Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

DNP 805 Topic 3 Using CPOE and CDSS Essay

DNP 805 Topic 3 Using CPOE and CDSS Essay

Assessment Description

For this assignment, select one clinical practice issue that involves a specific medication. Using a Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) system, design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) that would be embedded in the EHR at your site of practice. Your CDSS must connect with CPOE to include a medication. You must link these two applications within the design.

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

  • This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
  • Use primary sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
  • You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
  • Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the learning management system. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.

Directions:

Write a 1,000-1,250 word paper that provides the following:

  1. Specific details of the clinical issue involving a specific medication
  2. The rationale behind your design development.
  3. A description of how this CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians.
  4. An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario (e.g., information loss, communication breakdown).

Using CPOE and CDSS – Rubric

Collapse All Using CPOE And CDSS – RubricCollapse All

Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)Com

15 points

Criteria Description

Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)

  1. Excellent

15 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

13.8 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

13.2 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS but used at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS but use is marginal or incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

CPOE is not used to design a CDSS.

Proposed CDSS Embedded in the EHR

15 points

Criteria Description

Proposed CDSS Embedded in the EHR

  1. Excellent

15 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

13.8 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but use is marginal or incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Proposed CDSS is not embedded in the EHR.

Proposed CDSS Design Links a Specific Medication Through the CPOE

5 points

Criteria Description

Proposed CDSS Design Links a Specific Medication Through the CPOE

  1. Excellent

5 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but effort is marginal or incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Proposed CDSS design does not link a specific medication through the CPOE.

Discussion of Specific Details of Clinical Issue Involving the Selected Medication

5 points

Criteria Description

Discussion of Specific Details of Clinical Issue Involving the Selected Medication

  1. Excellent

5 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is not present.

Discussion of the Rationale Behind the Design Development

5 points

Criteria Description

Discussion of the Rationale Behind the Design Development

  1. Excellent

5 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

4.6 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is not present.

Description of How Proposed CDSS Will Be Implemented and Adopted by Fellow Clinicians

10 points

Criteria Description

DNP 805 Topic 3 Using CPOE and CDSS Essay

DNP 805 Topic 3 Using CPOE and CDSS Essay

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:DNP 805 Topic 3 Using CPOE and CDSS Essay

Description of How Proposed CDSS Will Be Implemented and Adopted by Fellow Clinicians

  1. Excellent

10 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

9.2 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

8.8 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

8 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is not provided.

Explanation of How Patient Outcomes Will Be Measured

5 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of How Patient Outcomes Will Be Measured

  1. Excellent

5 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

4.6 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided but explanation is incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is not provided.

Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions Which Might Apply to Scenario

10 points

Criteria Description

Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions Which Might Apply to Scenario

  1. Excellent

10 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

  1. Good

9.2 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

  1. Satisfactory

8.8 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but the assessment is rendered at a perfunctory level.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

8 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but elements are missing or incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is not provided.

Thesis Development and Purpose

7 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

  1. Excellent

7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

  1. Good

6.44 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

  1. Satisfactory

6.16 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

5.6 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

8 points

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

  1. Excellent

8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

  1. Good

7.36 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

  1. Satisfactory

7.04 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

6.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

  1. Excellent

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5 points

Criteria Description

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

  1. Excellent

5 points

All format elements are correct.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources

5 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

  1. Excellent

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 100 points

Welcome to class

Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to.

I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you.

Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted.

If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations.

Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements.

Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week.

I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!

Sincerely,

Rubric Criteria

Total100 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions Which Might Apply to Scenario

Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions Which Might Apply to Scenario

0 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is not provided.

8 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but elements are missing or incomplete.

8.8 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but the assessment is rendered at a perfunctory level.

9.2 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

5.6 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

6.16 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

6.44 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

6.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

7.04 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

7.36 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Explanation of How Patient Outcomes Will Be Measured

Explanation of How Patient Outcomes Will Be Measured

0 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is not provided.

4 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided but explanation is incomplete.

4.4 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Proposed CDSS Embedded in the EHR

Proposed CDSS Embedded in the EHR

0 points

Proposed CDSS is not embedded in the EHR.

12 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but use is marginal or incomplete.

13.2 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but at a perfunctory level.

13.8 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

15 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

4.4 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

4.6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

5 points

All format elements are correct.

Proposed CDSS Design Links a Specific Medication Through the CPOE

Proposed CDSS Design Links a Specific Medication Through the CPOE

0 points

Proposed CDSS design does not link a specific medication through the CPOE.

4 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but effort is marginal or incomplete.

4.4 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

4.4 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

4.6 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Discussion of the Rationale Behind the Design Development

Discussion of the Rationale Behind the Design Development

0 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is not present.

4 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but incomplete.

4.4 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)Com

Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)

0 points

CPOE is not used to design a CDSS.

12 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS but use is marginal or incomplete.

13.2 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS but used at a perfunctory level.

13.8 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

15 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

4.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

4.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Discussion of Specific Details of Clinical Issue Involving the Selected Medication

Discussion of Specific Details of Clinical Issue Involving the Selected Medication

0 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is not present.

4 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but incomplete.

4.4 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Description of How Proposed CDSS Will Be Implemented and Adopted by Fellow Clinicians

Description of How Proposed CDSS Will Be Implemented and Adopted by Fellow Clinicians

0 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is not provided.

8 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but incomplete.

8.8 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

9.2 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.