NR 599 Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

Sample Answer for NR 599 Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks Included After Question

Discussion

Purpose

The ideas and beliefs underpinning the discussions guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.

Course Outcomes

This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

Contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a discussion environment that models professional and social interaction. (CO 4)
Actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty. (CO 5)

Due Date

Students must post a minimum of 3 times in each graded discussion. The 3 posts in each individual discussion must be on separate days. Posting 3 times on 3 different days meets the minimum requirement for full credit; each post must be substantive. The student must provide an initial post to each graded discussion topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 3. Subsequent posts, including essential responses to peers, must occur no later than the Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 3. Students are expected to submit assignments by the time they are due. Threaded discussions are not considered assignments and are not part of the late assignment policy.

A 10% late penalty will be imposed for discussions posted after the deadline on Wednesday regardless of the number of days late. NOTHING will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Sunday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0).

Total Points Possible: 150

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NR 599 Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

Preparing the Discussion

Post a written response in the discussion forum to EACH threaded discussion topic:

As discussed in the lesson and assigned reading for this week, EHRs provide both benefits and drawbacks. Create a “Pros” versus “Cons” table and include at least 3 items for each list. Next to each item, provide a brief rationale as to why you selected to include it on the respective list.

Refer to the Stage 3 objectives for Meaningful Use located in this week’s lesson under the heading Meaningful Use and the HITECH Act. Select two objectives to research further. In your own words, provide a brief discussion as to how the objective may impact your role as an APN in clinical practice.

Adhere to the following guidelines regarding quality for the threaded discussions in Canvas:

Application of Course Knowledge: Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings.
Scholarliness and Scholarly Sources: Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions using valid, relevant, and reliable outside scholarly source to contribute to the discussion thread. 
Writing Mechanics: Grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation are accurate. In-text and reference citations should be formatted using correct APA guidelines.
Direct Quotes: Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the grammar, syntax, APA category.

For each threaded discussion per week, the student will select no less than TWO scholarly sources to support the initial discussion post.

Scholarly Sources: Only scholarly sources are acceptable for citation and reference in this course. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. The textbooks and lessons are NOT considered to be outside scholarly sources. For the threaded discussions and reflection posts, reputable internet sources such as websites by government agencies (URL ends in .gov) and respected organizations (often ends in .org) can be counted as scholarly sources. The best outside scholarly source to use is a peer-reviewed nursing journal.  You are encouraged to use the Chamberlain library and search one of the available databases for a peer-reviewed journal article.  The following sources should not be used: Wikipedia, Wikis, or blogs.  These websites are not considered scholarly as anyone can add to these. Please be aware that .com websites can vary in scholarship and quality.  For example, the American Heart Association is a .com site with scholarship and quality.  It is the responsibility of the student to determine the scholarship and quality of any .com site.  Ask your instructor before using any site if you are unsure. Points will be deducted from the rubric if the site does not demonstrate scholarship or quality. Current outside scholarly sources must be published with the last 5 years.  Instructor permission must be obtained BEFORE the assignment is due if using a source that is older than 5 years.

DISCUSSION CONTENT
Category	Points	%	Description
Application of Course Knowledge	50	33%	The quality for this category is determined by the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lessons and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations.
Scholarliness and Scholarly Resources	40	27%	This category is evaluated on the quality of the student’s ability to: Support writing with appropriate, scholarly sources; provide relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions; evaluate literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis; use sources published within the last 5 years; match reference list and in-text citations match, and minimize or appropriately format direct quotations.
Interactive Dialogue	40	27%	The quality for this category is determined by substantive written responses to a peer and faculty member’s questions in the threaded discussion. Substantive posts add importance, depth, and meaningfulness to the discussion. Students must respond to least one peer in the threaded discussion. If no question asked directly from faculty, student must respond to questions posed to the entire class. Post must include at least one scholarly source.
			Total CONTENT Points= 130
DISCUSSION FORMAT
Category	Points	%	Description
Grammar, Spelling, Syntax, Mechanics and APA Format	20	13%	Reflection post has minimal grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation and APA* errors. Direct quotes (if used) is limited to 1 short statement** which adds substantively to the post. * APA style references and in text citations are required; however, there are no deductions for errors in indentation or spacing of references. All elements of the reference otherwise must be included. **Direct quote should not to exceed 15 words & must add substantively to the discussion
			Total FORMAT Points = 20
			DISCUSSION TOTAL = 150 Points

