, B., Gilson, L., & Molyneux, S. (2021). An innovative leadership development initiative to support building everyday resilience in health systems. Health Policy and Planning, 36(7).
https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czab056
Pino, F. A., Sam, K. J., Wood, S. L., Tafreshi, P. A., Parks, S. L., Bell, P. A., Hoffman, E. A., Koebel, L. M., St. Peter, S. D. (2019). Increasing compliance with a new interunit
Handoff process. Pediatric Quality and Safety, 4, 180.
https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000180
Qiu, H., & Du, W. (2021). Evaluation of the effect of PDCA in hospital health management.
Journal of Health Care Engineering, 2021, 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6778045
Reis-Dennis, S. (2020). Understanding autonomy: An urgent intervention. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 7(1).
https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa037
Joint Commission. (2023). Hospital: 2023 national patient safety goals. Jointcommission.org.
https://www.jointcommission.org/standards/national-patient-safety-goals/hospital-national-patient-safety-goals/
Vanderzwan, K. J., Kilroy, S., Daniels, A., & Jennifer O’Rourke. (2023). Nurse-to-nurse handoff with distractors and interruptions: An integrative review. Nurse Education in Practice, p. 67, 103550.