NURS 8302 WEEK 3 Assignment Tools for Measuring Quality INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC
Sample Answer for NURS 8302 WEEK 3 Assignment Tools for Measuring Quality INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Included After Question
How do we determine quality? Quality in other areas of our lives can be subjective, so as it relates to our nursing practice, how do we specifically ensure that quality is clearly defined and measurable?
Tools for measuring quality are used to assess the value measured, collected, or compared. These tools allow for subjectivity to be replaced with objectivity through data, formula, ranking, and analysis.
Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto
For this Assignment, you will explore at least three rate-based measures of quality. You will deconstruct each measure to explore your understanding of the it, including its importance and its impact on patient safety, the cost of healthcare, and the overall quality of healthcare.
To Prepare:
- Review the Learning Resources for this week, and reflect on tools for measuring quality in nursing practice.
- Select three rate-based measurements of quality that you would like to focus on for this Assignment.
- Note: These measurements must relate to some aspect of clinical or service quality that directly relates to patient care or the patient’s experience of care, and for the purposes of this Assignment, an analysis of staffing levels is not permitted.
- You can find useful information on quality indicators that are of interest to you on these websites and resources. You may choose only one of the three measures to be some form of patient satisfaction measure.
- Consider how the three rate-based measures (you will select) are defined, how the rates were determined or calculated, how the measures were collected, and how these measures are communicated to both internal and external stakeholders.
- Reflect on how the three rate-based measures (you will select) may relate to organizational goals for improved performance.
- Reflect on the three rate-based measures (you will select), and consider the importance of these measures on patient safety, cost of healthcare, and overall quality of healthcare.
The Assignment: (8–10 pages)
- Describe the three rate-based measures of quality you selected, and explain why.
- Deconstruct each measure to include the following:
- Describe the definition of the measure.
- Explain the numerical description of how the measure is constructed (the numerator/denominator measure counts, the formula used to construct the rate, etc.).
- Explain how the data for this measure are collected.
- Describe how the measurement is compared externally to other like settings, and differentiate between the actual rate and a percentile ranking. Be specific.
- Explain whether the measure is risk adjusted or not. If so, explain briefly how this is accomplished.
- Describe how goals might be set for each measure in an aggressive organization, which is seeking to excel in the marketplace. Be specific and provide examples.
- Describe the importance of each measure to a chosen clinical organization and setting.
- Using the websites and resources you can choose a hospital, a nursing home, a home health agency, a dialysis center, a health plan, an outpatient clinic, or private office. A total population of patient types is also acceptable, but please be specific as to the setting. That is, if you are interested in patients with chronic illness across the continuum of care, you might home in a particular health plan, a multispecialty practice setting or a healthcare organization with both inpatient and outpatient/clinic settings.
- Note: Faculty appointments and academic settings are not permitted for this exercise. For all other settings, consult the Instructor for guidance. You do not need actual data from a given organization to complete this Assignment.
- Explain how each measure you selected relates to patient safety, to the cost of poor quality, and to the overall cost of healthcare delivery. Be specific and provide examples.
By Day 7
There is nothing to submit this week. This Assignment is due by Day 7 of Week 4.
What’s Coming Up in Week 4?
Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
Next week, you will continue to analyze tools used for quality improvement and will explore the application of project management for a quality improvement practice gap.
Next Week
To go to the next week:
Week 4
Assignment 2: Tools for Measuring Quality
How do we determine quality? Quality in other areas of our lives can be subjective, so how do we ensure—specifically as it relates to our nursing practice—that quality is clearly defined and measurable?
Tools for measuring quality are used to assess the value measured, collected, or compared. These tools allow for subjectivity to be replaced with objectivity through data, formula, ranking, and analysis.
Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto
For this Assignment, you will explore at least three rate-based measures of quality. You will deconstruct each measure to explore your understanding of the measure, its importance, and its impact on patient safety, cost of healthcare, and overall quality of healthcare.
To Prepare:
- Review the Learning Resources, for this week, and reflect on tools for measuring quality in nursing practice.
- Select three rate-based measurements of quality that you would like to focus on for this Assignment.
- Note: These measurements must relate to some aspect of clinical or service quality that directly relates to patient care or the patient’s experience of care. For the purposes of this Assignment, an analysis of staffing levels is not permitted.
- You can find useful information on quality indicators that are of interest to you on these websites and resources. You may choose only one of the three measures to be some form of patient satisfaction measure.
- Consider how the three rate-based measures (you will select) are defined, how the rates were determined or calculated, how the measures were collected, and how these measures are communicated to both internal and external stakeholders.
- Reflect on how the three rate-based measures (you will select) may relate to organizational goals for improved performance.
- Reflect on the three rate-based measures (you will select), and consider the importance of these measures on patient safety, cost of healthcare, and overall quality of healthcare.
The Assignment: (8–10 pages)
- Describe the three rate-based measures of quality you selected, and explain why.
- Deconstruct each rate-based measure to include the following:
- Describe the definition of the measure.
- Explain the numerical description of how the measure is constructed (the numerator/denominator measure counts, the formula used to construct the rate, etc.).
- Explain how the data for this measure are collected.
- Describe how the measurement is compared externally to other like settings, and differentiate between the actual rate and a percentile ranking. Be specific.
- Explain whether the measure is risk adjusted or not. If so, explain briefly how this is accomplished.
- Describe how goals might be set for each measure in an aggressive organization, which is seeking to excel in the marketplace. Be specific and provide examples.
- Describe the importance of each rate-based measure to a chosen clinical organization and setting.
- Using the websites and resources, you can choose a hospital, a nursing home, a home health agency, a dialysis center, a health plan, an outpatient clinic, or private office; a total population of patient types is also acceptable, but please be specific as to the setting. That is, if you are interested in patients with chronic illness across the continuum of care, you might home in a particular health plan, a multispecialty practice setting or a healthcare organization with both inpatient and outpatient/clinic settings.
- Note: Faculty appointments and academic settings are not permitted for this exercise. For all other settings, consult the Instructor for guidance. You do not need actual data from a given organization to complete this Assignment.
- Explain how each rate-based measure (you selected) relates to patient safety, to the cost of poor quality, and to the overall cost of healthcare delivery. Be specific and provide examples.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
By Day 7
Submit your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 4.
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
- Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK4Assgn2+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
- Click the Week 4 Assignment 2 Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
- Click the Week 4 Assignment 2 link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
- Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK4Assgn2+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
- If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
- Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 4 Assignment 2 Rubric
Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity
To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:
Submit your Week 4 Assignment 2 draft and review the originality report.
Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 4
To participate in this Assignment:
Week 4 Assignment 2
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 8302 WEEK 3 Assignment Tools for Measuring Quality INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC
Title: NURS 8302 WEEK 3 Assignment Tools for Measuring Quality INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC
Healthcare facilities aim to deliver high-quality medical services to patients. The demand for high-quality patient services is motivated by adjusting to upcoming organizational structures, healthcare system changes, and available procedures. Recently, there has been an increased focus on delivering high-quality medical treatment, as recognized by the government, medical experts, and patients (Palese et al., 2020). Assessing the probability and frequency of encountering quality issues is crucial to determining the provision of high-quality services. This paper identifies three rate-based measures of patient care.
Rate-based Measurements
Rate-based measurements effectively assess healthcare service quality by utilizing data from events at a specific frequency. Different forms can express these measures, including rates and proportions, means, and ratios (Dart & Cunningham, 2023). Using rate-based measurements to assess the quality of care for three patients, focusing on patient safety, timeliness, and patient-centeredness, is recommended. This approach facilitates comparisons of trends over time or among providers, aiding in identifying areas requiring improvement.
Patient Safety Measure
Definition of the Measure
A patient safety measure assesses the quality of care provided in a healthcare setting. This tool evaluates the safety of healthcare settings by analyzing adverse events, including medical errors, infections, and other such incidents. Patient safety measures assess various aspects of care quality, including the proficiency of healthcare professionals, the precision of medication orders, and the safety of the healthcare setting (Elliott et al., 2020). Patient safety measures assess compliance with regulatory standards and guidelines in healthcare settings.
Numerical Description
Quantifying a patient safety measure in a healthcare setting involves calculating the frequency of adverse events within a specific timeframe. The number is divided by the total number of patients seen during the specified period and multiplied by 100 to obtain a percentage. The given study by Palese et al. (2020) found that a hospital with a monthly occurrence of ten adverse events out of 500 treated patients had a safety measure of 2%.
Data Collection
Incident reports, surveillance systems, and patient records are typically used to gather data for patient safety measures. A thorough summary of a patient’s treatment may be found in their medical records, which can also be utilized to spot any possible negative outcomes. To further evaluate the safety of the treatment given, incident reports include comprehensive details about any unfavorable incidents. By recording and observing unfavorable occurrences, surveillance systems provide a more thorough understanding of the safety of the care given (Uddin et al., 2021). Surveys, focus groups, and other data sources, including test results and electronic medical records, may also be used to gather data. The safety of the care being given may then be evaluated, and possible areas for improvement can be found using the data that has been gathered.
Comparison to Other Settings
The effectiveness of a healthcare setting may be assessed by comparing its patient safety measures to those of other environments. The proportion of settings that perform better or worse than the measured setting might be shown in a percentile ranking as part of this comparison (Elliott et al., 2020). Regulatory agencies’ benchmarks for patient safety measures may also be compared to ascertain if the environment is according to norms and requirements.
Risk Adjustment
Any possible variations in patient populations that can impact the outcomes of a patient safety measure can be considered using risk adjustment. The process of risk adjustment involves estimating the seriousness of a negative occurrence. The outcomes of the patient safety measure are then modified using this weight. For instance, the risk-adjusted patient safety measure would be 4% if a hospital had ten adverse occurrences in a month, five of which were deemed serious (Braun & Clarke, 2020).
Goals for Aggressive Organization
An ambitious company looking to dominate its industry would aim higher than the regulatory authorities’ standards for patient safety measures. For example, the company may aim for a 2 percent patient safety measure higher than the 3 percent guideline (Braun & Clarke, 2020). The company can also aim to enhance the standard of treatment and lessen the severity of unfavorable situations.
Importance to a Clinical Organization
A clinical organization prioritizes patient safety measures since they provide valuable information on the quality of care in a medical setting. Furthermore, patient safety metrics may pinpoint improvement areas and establish objectives for better quality standards (Reddy et al., 2019). Furthermore, patient safety precautions may lower the total cost of healthcare delivery and the cost of subpar treatment. Healthcare businesses may save money by minimizing adverse occurrences and enhancing quality by lowering expenditures related to malpractice, medical mistakes, and other adverse events.
Relation to Patient Safety, Cost of Poor Quality, and Cost of Healthcare Delivery
Because they provide light on the safety of a medical environment, patient safety measures are intimately tied to patient safety. Patient safety measures may assist healthcare organizations in lowering the cost of subpar treatment by lowering the frequency of adverse occurrences, which can be measured to identify areas for improvement (Uddin et al., 2021). Furthermore, by enhancing the standard of care given and lowering the expense of malpractice and medical mistakes, patient safety measures may assist healthcare companies in lowering the total cost of healthcare delivery.
Timeliness Measures
Definition
Timeliness in healthcare refers to the speed at which healthcare services are delivered to patients, encompassing the period from identifying the need for care to the actual provision of care. This measure evaluates the time patients need to access necessary healthcare services, encompassing clinical and administrative aspects. This measure encompasses various time intervals in the healthcare system, such as the duration between a patient’s request for an appointment with a physician, the time taken for a patient to undergo a diagnostic test or procedure, and the time required for a patient to receive a referral to a specialist (Elliott et al., 2020).
Numerical Description
The numerical representation of the timeliness measure is typically based on the designated service timeframe and the actual timeframe in which the service was delivered. The timeliness measure for a physician appointment can be determined by subtracting the actual appointment duration from the expected appointment duration (Elliott et al., 2020).
Data Collection
The timeliness measure data is obtained from patient surveys and medical and administrative records. Patient surveys are commonly employed to evaluate patients’ time to obtain appointments with healthcare providers and access related services. Haraldstad et al. (2019) utilize medical and administrative records to evaluate the duration of time required for patients to undergo diagnostic tests or procedures, as well as the duration of time needed to obtain a referral to a specialist.
External Comparison
The timeliness indicator may be externally compared to other contexts by quantifying the duration it takes for patients to get treatment at different healthcare institutions. This comparison may be used to discern disparities in the duration it takes for patients to acquire medical attention at various establishments. The external comparison may also assess the real timeliness rate about a percentile rating, quantifying the duration a specific hospital takes to provide care compared to comparable facilities (Haraldstad et al., 2019).
Risk Adjustment
Risk-adjusted timeliness metrics are often adjusted to account for patient characteristics and differences in healthcare needs. Risk adjustment is often used to account for the complexity of the patient’s condition and the possible length of time that treatment may be needed. Giving patients prompt medical attention indicates the staff’s responsiveness and responsibility (Elliott et al., 2020). Patients are more likely to seek further medical care when they and their healthcare practitioner have built trust.
Setting Goals
In an assertive organization, the objectives for a timeliness metric may be established by assessing the duration it takes for a patient to obtain medical attention at various facilities. The aim would be to decrease the duration it takes for a patient to receive treatment at a certain facility. For example, a proactive organization may establish an objective to decrease the duration of a patient’s appointment with a physician by 10% (Agarwal et al., 2019). This objective may be monitored over time to verify that the organization is achieving its target. One of the objectives that might be set to ensure the application of timeliness measures is to reduce the number of in-patient stays by enhancing the dependability and effectiveness of patient treatment. The second objective is to enhance hospital infrastructure to enable healthcare professionals to provide high-quality treatment. The third objective is to alleviate the psychological distress of waiting for medical attention.
Importance to a Clinical Setting
The timeliness metric is of significant value in a clinical environment for two main reasons. Timely access to care is crucial to ensure patients get treatment promptly. This is particularly crucial for individuals requiring immediate medical attention or in danger of a medical crisis. Moreover, prompt access to healthcare might enhance the patient’s experience by decreasing waiting periods and mitigating patient dissatisfaction (Elliott et al., 2020). Furthermore, prompt access to healthcare might enhance patient safety by reducing the likelihood of medical mistakes. This is because prompt access to healthcare may decrease the duration of a patient’s stay in a medical facility, reducing the likelihood of medication errors and other medical mistakes. Moreover, prompt access to healthcare might mitigate the likelihood of nosocomial infections by minimizing the duration of a patient’s hospital stay.
Relationship to Patient Safety, Cost of Poor Quality, and Cost of Healthcare Delivery
The timeliness indicator is closely correlated with patient safety, the financial implications of subpar quality, and the total expenses associated with healthcare provision. Timely access to treatment is crucial for patient safety since it minimizes the duration of a patient’s stay in a healthcare facility, minimizing the likelihood of medical mistakes. Moreover, prompt access to healthcare might mitigate the likelihood of nosocomial infections by minimizing the duration of a patient’s hospital stay. Timely access to treatment may mitigate the cost of poor quality by minimizing a patient’s duration in a healthcare facility, hence decreasing the expenses linked to medical mistakes (Dart & Cunningham, 2023). Additionally, timely access to medical treatment may shorten a patient’s hospital stay, saving costs associated with nosocomial infections. In the end, early access to medical care may reduce healthcare costs by shortening the length of time a patient stays in a hospital. This might result in less time spent providing care and less use of available resources. Additionally, early access to healthcare may shorten a patient’s hospital stay, saving hospital treatment costs somewhat.
Patient-Centeredness Measure
Definition
The patient-centeredness metric quantifies the extent to which a healthcare facility, institution, or organization prioritizes the patient’s preferences and requirements in providing treatment. This metric is predicated on the notion that healthcare organizations prioritizing patient-centric treatment, customized to meet each person’s specific requirements, desires, and preferences, are the most efficacious (Al-Fraihat et al., 2020). This care method considers the patient’s unique requirements, beliefs, and choices and utilizes this data to direct the supplied treatment. This encompasses educating patients and encouraging them to actively engage in their treatment, using patient-centered communication, and delivering care customized to each person’s unique requirements.
Numerical Definition
The percentage of patients rated their overall care experience as “excellent” or “very good” on a five-point scale is used to calculate this score. The number of patients who rated their care experience as “excellent” or “very good” is represented by the numerator. In addition, the total number of patients who took part in the survey is represented by the denominator. The following formula is used to compute the rate: Patient-centeredness measure is calculated by dividing the total number of patients who responded to the survey by the number of patients who rated their treatment as “excellent” or “very good,” then multiplying the result by 100. (Al-Fraihat et al., 2020).
Data Collection
Patient and healthcare provider feedback is gathered on this statistic via surveys, focus groups, and interviews. Surveys of patients may be used to learn more about their experiences receiving care from the medical facility and the quality of that care. In order to learn more about healthcare professionals’ direct experiences with the organization’s patient-centered practices, interviews may be conducted (Elliott et al., 2020). In contrast, focus groups may be used by medical professionals and patients to discuss their experiences with the organization’s patient-centered procedures.
Measurement Comparison
By comparing a percentile rating to the actual patient satisfaction rate with the patient-centeredness of their treatment, the Patient-Centeredness metric is compared to different settings. For instance, if a healthcare institution has a Patient-Centeredness rate of 75%, it indicates that 75% of the polled patients expressed satisfaction with the patient-centeredness of their treatment (Enticott et al., 2021). Subsequently, this rate may be juxtaposed with a percentile rating to assess the healthcare facility’s relative performance compared to other settings.
Risk-Adjusted or Not
The Patient-Centeredness Measure lacks risk adjustment. Risk adjustment is a technique used to factor in variations in patient attributes while evaluating healthcare quality. Risk adjustment incorporates variables such as age, gender, and other attributes that may influence the result of healthcare. As the Patient-Centeredness Measure does not evaluate healthcare results, there is no need for risk adjustment (Enticott et al., 2021).