**To see view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric.

As discussed in the lesson and assigned reading for this week, EHRs provide both benefits and drawbacks. Create a “Pros” versus “Cons” table and include at least 3 items for each list. Next to each item, provide a brief rationale as to why you selected to include it on the respective list.

PRO’s	Improved patient-provider communication	EHRs have become an important part of nurse-patient interactions which includes both face-to-face and remote consultations (Aveyard, et al., 2022). EHRs allow the patient to connect with their provider from anywhere. Being able to connect at any time for any issue facilitates better communication and promotes better patient outcomes.	CONs	Less patient interaction	The distraction that can be caused by the use of EHRs by providers has negative impacts on the patient-provider relationship (Bohsali, et al., 2018). Providers need to be cognoscente of time they are devoting to EHR documentation, especially in the presence of the patient, as not to distract of the patient-provider interaction (Bohsali, et al., 2018).
PRO’s	Reduced costs	Advantages of EHRs are the shortening of the time to make a new medical record, the reduction of working hours for employees in the records department and other departments, increase of billing accuracy and income, and improvement in the quality of provider documentation (Adebowale, et al., 2022).	CONs	Cost of operation/running	Long-term costs associated with running an HER includes software protection to protect against malware, system upgrades, and ransomware concerns (Adebowale, et al., 2022).
PRO’s	Legible and complete documentation	EHRs support documentation which improves clinical outcomes and streamlines communication between professionals to improve patient safety, assess quality of care and maximize efficiency (Eltair, et al., 2018).	CONs	Usability	“…poor EHR usability has been found to be a contributor to physician dissatisfaction, and many have hypothesized a direct relationship between EHR usability and physician burnout” (Dyrbye, et al., 2019, para. 6). Authors further point out that providers spend 1 to 2 hours time charting in the EHR for every 1 hour they spend with their patient on top of the 1 to 2 hours personal time they spend working in the EHR (Dyrbye, et al., 2019).

Refer to the Stage 3 objectives for Meaningful Use located in this week’s lesson under the heading Meaningful Use and the HITECH Act. Select two objectives to research further. In your own words, provide a brief discussion as to how the objective may impact your role as an APN in clinical practice.

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NR 599 Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

Title: NR 599 Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

Generate and transmit prescriptions electronically: this objective strives to ensure all eligible hospitals and critical access hospitals use electronic health record technology to transmit prescriptions to patients (CMS, 2018). Under stage 2 controlled substances were excluded but under stage 3 e-prescribing of controlled substances is included in states where allowable (CMS, 2018). As an Advanced Practice Provider, I will have to be knowledgeable about prescribing restrictions. For example, in my state of Wisconsin, there are restrictions on prescribing controlled substances (Board of Nursing, 2019).

Regardless of eligibility under the objective, I will be unable to prescribe any schedule I controlled substance (Board of Nursing, 2019). One of the factors in my ability to meet this objective is the training I receive. Proper training to ensure correct utilization of the organization’s EHR to e-prescribe will be vital. Beykloo, et al. states that use of the EHR for prescribing increases patient safety by reducing risk of errors, but can add to workflow thereby increasing provider frustration (The impact of electronic prescribing, 2019). To decrease workload, reduce steps in the process, and decrease frustration, providers often use workarounds (Beykloo, et al., 2019). Although workarounds can save time, they are not best practice and can lead to adverse events or poor patient outcomes.

Actively engage in public health: this objective requires providers to show active engagement with public health agencies by meeting at least 2 of the 5 different public health measures (Forward Health, 2023). These measures are: immunization registry reporting, syndromic surveillance reporting, electronic case reporting, public health registry reporting, and clinical data registry reporting (Forward Health, 2023).

Meeting these public health measures are vital in my future practice to promote the overall health of the community by focusing on the social, economic, and environmental factors that contribute to patient well-being (Bekemeier, et al., 2021). As Advanced Practice Providers, we have the capacity to work in diverse settings such as health departments, nonprofits, and complex care systems in our community. Being able and willing to engage the fore-mentioned public health measures will guide us to provide better care to the patients we serve in our future practice (Bekemeier, et al., 2021).

Aveyard, H., Butcher, D. & Forde-Johnston, C. (2022). An integrative review exploring the impact of electronic health records (HER) on the quality of nurse-patient interactions and communication. JAN, 79(1), 48-67. Retrieved on 03/19/2023 from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jan.15484Links to an external site.

Adebowale, A., Amanullah, S. & Gopidasan, B. (2022). Electronic medical records – a review of cost-effectiveness, efficiency, quality of care, and usability. Journal of Psychiatry Spectrum, 1(2), 76-79. DOI: 10.4103/jopsys.jopsys_17_22. Retrieved on 03/19/2023 from: https://journals.lww.com/jops/Fulltext/2022/07000/Electronic_Medical_Records___A_Review_of.2.aspxLinks to an external site.

Bekemeier, B., Johnson, K., Kaneshiro, J., Kuehnert, P., Swider, S. & Zahner, S. (2021). A critical gap: advanced practice nurses focused on the public’s health. Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection, 69(5), 865-874. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2021.03.023. Retrieved on 03/19/2023 from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8092811/Links to an external site.

Beykloo, M., Blandford, A., Franklin, B., Furniss, D., Ma, T., McLeod, M. & Mohsin-Shaikh, S. (2019). The impact of electronic prescribing systems on healthcare professionals’ working practices in the hospital setting: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. BMC Health Services Research, 19. Retrieved on 03/19/2023 from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6806498/Links to an external site.

Board of Nursing (2019). Chapter N8. Wisconsin Legislature. Retrieved on 03/18/2023 from: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/n/8.pdfLinks to an external site.

Bohsali, F., Chisolm, M. & Wolfe, L. (2018). Clinically excellent use of the electronic health record: review. JMIR Human Factors, 5(4). doi: 10.2196/10426. Retrieved on 03/18/2023 from: https://humanfactors.jmir.org/2018/4/e10426/Links to an external site.

CMS (2018). Medicare promoting interoperability program stage 3 eligible hospitals, critical access hospitals, and dual-eligible hospitals attesting to CMS objectives and measures for 2018. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved on 03/18/2023 from: https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/EHRIncentivePrograms/Downloads/MedicareEHStage3_Obj2.pdfLinks to an external site.

Dyrbye, L., Melnick, E., Nedelec, L., Shanafelt, T., Sinsky, C., Trockel, M., Tutty, M. & West, C. (2019). The association between perceived electronic health record usability and professional burnout among US physicians. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 95(3), 476-487. Retrieved on 03/18/2023 from: https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/playContent/1-s2.0-S0025619619308365?returnurl=https:%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0025619619308365%3Fshowall%3Dtrue&referrerLinks to an external site.=

Eltair, S., Faber, K. & Pagulayan, J. (2018). Use the nursing process to take advantage of EHR’s capabilities and optimize patient care. The American Nurse Journal. Retrieved on 03/18/2023 from: https://www.myamericannurse.com/documentation-electronic-health-record/Links to an external site.

Forward Health (2023). Promoting interoperability program: meaningful use of certified EHR technology. Department of Health Services. Retrieved on 03/19/2023 from: https://www.forwardhealth.wi.gov/WIPortal/Subsystem/KW/Print.aspx?ia=1&p=1&sa=15&s=11&c=637&ntLinks to an external site.=