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

NURS 6051 Discussion The Inclusion of Nurses in the Systems Development Life Cycle Sample

The Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) relates to the five phases of the creation and growth of information technology. This involve the processes of research, planning, execution, assessment and maintenance. Successful adoption of health information technology (HIT) relies on the degree to which patients, as the plurality of end-users, are involved in the life-cycle creation of programs. The theoretical consequences of the absence of nurses in the creation of Impact programs are as follows:

Systems analysis: This step evaluates current technology to see what functions and what doesn’t work. The position of nurses as end-users of HITs is to include input on the difficulties and advantages they have faced through the usage of current programs. Given the role they hold and the complexity of their function in a health care environment, they are ideally positioned to recognize the vital framework difficulties in gathering, reviewing, processing, restoring and leveraging knowledge within the current information structure. Failure to include nurses at this point would also imply that the latest HITs would not react to the urgent IT needs of nurses (Qin, et al., 2017).

Systems design: Throughout this stage, the HIT expert proposes a strategy to strengthen the current program based on the findings of the review of the processes. Each stage defines the most important user experience, files, infrastructure, applications, and how certain aspects of the HIT program can be combined into a successful and productive kit. Nurses do have a vital role to play in developing unique operating processes that can be integrated into modern structures to enhance performance. System designers will involve nurses at this point in continuing research and refinement of the program. Failure to include nurses in the design of the technologies would mean that the latest equipment would not adapt to the input and output needs of nurses. Nurses aid to test whether or not the built program is effective.NURS 6051 Discussion The Inclusion of Nurses in the Systems Development Life Cycle Sample

NURS 6051 Discussion The Inclusion of Nurses in the Systems Development Life Cycle Sample

NURS 6051 Discussion The Inclusion of Nurses in the Systems Development Life Cycle Sample

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 6051 Discussion The Inclusion of Nurses in the Systems Development Life Cycle Sample

Systems implementation: At this phase, nurses, with the aid of the device design specialist, are implementing the latest HIT. Nurses were the primary development department of the EHITs. The most critical move of introducing the programs is educating nurses to be able to maximize HIT of delivering secure and reliable health care facilities. Lack of technical preparation would delay adoption because it contributes to low acceptance and weak morale among nurses. Training improves end-user knowledge, confidence and ability to utilize the latest EHIT. During transition, nurses will provide input into the required improvements in processes, strategies, process and collaboration in the introduction of HITs. Without their feedback, the latest programs cannot work well within the current corporate culture and experience..

NURS 6051 Discussion The Inclusion of Nurses in the Systems Development Life Cycle Sample

Systems evaluation: When implemented, the program consultants, coaches and nurse managers evaluate the efficiency of the device as well as the willingness of patients to utilize it. The actual and assumed utility of technology affects its implementation. At this point, nurses will be interested in evaluating the effectiveness of the programs in place. An evaluation that ignores the position of nurses would yield null results. As end-users of HITs, nurses are better positioned to detect technical glitches that may threaten patient health and standard of treatment (Cresswell & Sheikh, 2015).

Systems maintenance and support: Device repair includes the tasks involved in finding and resolving bugs that may affect the functionality of the current HIT. After deployment, the hospital would have to operate closely with the new HIT solutions manufacturer and creator. In the process of their jobs, nurses must find and comment on the program glitches impacting the reliability and applicability of the systems to the nurse executive. The nurse executive will then disclose the issue to the IT experts at the facility, who will also implement disciplinary and prevention action.

Nurses are at the center of the introduction of online health information systems. The successful participation of nurses will be an

important part of the whole life cycle of the programs. Nurses are ideally placed in order to identify the Essential needs of their services. Their guidelines will direct the architecture and programming processes of healthcare technology growth. Successful adoption of EHITs is focused entirely on the feedback and dedication of nurses (Schoville & Marita Titler PhD, 2015).

References

Cresswell, K., & Sheikh, A. (2015). Health information technology in hospitals: current issues and future trends. Retrieved from researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275520103_Health_information_technology_in_hospitals_current_issues_and_future_trends

Qin, Y., Zhou, R., Wu, Q., Huang, X., Chen, X., Wang, W., . . . Yu, P. (2017). The effect of nursing participation in the design of a critical care information system: a case study in a Chinese hospital. Retrieved from biomedcentral: https://bmcmedinformdecismak.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12911-017-0569-3. NURS 6051 Discussion The Inclusion of Nurses in the Systems Development Life Cycle

Schoville, R., & Marita Titler PhD, R. F. (2015). Guiding Healthcare Technology Implementation: A New Integrated Technology Implementation Model. CIN Computers Informatics Nursing, 33(3). doi:10.1097/CIN.0000000000000130

Great informational post, Destiny,

with many good discussion points!  I think that too many organizations rushed to judgment, so to speak, for the electronic health records (EHRs) because they wanted to cash in on the meaningful use incentives.  But my take on it, aside from the almost constant griping I have been doing related to the overall lack of involvement of nurses in the process and the tendency to have a big focus on computerized physician order entry systems and medication documentation, is the entire lack of consideration for the enormous amount of data that can – and should – be generated related to health care knowledge.  My goodness, the stuff we could figure out if we could easily retrieve that data!!

I wrote this in another post, and I was at the ACENDIO conference in Spain in 2017 and in Sweden in 2019 so I do actually have a lot of the latest skinny on this stuff, but what if we wanted to research what nurses do for patients that make a difference?  A constant statement at the ACENDIO conferences was that the vendors like EPIC and CERNER would not understand what nurses needed to have in the system, and then once they ‘got it’ so to speak, the nurses could input the information, but if they wanted to retrieve it as data, that was another whole issue and not at all easy to do.  It was kind of a joke that the vendors kept saying, well, we helped you get your information in the system, and now you want to get it back out?

But without that ability, how can we know, for example, that routine mouth care helps heart patients?  Or that bed alerts are not that great in preventing falls?  Or that a particular group of patients is more at risk for skin tears than another?  Of course, we can manually review charts and try to make connections, but why should we have to?

Well, anyway, this is turning into a soap box again – what do you think?

Response #2: Discussion – Week 9

D,

Great, very informative post! The world of healthcare is constantly changing, and technology within healthcare is no different. The development process that was created to ensure effective changes in health information technology (HIT) is the systems development life cycle (SDLC). This 5-phase process ensures a seamless flow between the development, testing, and implementing of the HIT systems (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2017). As you’ve discussed, nurses have essential roles in each of the phases, and without their involvement there would be serious consequences. The nurse, as one of the most prominent users of HIT systems, is incredibly knowledgeable on what works well and what does not work well in the system. In general, not including the nurse in any or all of the phases will give the same result—an insufficient system (Laureate Education, 2018). Another important role the nurse has in system effectiveness is their link to the person’s indirectly affected by the system (clients/patients, other healthcare entities, etc.). The nurse is able to receive feedback from these outside parties and then can relay this information to the other system team members. The nurse is the direct link to this beneficial information (Laureate Education, 2018). Using SDLC in the development or maintenance of a HIT system certainly requires an entire team of people from different specialties; however, the nurse has a crucial role that directly effects the overall success of the system.

References

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Systems Implementation [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

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

It was suggested in the media introduction to this module that you, as a nurse, play an important role in the Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC). Nurses may not always see themselves as contributors to the development of new systems because they are focused on patient care and outcomes. However, as you may have noticed from your own experience, excluding nurse contributions when implementing systems can have disastrous consequences.

In this Discussion, you will consider the role you might play in system development as well as the consequences of not participating actively in system development.

To Get Ready:

Examine the steps of the Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) as shown in the Resources.

Consider your own healthcare organization, as well as any steps it takes when purchasing and implementing a new health information technology system.

When planning for new health information technology, consider how a nurse might contribute to decisions made at each stage of the SDLC.

By Week 9’s third day

Post a description of the consequences you believe will result from a healthcare organization failing to include nurses in each stage of the SDLC when purchasing and implementing a new health information technology system. Give specific examples of potential problems at each stage of the SDLC and explain how the inclusion of nurses may help to solve these problems. Then, explain whether you had any input in the selection and planning of new health information technology systems in your nursing practice or healthcare organization, as well as the potential consequences of being or not being included in the decision-making process. Provide specifics and examples.

By the sixth day of Week 9,

Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two separate days, offering additional thoughts on the examples shared, SDLC-related issues, and ideas on how the inclusion of nurses may have impacted the example described by your colleagues.

Name: NURS_5051_Module05_Week09_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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
Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.