NURS FPX 8022 Assessment 2 Sample FREE DOWNLOAD
NURS FPX 8022 Assessment 2
SAFER Guides and Evaluating Technology Usage
Student name
NURS-FPX8022
Capella University
Professor Name
Submission Date
SAFER Guides and Evaluating Technology Usage
Slide 1:
Hi, I am _________, and today I would like to discuss the implementation of predictive analytics into the Epic electronic health record (EHR) system at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), which will lead to improved patient safety, reduced medication errors, and increased Leapfrog and Medicare Compare scores.
Slide 2:
Of particular importance are the rates of drug errors, admission backlogs due to infections, and gaps in real-time monitoring. The issue will be assessed in terms of workflow inefficiencies and safety vulnerabilities, and safety assurance factors of EHR resilience (SAFER) guidelines will be aligned with the approach. This is to allow more clinical decisions and provide credibility to health IT while protecting care (Dixon et al., 2024). In addition, technology could lead to the minimization of adverse events by standardizing the processes and increasing predictive power. Finally, the SAFER Guides (Sittig et al., 2025) on the maximization of BCMA, the minimization of alert fatigue, and the maximization of integration within clinical teams are discussed and implemented in this engine. I will critically discuss the strengths, risk mitigation, and sustainable technology-based patient safety improvements that the SAFER guides recognize during the presentation.
Proposed Technology/Informatics Implementation
Slide 3:
EPICS PROPOSAL: This practice would extend the use of predictive analytics to the Epic EHR system for the purpose of supporting patient safety and quality. Predictive analytics will use admission data, lab results, comorbidities, and real-time clinical documentation to produce automated fall risk scores, infection risk scores, and medication-related safety event risk scores (Chishtie et al., 2023). The scores will actively raise appropriate care plan alerts to the nursing staff and provider pharmacy alerts. The strategy specifically focuses on the workflow gaps in the present system, in which risk identification is reactive, relies on manual testing, and is frequently delayed. “We will reduce care planning inefficiencies, improve interdisciplinary communication, and help prevent unnecessary safety events through a redesigned workflow with real-time predictive insights into Epic,” says Mohammed Chishtie, MD, assistant professor of healthcare and Cubism AI advisor. In addition, incorporating 24-hour updated dashboards of unit managers assists organizational benchmarking against Leapfrog and Medicare Compare quality indicators, thereby facilitating continuous improvement (LeapFrog, n.d). Epic EHR implementation in MGH ensures a smooth workflow and meets both performance enhancement targets and safety standards.
SAFER Guides Findings: Areas of Strength
Slide 4:
The SAFER Guides state that there are various areas where the healthcare environment is currently doing well regarding the suggested informatics solution. Contingency planning, system interfaces, and availability of clinical decision support were evaluated fully in all areas. EHR already boasts a good uptime reliability, medication administration with a built-in barcode tech, and interdepartmental secure communication (Syrowatka et al. 2023). The strengths can help offer a stable platform for applying predictive analytics without influencing the performance or data protection of the system (Owens et al., 2020). Further, there exist robust governance frameworks and multidisciplinary supervision to facilitate change management that resonates with SAFER principles of leadership participation and ongoing observation.
SAFER Guides Findings: Areas of Risk
Slide 5:
Despite the strengths, the SAFER Guide evaluation also revealed risks that will need to be considered to implement the project safely and effectively. The alert optimization, user training, and workflow integration were rated as not implemented or partially implemented in some areas. The EHR in illustration causes several clinical alerts. However, many of these alerts are not needed and contribute to provider alert fatigue, which can cause one to overlook high-severity alerts (Chishtie et al., 2023). On the same note, predictive analytics will also eliminate the need to train the entire staff to correctly interpret risk scores and integrate them into care planning, which remains a fully standardized process between units (Harbi et al., 2024). The other critical risk is that, unless workflow alignment is done with care, predictive alerts can result in duplication of existing assessments or burden clinical staff, making it quite likely that they will resist this change (Shan et al., 2023). The risks are indicative of the value of a designed rollout that is expansively educative, experimental, and feedback-intensive.
Reflection on Using the SAFER Guides
Slide 6:
The SAFER Guides presented a coherent framework to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the current and future workflows. The application of the guides also helped me change my mindset and go beyond the technical aspects of Epic to consider the interaction of informatics with human factors, organizational culture, and workflow integration (Sittig et al., 2025). The methodology prompted me to look not only at areas in which the adoption succeeds, but also at possible unwanted effects, including alert fatigue or inefficient workflow (Sittig et al., 2025). The SAFER Guides directed effort toward the area with the highest impact on patient safety by systematically identifying the risks and prioritizing efforts to improve them. Finally, the process strengthened the role of evidence-based assessment tools to inform technology implementation and make informatics functional, as well as safe, reliable, and aligned with the overall objectives of patient-centered care.
Conclusion
Slide 7:
Implementing predictive analytics and BCMA technologies in MGH will prevent a significant number of patient injuries and improve clinical safety systems. Informatics-based solutions will have a direct positive impact on the Leapfrog safety grades and Medicare Compare patient safety ratings. The risks identified in SAFER guides will be mitigated to create a greater resilience to failure caused by technology. MGH will ensure the implementation of a safety and innovation culture in every department, supported by the executives. The long-term benefits of patient safety and organization performance will be achieved through the assessment and training of health IT systems and continued development.
Need Help with Your NURS-FPX 8022 Assessment 4? Download Your Free Sample and Get Expert Tutoring. Delivered in 24 Hours!
Instructions To Write NURS FPX 8022 Assessment 2
If you need guidance for NURS FPX 8022 Assessment 2: SAFER Guides and Evaluating Technology Usage, contact Tutors Academy. Our expert tutors are ready to help you succeed.
Instruction file for 8022 Assessment 2
Assessment 2
SAFER Guides and Evaluating Technology Usage
| Instructions | Resources | Attempt 1 available | Attempt 2 | Attempt 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Create a 5–8 minute video presentation reporting your findings and reflecting on the experience. |
Introduction
Doctor of Nursing Practice-prepared nurses will be expected to lead large-scale informatics/technology implementation projects. One of the keys to a successful project is understanding real or potential risks. The HealthIT SAFER Guides are designed to recommend practices to optimize the safety and safe use of EHRs and other technology. In this assessment, you will demonstrate this by using the SAFER Guides to examine performance and risk in your chosen healthcare setting. Then, you will create a video presentation reporting your findings and reflecting on the experience.
Preparation
In preparation for this assessment, think about the technology/informatics you recommended to implement as part of the practice change to address the safety, process, or quality issues identified in the previous assessment. Review the nine SAFER Guides found in Assessment 2 SAFER Guides (E) with your proposed technology/informatics in mind. You will use the discoveries you uncover by using the SAFER Guides to identify risks, which you will address via the risk mitigation plan you will create in Assessment 3.
If you are not familiar with the SAFER Guides, Assessment 2: How to Use SAFER Guides (E) may help you get started on this assessment.
If you choose to make revisions based on feedback from a previous attempt, you should highlight your revisions in yellow. For example, if you made revisions from attempt one and would like the instructor to review the content when grading attempt two, the content needs to be highlighted. Therefore, the instructor reviews only the content highlighted on attempts two and three. If the entire paper is highlighted, the paper will be returned ungraded and will count as an attempt. Track changes are not a substitution for highlighted text.
Instructions
Before you get started, please watch the following video:
NURS-FPX8022 Assessment 2 Video (E).
For this assessment, create a 5–8 minute video presentation for an executive-level audience to showcase your SAFER guidelines and identify and describe any potential risks uncovered through the completion of such. Make sure to use the literature to support your findings.
Overall, your assessment will be assessed based on the following criteria and should be presented in the order listed:
Describe the technology/informatics you propose to implement as part of a practice change to drive improvements in a chosen healthcare environment.
Evaluate the use of information and communication technology to address needs, gaps, and inefficiencies in care.
You may wish to refer to your work in the previous assessments to help you compose this section. Keep in mind, as you move through these assessments, your writing should become more concise.
Explain SAFER Guides findings related to areas where the chosen healthcare environment is performing well with regard to the proposed technology/informatics.
These will likely be areas in which you would have rated your chosen healthcare environment as “Fully in all areas” on the SAFER Guides.
Explain SAFER Guides findings related to risks with regard to the proposed technology/informatics in the context of the chosen healthcare environment.
These will likely be areas in which you would have rated your chosen healthcare environment as “Not implemented” on the SAFER Guides, but could also include areas you rated “Partially in some areas,” depending on how severe the risks might be.
Reflect on the experience of using the SAFER Guides to discover areas of risks and to focus improvement efforts.
Think about the process of using the SAFER Guides and how it helped you adopt a different point of view in your evaluation.
Note: Remember, the assessments in this course build upon one another. It may be helpful to refer to any feedback you received on previous assessments when completing this. Also, keep in mind that your findings from the SAFER Guides will be used to inform Assessment 3.
Video Recording
Kaltura is the recommended tool for video recording. Refer to Using Kaltura (E) for more information about this courseroom tool. You are also free to use any other technology of your choice (such as a video camera or smartphone) to record your video; however, please inform the faculty facilitator of your decision not to use Kaltura to avoid potential technical problems associated with the formats.
For example, if you choose to use PowerPoint with voice-over or video, you will need to save and submit in a .mov or .mp4 file format to allow the instructor to view without advancing slides.
To record your video, you will need a built-in or external microphone and/or video camera (webcam or other device). Check that your recording equipment and software is working properly and that you know how to record and submit your video. Be sure to set up and test your equipment ahead of time.
Note: If you use assistive technology or any alternative communication methods to access course content, please contact DisabilityServices@Capella.edu with any access-related questions or to request accommodations.
Additional Requirements
Your assessment should also meet the following requirements:
Length: 5–8 minute video presentation for an executive-level audience.
References: APA formatted citations and references for a minimum of four to six scholarly references, no more than five years old. Visit the Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) Program Library Guide (E) for help with library research. Use Academic Writer (E) for guidance in citing sources and formatting your paper in proper APA style. See the Writing Center (E) for more APA resources specific to your degree level.
APA Format: Written material shown in your presentation should follow current APA style and formatting. Please include a visual or reference slide of your sources at the end of the presentation recording.
Additional Information: Submit your assessment in a movie format such as .mov or .mp4
Nomenclature: Please save the document you are submitting for grading using the following format.
Lastname, First name – Assessment 2 Attempt #
Competencies Measured
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and scoring guide criteria:
Competency 1: Use data, technology, and change management to drive improvements in healthcare organizations.
Describe the proposed technology/informatics to implement as part of a practice change to drive improvements in a chosen healthcare environment.
Competency 2: Manage risks in technology implementations.
Explain SAFER Guides findings related to areas where the chosen healthcare environment is performing well with regard to the proposed technology/informatics.
Explain SAFER Guides findings related to risks with regard to the proposed technology/informatics in the context of the chosen healthcare environment.
Competency 4: Address assessment purpose in effective written or multimedia presentations, incorporating appropriate evidence and communicating in a form and style consistent with applicable professional and academic standards.
Present in required time limit.
Reflect on the experience of using the SAFER Guides to discover areas of risks and to focus improvement efforts.
Communicate clearly and concisely in a form and style appropriate for audience, substance, purpose, and context of message being conveyed.
Apply APA style and formatting to scholarly writing.
Scoring Guide for 8022 Assessment 2
Scoring Guide
Use the scoring guide to understand how your assessment will be evaluated.
Criterion 1
Present in required time limit.
Distinguished
N/A
Proficient
Presentation is between 5–8 minutes.
Basic
N/A
Non Performance
Does not present in required time limit. Presentation is under 5 minutes or over 8 minutes.
Criterion 2
Describe the proposed technology/informatics to implement as part of a practice change to drive improvements in a chosen healthcare environment.
Distinguished
Describes the proposed technology/informatics to implement as part of a practice change to drive improvements in a chosen healthcare environment with exceptional detail and clarity.
Proficient
Describes the proposed technology/informatics to implement as part of a practice change to drive improvements in a chosen healthcare environment.
Basic
Describes the proposed technology/informatics implement as part of a practice change to drive improvements in a chosen healthcare environment, but lacks detail or clarity.
Non Performance
Does not describe the proposed technology/informatics to implement as part of a practice change to drive improvements in a chosen healthcare environment.
Criterion 3
Explain SAFER Guides findings related to areas where the chosen healthcare environment is performing well with regard to the proposed technology/informatics.
Distinguished
Explains SAFER Guides findings related to areas where the chosen healthcare environment is performing well with regard to the proposed technology/informatics with logical insights.
Proficient
Explains SAFER Guides findings related to areas where the chosen healthcare environment is performing well with regard to the proposed technology/informatics.
Basic
Explains SAFER Guides findings related to areas where the chosen healthcare environment is performing well with regard to the proposed technology/informatics but lacks detail or clarity.
Non Performance
Does not explain SAFER Guides findings related to areas where the chosen healthcare environment is performing well with regard to the proposed technology/informatics.
Criterion 4
Explain SAFER Guides findings related to risks with regard to the proposed technology/informatics in the context of the chosen healthcare environment.
Distinguished
Explains SAFER Guides findings related to risks with regard to the proposed technology/informatics in the context of the chosen healthcare environment with logical insights.
Proficient
Explains SAFER Guides findings related to risks with regard to the proposed technology/informatics in the context of the chosen healthcare environment.
Basic
Describes or lists SAFER Guides findings related to risks with regard to the proposed technology/informatics in the context of the chosen healthcare environment.
Non Performance
Does not explain SAFER Guides findings related to risks with regard to the proposed technology/informatics in the context of the chosen healthcare environment.
Criterion 5
Reflect on the experience of using the SAFER Guides to discover areas of risks and to focus improvement efforts.
Distinguished
Reflects on experience of using SAFER Guides with exceptional depth or insight into areas of risks or improvement efforts.
Proficient
Reflects on experience of using SAFER Guides to discover areas of risks and focus improvement efforts.
Basic
Reflects on experience of using SAFER Guides, but lacks depth or insight into areas of risks or improvement efforts.
Non Performance
Does not reflect on experience of using SAFER Guides to discover areas of risks and focus improvement efforts.
Criterion 6
Communicate clearly and concisely in a form and style appropriate for audience, substance, purpose, and context of message being conveyed.
Distinguished
Communicates clearly or concisely in a form or style appropriate for audience, substance, purpose, context of message being conveyed consistently throughout presentation while demonstrating exceptional polish or refinement in delivery or organization.
Proficient
Communicates clearly and concisely in a form and style appropriate for audience, substance, purpose, and context of message being conveyed.
Basic
Communicates clearly or concisely in a form or style appropriate for audience, substance, purpose, and context of message being conveyed, but lacks consistency or effectiveness throughout presentation.
Non Performance
Does not communicate clearly or concisely in a form or style appropriate for audience, substance, purpose, and context of message being conveyed.
Criterion 7
Apply APA style and formatting to scholarly writing.
Distinguished
Applies APA formatting to in-text citations, references, figures, appendices in written material used within presentation. Exhibits strict and nearly flawless adherence to stylistic conventions, document structure, and source attributions.
Proficient
Applies APA formatting to in-text citations, references, figures, appendices in written material used within presentation.
Basic
Applies APA formatting to in-text citations, references, figures, appendices in written material used within presentation, with some errors in the APA formatting.
Non Performance
Does not apply APA formatting to in-text citations, references, figures, appendices in written material used within presentation.
References For NURS FPX 8022 Assessment 2
Chishtie, J., Sapiro, N., Wiebe, N., Rabatach, L., Lorenzetti, D., Leung, A. A., Rabi, D., Quan, H., & Eastwood, C. A. (2023). Use of Epic electronic health record system for health care research: Scoping review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.2196/51003
Dixon, D., Sattar, H., Moros, N., Kesireddy, S. R., Ahsan, H., Lakkimsetti, M., Fatima, M., Doshi, D., Sadhu, K., & Hassan, M. J. (2024). Unveiling the influence of AI predictive analytics on patient outcomes: A comprehensive narrative review. Cureus, 16(5), e59954. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.59954
Harbi, S. A., Aljohani, B., Elmasry, L., Baldovino, F. L., Raviz, K. B., Altowairqi, L., & Alshlowi, S. (2024). Streamlining patient flow and enhancing operational efficiency through case management implementation. British Medical Journal Open Quality, 13(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002484
LeapFrog. (n.d.). Massachusetts General Hospital – MA – Hospital Safety Grade. Www.hospitalsafetygrade.org. https://www.hospitalsafetygrade.org/h/massachusetts-general-hospital
LeapFrog. (n.d.). Massachusetts General Hospital – MA – Hospital Safety Grade. Www.hospitalsafetygrade.org. https://www.hospitalsafetygrade.org/h/massachusetts-general-hospital
Owens, K., Palmore, M., Penoyer, D., & Viers, P. (2020). The effect of implementing a bar-code medication administration system in an emergency department on medication administration errors and nursing satisfaction. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 46(6), 884–891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2020.07.004
Shan, Y., Shang, J., Yan, Y., & Ye, X. (2023). Workflow interruption and nurses’ mental workload in electronic health record tasks: An observational study. BioMed Central Nursing, 22(1), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01209-9
Sittig, D. F., Flanagan, T., Sengstack, P., Cholankeril, R. T., Ehsan, S., Heidemann, A., Murphy, D. R., Adelman, J. S., & Singh, H. (2025). Revisions to the safety assurance factors for electronic health record resilience (SAFER) guides to update national recommendations for safe use of electronic health records. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 9(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf018
Syrowatka, A., Motala, A., Lawson, E., & Shekelle, P. (2023). Computerized clinical decision support to prevent medication errors and adverse drug events: Rapid review. PubMed; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK600580/
Best Professors To Choose From For 8022 Class
- Lisa Kreeger, PhD, RN.
- Buddy Wiltcher, EdD, MSN, APRN, FNP-C.
- Jill Aston, DNP, MSN, BSN.
- Erica Alexander, DNP, MSN, BSN.
- Linda Matheson, PhD (part-time/adjunct DNP faculty).
(FAQs) related toNURS FPX 8022 Assessment 2
Question 1: From where can I download a free sample for NURS-FPX 8022 Assessment 2?
Answer 1: You can download a free sample for NURS-FPX 8022 Assessment 2 from the Tutors Academy website.
Question 2: Where can I find the instructions and rubric file for NURS-FPX 8022 Assessment 2?
Answer 2: You can find the rubric and instruction files for this assessment on the Tutors Academy sample page for NURS-FPX 8022 Assessment 2.
Question 3: What is NURS-FPX 8022 Assessment 2?
Answer 3: NURS-FPX 8022 Assessment 2 uses SAFER Guides to assess technology and propose informatics solutions for better patient safety and workflows.
Do you need a tutor to help with this paper for you with in 24 hours.
- 0% Plagiarised
- 0% AI
- Distinguish grades guarantee
- 24 hour delivery