Chamberlain College of Nursing Quality Improvement Model Application Discussion

User Generated

Pmnwxb13

Health Medical

Chamberlain College of Nursing

Description

This assignment is due at the end of Week 3, Sunday at 11:59 p.m. MT. The guidelines and rubric for this assignment are located and listed below.

Week 3: Quality Improvement Model Application (Links to an external site.)

Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is to (a) provide examples of a quality improvement initiative or patient safety issue in any healthcare delivery setting, (b) explore the contributing factors for this adverse medical outcome, (c) apply quality improvement theories and philosophies to a healthcare management project, (d) demonstrate an understanding of quality improvement tools by correctly choosing and using them in specific cases, and (e) recognize the extent of problems of patient safety in medical care.

Course Outcomes

Through this assignment, the student will demonstrate the ability to do the following.

  • Apply frameworks and theories for improving quality of care in various healthcare systems. (CO 1)
  • Use critical inquiry to evaluate the design, implementation, and outcomes of quality and safety improvement strategies. (CO 3)
  • Advance knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary for the continuous improvement of quality and safety in healthcare. (CO 5)

Due Date: Submit by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 3.

Students are given the opportunity to request an extension on assignments for emergent situations. Supporting documentation must be submitted to the assigned faculty. If the student's request is not approved, the assignment is graded and a late penalty is applied as follows:

  • Monday = 10% of total possible point reduction
  • Tuesday = 20% of total possible point reduction
  • Wednesday = 30% of total possible point reduction

If the student's request is approved, the student will be informed of the revised due date. Should the student fail to meet the revised due date, the assignment is graded and a late penalty is applied as follows:

  • Monday = 10% of total possible point reduction
  • Tuesday = 20% of total possible point reduction
  • Wednesday = 30% of total possible point reduction

Total Points Possible: 230

Requirements

Assignment Criteria for the Paper

1. Identify any existing quality concern or an existing patient safety issue and provide the rationale for choosing this issue.

2. Explain the background and scope of the problem.

3. Analyze the issue based on the appropriate quality philosophy.

4. Identify the regulatory guidelines, internal and/or external benchmarks, or evidence-based practice standards surrounding the issue—explain what that expectation is and why.

5. Use the appropriate quality improvement tools to improve the quality outcome.

6. Describe how you could or will get involved in this initiative to make a difference and move it forward to enactment.

7. Summarize the content in concluding statements.

8. The body of the scholarly paper is to be 3–5 pages in length, excluding title and reference pages.

9. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, references, and citations are consistent with formal academic writing and APA format as expressed in the current edition.

10. Include a minimum of four references published within the past 5 years, not including your textbook. References may include scholarly websites of organizations or government agencies and must be presented using APA current edition format for electronic media.

Preparing the Paper

Category

Points

%

Description

Introduction and quality concern

25

11%

Identify a quality issue/patient safety issue and provide a rationale.

Background and scope of the problem

20

9%

Analyze the problem from a literature review and a practical point of view.

Goals of improvement

20

9%

Identify three goals to improve the problem.

Quality philosophy application

35

15%

Using a quality model, analyze the patient safety concern and the intervention to bridge the gaps.

Identification of the regulatory guidelines and internal/external benchmarks or EBP standards for this issue

40

17%

Discuss all related factors to this problem and explain what the expectation is and why.

Quality process tool and improvement recommendation

40

17%

Apply appropriate quality improvement tools to improve the quality outcome; provide illustrations for all tools used (flowchart, gap analysis, root cause analysis, etc.). Choose at least two tools for implementation.

Conclusion

15

7%

Provide summary and concluding statements.

APA style

10

4%

Text, title page, and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA current edition format.

Scholarly references

15

7%

Paper is 3–5 pages in length, excluding the cover and reference pages. References include a minimum of 4 scholarly references, excluding the course text.

Grammar and spelling

10

4%

Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work.

Total

230

100%

A quality assignment will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.

Rubric

Quality Improvement Model Application Guidelines With Scoring Rubric

Quality Improvement Model Application Guidelines With Scoring Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction and quality concern

25 pts

Exceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance

Introduction offers broad overview of topic narrowing to key concepts to be presented. Purpose statement is clear. All elements provided.

20 pts

Exceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performance

Introduction includes issue and purpose. Statement present but may lack a key component.

16 pts

Meets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Introduction of topic issue lacks occasional important element or specificity. One element provided.

10 pts

Needs Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performance

Introduction of topic issue has multiple instances of inaccuracies. None of the required elements present or no introduction.

0 pts

Developing (0) Unsatisfactory level of performance

Introduction is not present.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBackground and scope of the problem

20 pts

Exceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance

Succinctly defines problem and population with significant demographics; describes depth of the problem and numbers affected.

18 pts

Exceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performance

Defines problem, some elements may not be fully developed; rare inaccuracy.

16 pts

Meets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Identifies problem with lack of depth and occasional important elements or specificity.

8 pts

Needs Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performance

Identifies problem with multiple instances of inaccuracies or one or more elements missing.

0 pts

Developing (0) Unsatisfactory level of performance

Overview of health problem is not present.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGoals of improvement

20 pts

Exceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance

Comprehensive and realistic benefits to nursing profession presented.

18 pts

Exceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performance

Benefits to nursing profession stated with adequate clarity or realism.

16 pts

Meets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Benefits to nursing profession stated but lack clarity or realism.

8 pts

Needs Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performance

Benefits to nursing profession stated but unrealistic.

0 pts

Developing (0) Unsatisfactory level of performance

Benefits to nursing profession absent.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality philosophy application

35 pts

Exceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance

Application to problem/concern is fully developed and comprehensive.

25 pts

Exceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performance

Application to problem/concern is adequately present or model mostly linked to project.

20 pts

Meets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Application to problem/concern is minimally present or model not always linked to project.

15 pts

Needs Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performance

Model is not linked to project.

0 pts

Developing (0) Unsatisfactory level of performance

Application to problem/concern is absent.

35 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify regulatory guidelines, internal/external benchmarks and EBP standards

40 pts

(100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance

Able to discuss all related factors.

32 pts

Exceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performance

Able to discuss all related factors but there are some missing details.

25 pts

Meets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Discussed some related factors but there are some that are missing.

15 pts

Needs Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performance

Discussion is minimal and most of the factors are missing.

0 pts

Developing (0) Unsatisfactory level of performance

No discussion of related factors.

40 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeImprovement process and recommendations

40 pts

Exceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance

Decision recommendation thoroughly discussed. Discusses at least two tools.

32 pts

Exceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performance

Decision recommendation developed with rare inaccuracies; Discusses at least one tool.

25 pts

Meets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Discussion of the decision recommendation lacks occasional important elements or specificity but one tool is discussed.

15 pts

Needs Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performance

Discussion of the decision recommendation has multiple instances of inaccuracies and/or is vague. One tool discussed.

0 pts

Developing (0) Unsatisfactory level of performance

Discussion of the decision recommendation is absent. No tools discussed.

40 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion

15 pts

Exceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance

Provides distinct summary with concluding statements regarding the future direction and focus of the project; reflects key elements of the paper.

12 pts

Exceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performance

Provides distinct summary with concluding statements regarding the future direction and focus of the project; does not summarize key elements of the paper.

8 pts

Meets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Provides distinct summary with no concluding statements; no summarization of key elements of the paper.

4 pts

Needs Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performance

No distinct summary; concluding statements found at the end in the general body of the paper.

0 pts

Developing (0) Unsatisfactory level of performance

No distinct summary or conclusion provided.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA

10 pts

There are no APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).

8 pts

There are 1–2 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).

6 pts

There are 3–4 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).

4 pts

There are 5 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).

0 pts

There are 6 or more APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholary

15 pts

The table provided is utilized. References include 2 or more scholarly resources, excluding the course text, and may include scholarly websites.

12 pts

The table provided is utilized. References include a minimum of 2 scholarly resources, excluding course text. One of the references utilized was not scholarly.

8 pts

The table provided is not utilized and/or references contain a minimum of 2 resources, excluding course text. One or more references utilized is not a scholarly resource.

4 pts

The table provided is not utilized and/or references utilized are not scholarly and/or fewer than 2 resources were utilized.

0 pts

Only one resource was utilized.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work.

10 pts

Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with no exceptions.

8 pts

Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with 1–2 exceptions.

6 pts

Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with 3–4 exceptions.

4 pts

grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are not followed with errors.

0 pts

Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are not followed with 6 or more errors.

10 pts

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Please vie...


Anonymous
Just what I needed…Fantastic!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags