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

NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample

NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample
Main Discussion Post

Unless something is wrong with the computer system, the technology specialists on my current assignment have very little interaction with the nursing staff. I believe that making the technology specialists more visible to the nursing staff would be beneficial. It would be beneficial if technology specialists were included in the orientation process when new members are learning how to use the system. Epic is the electronic health record (HER) that we use, and I am familiar with it. I was talking about the “hot keys” when I arrived on the floor, and the staff who had worked at this facility for years had no idea what I was talking about. The staff was unaware that Epic had shortcuts that could make charting easier. “The American Nurses Association continues to advocate for the use of the ANA recognized terminologies supporting nursing practice within the Electronic Health Record (EHR) and other health information technology solutions,” according to the American Nurses Association (2018). (para. 2). (para. 2). The continued development of new technologies may have a positive impact on professional interactions by increasing the efficiency of the HER. “Eliminating duplication of effort will go a long way toward simplifying and streamlining nursing work within the EHR,” writes Glassman (2017). (p. 46). (p. 46). According to McGonigle and Mastrian (2017), “as learning healthcare system concepts become more widely implemented, we will see more rapid knowledge dissemination than was previously possible with more traditional forms of research, particularly the randomized clinical trial” (p. 550). (p. 550).

References

American Nurses Association. (2018). Inclusion of recognized terminologies supporting nursing practice within electronic health records and other health information technology solutions. Retrieved March 9, 2020, from https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/nursing-excellence/official-position-statements/id/Inclusion-of-Recognized-Terminologies-Supporting-Nursing-Practice-within-Electronic-Health-Records/

Glassman, K. S. (2017). Using data in nursing practice. American Nurse Today, 12(11), 45-47. Retrieved March 9, 2020, from https://www.myamericannurse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ant11-Data-1030.pdf

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

RE: Discussion – Week 3

Great informative post, Tia,

with nice discussion and citations to support your responses.  I think I have mentioned this before, but I am one of the editors of the Nursing Interventions Classification.  One thing we struggle with a lot, is the current methods of nursing documentation in the electronic record, and the fact that most of the electronic documentation systems do not want to standardize the nursing languages within their systems.  In other words, any old language will suit them.

One thing I would like to see related to electronic medical records and nursing documentation systems is the use of standardized nursing languages in those documentation systems, and I would LOVE it if nursing informaticists would embrace this method of helping nurses with electronic documentation.  Right now, anyone can put whatever they want to in the systems – any type of nursing care in any form. At one time, NANDA, NIC and NOC almost had a contract with EPIC and CERNER and some of the big name documentation systems, but then those systems decided that it was cheaper for them to hire someone to make up the languages they use, and not to use any of the researched and time proven nursing languages.  And nurses basically did not care, because as always, we never keep current with what is going on in our profession……. NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample

Anyway, these documentation systems can state auscultate lung sounds in one record, for example, and in the hospital across the street, it might be auscultate breath sounds.  What does that matter, you might ask?  Well, just try and gather data related to frequency of nurse assessment of lungs, and you would have to know every single programming word that could remotely be connected to lungs and then program your data collection to pick them all up, then read the data to find what you needed, etc., etc., etc.  Instead of say, just telling the computer to gather all of the instances that the NIC Respiratory Monitoring was documented by the nurse.  It boggles the mind how simple it would be to gather data.  And that is just for data gathering. Imagine the ease of charting that is afforded by using nursing languages to document nursing actions…….

NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample

NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample

I gave an extremely simple example, but all kinds of things could be discovered about nursing care and patient outcomes if these

systems would use the nursing friendly standardized languages.  For example, a couple of years ago when some nurse researchers were trying to find out how well they could gather and clean the data at the University of Iowa – which uses NIC in its charting – they found that for each 20% decline in nurse staffing, hospital costs increased by nearly $1200.  They were looking for data relating the effects of the effects of staffing, treatment, pharmacy, and nursing intervention on overall cost.  They found that the nursing interventions of discharge planning, fall prevention, pressure ulcer care, teaching, health screening, vital signs monitoring, and medication management were associated with less cost if done more often (Titler, Dochterman, Picone, Everett, Xie, Kanak, & Fei, 2005, p. 290).

Imagine what we could find out if we could program all nursing documentation systems in the same manner, and compare across regions or states.  Kinda cool…..

Do you see this happening in any of your current systems?  Might it be easier for nurses to chart care plans and their actions in patient care if the languages were standardized?

Nice work!!

Hello, Tia,

Great post! I can definitely relate to working the night shift in jobs before, and not having very much interaction with technology specialists or Information Technologists (IT), with the exception of calling them when a problem with the computer system or electronic health record (EHR) arose. At one small rural facility, we used Cerner, and had nothing but difficulties, especially during the night hours, for some reason. NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample – Nursing Assignment CrackersWe got pretty used to restarting our computers! But it was also a learning experience as our small facility worked to build our own unique charting program through the EHR, where all we had before in the emergency room (ER) was paper charting since the facility was built. There was some training, but since it was brand new to everyone, including administration, I also believe that there should have been more training, orientation and teaching involved for better results and less problems. There was also not a lot of follow up following the “go-live” period, especially for us that worked nights. “Training must be work-flow based and reflect real clinical processes. It must also be planned and budgeted for through the post-live period to ensure that competency with the system is assessed at the go-live point and that any necessary retraining or reinforcements are made in the 30 to 60 days post-live” (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2017, p. 282). This would have helped drastically, as it took well over a 18 months for things to improve. That facility still struggles to this day with that particular EHR as a proper fit for their facility, and have spent close to $1 million dollars trying to make improvements. One of the administrators recently stated that they wish they had originally gone with Epic, which almost the entire staff voted on to begin with. NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample

It is of utmost importance for IT and nurses to come together and be a team throughout the EHR process. Continued support and even face-to-face interactions or conversations, orientations and trainings wouod not only be beneficial for nurses, but for patients, as well. And with inadequate training or experience when problems arise with the EHR, it takes time away from patient care for the nurses, and can be a potential obstacle for patient safety. “Nurses, who do most of the EHR documentation (including plans of care, physiological parameters, assessments, interventions, and progress evaluations) in hospitals, are critical to care integration and patient safety” (Glassman, 2017, p. 45). Patient care and safety shold be second to none.NURS 6051 Discussion Interaction Between Nurse Informaticists and Other Specialists Sample – Nursing Assignment Crackers

References

Glassman, K.S. (2017). Using data in nursing practice. American Nurse Today, 12(11), 45-47. Retrieved March 13, 2020, from                https://www.myamericannurse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ant11-Data-1030.pdf

McGonigle,D. & Mastrian, K.G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed., p. 282). Burlington, MA:                Jones & Bartlett Learning.

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

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