DNP 805 Topic 3 Discussion 2 Select a particular medication or clinical problem – Online Nursing Essays

DNP 805 Topic 3 Discussion 2 Select a particular medication or clinical problem

DNP 805 Topic 3 Discussion 2 Select a particular medication or clinical problem

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 805 Topic 3 Discussion 2 Select a particular medication or clinical problem

One of the major concerns in the clinical environment is patient safety. The implication is that various stakeholders have to use strategies that ensure patient safety and efficient patient service. Some of these problems are clinical or medication problems. In recent times, technology has played a significant role in solving these problems. In particular, the clinical decision support system and the computerized physician order entry system have been at the center stage of solving medication and clinical problems (Sutton et al., 2020).

The case of a critically ill patient or patients living with multiple conditions is one example of how the two technologies can be combined for better outcomes. Such patients frequently require a number of medications and tests. As a result, the volume of treatments and orders for these patients is high, increasing the likelihood of confusion and medication errors (Liu et al., 2020). In such a case, the computerized physician order entry system can be critical in organizing and updating new orders or entries created by healthcare providers. Such updates and organization improve patient care efficiency. Furthermore, treatment and medication error rates are reduced, and care quality is improved.

The use of a clinical decision support system can also be key in such a case. CDSS analyses data that can then be used in making decisions and improving patient care. Critically ill patients and patients living with more than one chronic condition are usually in need of quality care and special attention (Liu et al., 2020). The use of CDSS is important in such cases as it helps the healthcare professionals to make better decisions regarding their care, hence better outcomes.

References

Liu, S., See, K. C., Ngiam, K. Y., Celi, L. A., Sun, X., & Feng, M. (2020). Reinforcement learning for clinical decision support in critical care: comprehensive review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(7), e18477. https://doi.org/10.2196/18477

Sutton, R. T., Pincock, D., Baumgart, D. C., Sadowski, D. C., Fedorak, R. N., & Kroeker, K. I. (2020). An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success. NPJ digital medicine, 3(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0221-y

REPLY

Unread

Replies

Patient safety is important in general, and the CDSS systems ensure safety on all levels. When patients in behavioral health are placed in restraints, for example, the system generated CDSS reminds nurses to check the restraints to ensure that the restraints are released Q2H and circulation checks are performed. When an IV is inserted, the system’s CDSS ensures that the IV is properly cared for. When a Foley Cather is inserted, it alerts the nurses to the need for catheter care. Patients on specific medications, such as patches, are reminded and alerted by the system to perform patch checks and document where their patches are placed. If a note is missing documentation, the system flags it and notifies the clinician.

DNP 805 Topic 3 Discussion 2

Select a particular medication or clinical problem. Describe how the CPOE and/or CDSS technologies support care decisions in this area.

Also Check Out: DNP 805 Week 4 Assignment EHR Database and Data Management

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 805 Topic 3 Discussion 2 Select a particular medication or clinical problem

Topic 4 DQ 2
May 5-9, 2022
Discuss the type of integration data from your defined patient population in Topic 4 DQ 1 would require.
How could the EHR database facilitate this type of integration between clinical and administration
systems
REPLY TO DISCUSSION
BQ
Beverly Quiza
Posted Date
May 11, 2022, 7:28 AM
Unread
Replies to Beverly Quiza
Electronic Health Record (EHR) are used in our healthcare organization and widely used to research as
well. The validity of the results is dependent upon the assumptions of the healthcare system. EHR based
data have challenges and some threats to validity and includes target population, availability and
interpretability of clinical and non-clinical data. EHR includes socioeconomic status, race, and ethnicity
that can be compared. Availability of data for fundamental markers of health are important for
identifying inequities. The data has the ability to capture individuals clinical trials , data sets and
measures the outcome that has potential risk factors. The EHR can be robust, informative and important
to the understanding of health and disease in the population.
The Veterans Health Administration is a unique healthcare organization that provides good insight into
the implementation of a population health approach to vaccine acceptance. I work at the VA and I can
say that we cater to a special population in the community. The COVID-19 pandemic and vaccine
hesitancy, and has been a threat in public health. Population health approach to vaccine acceptance
using EHR-based tools can greatly impact vaccination rates in the healthcare system. Vaccine
hesitancy—“the reluctance or refusal to vaccinate despite the availability of vaccines”—was identified as
a “top 10” threat to global health in the years leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine hesitancy
on a large scale focuses in voices of authority, engaging health care workers, scientists and strategies are
addressed. The size and scope of the Veterans Health Administration, the characteristics of EHR primary
focuses in health population, record of high quality preventive care and implementation of an
evidenced-based framework to address vaccine hesitancy. The goal is to improve clinical and
operational vaccine uptake. Steps that improve vaccine acceptance includes the identification of
education for clinicians and veterans. Development of vaccine acceptance tools and application of
population health approach will readily available.

References:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID Data tracker. Available
at: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-datatracker/#vaccinations_vacc-total-admin-rate-total. Accessed
September 1, 2021.

Ni K, Chu H, Zeng L, et al. Barriers and facilitators to data quality of electronic health records used for
clinical research in China: a qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2019;9(7):e029314. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-
2019-029314. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Verheij RA, Curcin V, Delaney BC, et al. Possible sources of bias in primary care electronic health record
data use and reuse. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(5):e185. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9134. [PMC free
article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

World Health Organization. Ten threats to global health in 2019. Available
at: https://www.who.int/news-room/spotlight/ten-threats-to-global-health-in-2019. Accessed
September 1, 2021.
REPLY
 NM
Nkiruka Mgbemena
replied toBeverly Quiza
May 11, 2022, 10:13 PM
Unread
Replies to Beverly Quiza
Great topic Beverly—The Covid pandemic came on quickly like a rush of a whirlwind or tornado and
caused so much havoc and left in its wake a lot of devastation and then dissipated or slowly dissipating.
In the wake of the Pandemic, the administration and the clinical systems had to work together to follow
the center for disease rules and regulations concerning this pandemic by creating policies for their
decisions and the informaticists created the electronic health records (EHR) that would be used to
obtain some form of minimal history and physical before the vaccine could be given and also used to
record the type of vaccine that was given so that CDC can monitor the effectiveness of the medication to
determine the need for further treatment or not. Like you pointed out Beverly, the EHR was used to
keep track of those who had not taken the vaccine since there was no record of them taking it. Which
led to increased process of re-education. So, with the EHR, it shows the need for educating people to the
need for vaccinations. In my hospital facility, there were those who also refused to take it until it was
mandated and then some took it and others presented exemptions.
Reference:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2021, April 2). Monitoring COVID-19 Vaccine
Effectiveness How and Why CDC Tracks How Well the Vaccines Are Working. Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/how-they-
work.html

Name:  Discussion Rubric

		Excellent  90–100	Good  80–89	Fair  70–79	Poor  0–69
Main Posting:  Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.		40 (40%) – 44 (44%)  Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current credible sources.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%)  Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible references.	31 (31%) – 34 (34%)  Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to 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. Cited with fewer than two credible references.	0 (0%) – 30 (30%)  Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). 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 references.
Main Posting:  Writing		6 (6%) – 6 (6%)  Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%)  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 Posting:  Timely and full participation		9 (9%) – 10 (10%)  Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	8 (8%) – 8 (8%)  Meets requirements for full participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	7 (7%) – 7 (7%)  Posts main Discussion by due date.	0 (0%) – 6 (6%)  Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main Discussion by due date.
First Response:  Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.		9 (9%) – 9 (9%)  Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.	8 (8%) – 8 (8%)  Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	7 (7%) – 7 (7%)  Response is on topic and may have some depth.	0 (0%) – 6 (6%)  Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
First Response:  Writing		6 (6%) – 6 (6%)  Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully 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.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%)  Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
First Response:  Timely and full participation		5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%)  Posts by due date.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%)  Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.		9 (9%) – 9 (9%)  Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.	8 (8%) – 8 (8%)  Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	7 (7%) – 7 (7%)  Response is on topic and may have some depth.	0 (0%) – 6 (6%)  Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Second Response: Writing		6 (6%) – 6 (6%)  Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully 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.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%)  Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response: Timely and full participation		5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%)  Posts by due date.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%)  Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric