Benchmarks and quality Benchmarks and quality measures – Online Nursing Essays

I’m working on a health & medical question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.

 

“please respond to the following discussion post as a peer making a comment”. Benchmarks and quality Benchmarks and quality measures are standards for measuring the performance of healthcare organizations and care providers to care for patients. Quality measures can isolate important facets of care like efficiency, impartiality, reliability, and safety. Benchmarking is an appraisal and evaluation of a healthcare organization’s services against other national healthcare organizations. It offers organizational leaders the acumen to help them recognize how their organization compares with similar organizations that provide comparable services. It also allows for the distribution of best practices and research-based practice clinical research outcomes between healthcare facilities at a national level. (Davis, 2015)

I work in a home care setting and hospital setting which has a population of adults to geriatric. The three nationally accepted quality measures and benchmarks used in my practice setting are:

– Inpatient Quality Indicators: Summarizes quality of care inside hospitals. They include inpatient mortality for particular procedures and medical situations; utilization of procedures for which there are inquiries of overuse, underuse, and misuse; and volume of procedures for which there is some evidence that a higher volume of procedures is associated with lower mortality.

– Patient Safety Indicators: Recognizes adverse patient events occurring during hospitalization. They provide information on possible in-hospital problems and adverse events following surgeries, procedures, and childbirth.

– Pain Quality Indicators: Includes the measurement of assessment and management of pain which can improve patient outcomes or may delay patient care (Stang et al., 2014)

Quality measurement for quality assertion and responsibility makes cumulative judgments about the quality of care provided. The different approaches used when measuring quality data at the hospital are

– ORYX: A set of performance measures required by The Joint Commission. Hospitals pursuing accreditation from The Joint Commission are required to submit some combination of ORYX measures to achieve the requirements; the measures are also meant to support organizations in their quality improvement efforts.

– CAHPS Hospital Survey for both adults and children: Hospital CAHPS or HCAHPS is a standardized survey implemented for measuring adult patients’ perspectives on the care they experience during their hospital stay. The CAHPS Child Hospital Survey is also a standardized survey implemented that enquires about the experiences of pediatric patients and their parents or guardians with inpatient care.

– The Leapfrog Group: It is an employer-based association that develops and sustains a measure set that emphasizes hospital quality and safety practices. Hospitals voluntarily submit information on the level to which they abide by the certain quality and safety practices using the Leapfrog Hospital survey tool. (AHRQ, 2019)

Reference:

AHRQ. (2019). Major Hospital Quality Measurement sets. AHRQ. Retrieved March 11, 2022, from https://www.ahrq.gov/talkingquality/measures/setting/hospitals/measurement-sets.html

Davis, C. (2015). Let’s talk about benchmarking. Nursing Made Incredibly Easy!, 13(2), 4. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.nme.0000460363.11541.5c

Stang, A. S., Hartling, L., Fera, C., Johnson, D., & Ali, S. (2014). Quality indicators for the assessment and management of pain in the emergency department: a systematic review. Pain research & management19(6), e179–e190. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/269140

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100  

 

"Get 15% discount on your first 3 orders with us"
Use the following coupon
"FIRST15"

Order Now