Quality Improvement Milestones
NURS 8300 Week 1: Concepts of Quality and Patient Safety at the Organizational and System Level
NURS 8300 Week 1 Discussion
Quality Improvement Milestones
Throughout history, major events have influenced quality improvement efforts in health care. For example, the Institute of Medicine’s report To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System revealed statistics about errors in patient safety that result in thousands of deaths annually. Health care providers must be cognizant of the purpose and philosophy of quality improvement efforts as they lead the charge for improving health outcomes and patient safety. This Discussion is intended to help you understand how various developments have shaped contemporary perspectives and approaches to promoting health care quality.
Post a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:
When “To Err is Human” was published in 1999, it marked an important milestone in Quality Improvement Science.
Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on Quality Improvement Milestones done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
Meet my deadline
Analyze how this milestone has influenced the health care delivery system and nursing practice.
Provide an example from your own work history and experience as to how the patient safety movement has affected your practice.
Post your response by Day 3 of this week.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
By Day 7, respond to two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:
Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
Offer and support an alternative perspective, using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.
Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.
Click on the Reply button below to post your response.
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 Administration Press.
Chapter 1: “Healthcare Quality and the Patient”
Chapter 2: “Basic Concepts of Healthcare Quality”
Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J. M., & Donaldson, M. S. (Eds). (2000). To err is human: Building a safer health system. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Executive summary: Released in 1999, this groundbreaking report provides the rationale for implementing comprehensive improvements in patient safety, an important subset of health care quality. Although only the executive summary is required this week, you are strongly encouraged to read additional sections of this report as you proceed through the course.
Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Executive summary: This report was published by the Institute of Medicine in 2001 to highlight the significant gap between the state of health care quality and where it should be. The report draws attention to the need to improve the U.S. health care delivery system as a whole, and identifies six areas for improvement: safety, effectiveness, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity. Although only the executive summary is required this week, you are strongly encouraged to read additional sections of this report as you proceed through the course.
Wachter, R. M. (2010). Patient safety at ten: Unmistakable progress, troubling gaps. Health Affairs, 29(1), 165–173.
This article presents an analysis of progress in patient safety since the publication of the IOM report, To Err is Human. As you read this article, evaluate the author’s critique, and consider recent developments that continue to shape patient safety efforts in health care.
Required Media
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2011). Organizational and systems leadership for quality improvement: Concepts of quality and patient safety. Baltimore: Author.
This video examines the recent history of the quality improvement movement, including two pivotal IOM reports, To Err is Human and Crossing the Quality Chasm. Dr. Donald Berwick introduces six dimensions of quality: safety, effectiveness, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity. Other topics addressed include transparency, the prevention of adverse events, and the usefulness of international comparisons for quality assessment and improvement.
ORDER NOW FOR ORIGINAL PAPER
NURS 8300 Week 1 Discussion SAMPLE
Quality Improvement Milestones
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) reports To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System in 1999 and Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21stCentury in 2001 made public the number of patients that suffer adverse events from medical errors and shed light on significant quality and safety deficits in the health care system. These reports also made recommendations that not only targeted medical professionals and health care facilities, but also included recommendations for federal policy, insurance companies, health care licensing agencies, and other stakeholders in an effort to create the external pressure needed to force health care organizations to focus on patient safety (Kohn, Corrigan, & Donaldson, 1999). David Nash, MD, MBA highlights the reports as the “foundation for our national conversation about quality and safety” (Laureate Education, Inc, 2011). These reports were instrumental in making patient safety the focus of the entire health care system……
NURS 8300 Week 1 Assignment: Major Assessment 6
The Week 1 Assignment requires completion of 13 IHI Open School modules and the completion of the Certificate of Completion Basic level. There are 13 modules which you must complete over the course of these 11 weeks. While they are learner paced, it is to your advantage to complete the modules in the week assigned as the content of the course is related to the modules.
To earn the 30 points associated with this application, you must complete all 13 modules and earn the certificate of completion. Partial credit is not permitted.
To access the IHI Certificate Program, go to IHI.org and open an account. Then search on Open school, Basic Certificate. Declare that you are a student at Walden University. You will have access to the modules (there is no charge for these as a student). You will earn contact hours for each module, and once all 13 are completed, you will download the certificate of achievement. Please save this certificate. You will be required to upload this to gradebook in evidence of your completion.
Week 1: PS 101: Introduction to Patient Safety
Week 1: QI 101: Introduction to Health Care Improvement
There is nothing to submit this week.
ORDER NOW FOR ORIGINAL PAPER
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NURS_8300_ Week1_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
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_ Week1_Discussion_Rubric
Don’t wait until the last minute
Fill in your requirements and let our experts deliver your work asap.
Start My Order