Goals
The objective for this metric in a proactive organization would be to surpass the mean rate of patient-centric practices across comparable organizations. This objective might be accomplished by including supplementary patient-centric measures, such as offering more patient instruction and engaging patients in decision-making. The organization should adopt additional patient-centered practices that surpass the current provision of basic care. This could involve offering resources and support systems to patients with chronic conditions or those requiring assistance managing their health (Agarwal et al., 2019). In addition, the organization should aim to enhance patient-centered communication by offering explicit guidelines to patients on medication adherence, maintaining regular contact with their care team, and diligently adhering to their treatment plans.
Importance of the Measure
The Patient-Centeredness Measure is crucial for a healthcare organization as it offers valuable insights into the quality of patient care they provide. The metric may facilitate the identification of deficient regions in healthcare and can be used to monitor advancements over some time (Enticott et al., 2021). Furthermore, the measure may provide valuable information on patient engagement in their healthcare and the extent of autonomy they are granted. This may be advantageous for both the organization and the patient since it can assist in guaranteeing that the patient is getting optimal treatment.
This measure may also aid in the identification of possible issues related to patient participation or autonomy. If the measure indicates that patients lack sufficient autonomy or have poor participation in their treatment, the organization may take steps to remedy this issue. This may include allocating more resources to enhance patient involvement in their healthcare or additional resources to promote autonomy (Enticott et al., 2021). Ultimately, the metric may be used to monitor the efficacy of patient-centered treatment as time progresses. This facilitates the organization’s identification of areas that need improvement in care and enables the measurement of the effects of implemented changes aimed at enhancing patient-centered care. Implementing this may enable the organization to guarantee optimal patient care and reduce medical mistakes and readmission expenses.
Relation to Patient Safety, Cost of Poor Quality, and Cost of Healthcare Delivery
Since it measures the organization’s capacity to meet patients’ needs and provide all-encompassing care, the patient-centeredness metric has a significant correlation with patient safety. Low patient-centeredness rates in hospitals may indicate that patients are not receiving enough patient-centered care, which might lead to negative outcomes and an overall reduction in patient safety (Agarwal et al., 2019). Because it measures how well an organization can meet patient needs and provide all-encompassing care, the patient-centeredness metric is highly correlated with the price of subpar quality. Inadequate patient-centered care has negative effects and may increase costs for the organization since more treatments or services are required.
The patient-centeredness metric correlates with the overall healthcare cost because it measures how effectively an organization meets patients’ needs and provides a thorough treatment plan. Unfavorable results from inadequate patient-centered care may increase healthcare costs by necessitating more treatments and services (Enticott et al., 2021). Patients who get subpar patient-centered treatment are more likely to be dissatisfied, which lowers patient satisfaction and increases patient turnover rates. As a result, the company may experience increased costs.
Conclusion
The quality of healthcare that is provided is objectively evaluated using quality metrics. To improve patient care, they support the creation of standardized medical care procedures. The active involvement of patients, regulatory agencies, and healthcare professionals is necessary for continuous quality improvement. Patient safety, timeliness measures, and patient preparedness are the three most effective quality measures. To protect patients, all healthcare facilities must implement patient safety procedures. Metrics that measure timeliness are essential for reducing the number of people who die or suffer negative outcomes as a result of receiving subpar medical treatment. It is crucial to prioritize patient-centeredness by considering patient preferences and including family members. Consequently, the main priority should be to evaluate and ensure the quality of care, allocating resources to enhance its quality while minimizing potential damage and expenses.
References
Agarwal, S., Sripad, P., Johnson, C., Kirk, K., Bellows, B., Ana, J., Blaser, V., Kumar, M. B., Buchholz, K., Casseus, A., Chen, N., Dini, H. S., Deussom, R., Jacobstein, D., Kintu, R., Kureshy, N., Meoli, L., Otiso, L., Pakenham-Walsh, N., . . . Warren, C. E. (2019). A conceptual framework for measuring community health workforce performance within primary health care systems. Human Resources for Health, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0422-0
Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa’deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, pp. 102, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Dart, S., & Cunningham, S. (2023). Using institutional data to drive quality, improvement, and innovation. In University development and administration (pp. 1–24). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9438-8_29-1
Elliott, R. A., Camacho, E., Janković, D., Sculpher, M., & Faria, R. (2020). Economic analysis of the prevalence and clinical and economic burden of medication error in England. BMJ Quality & Safety, 30(2), 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-010206
Enticott, J., Johnson, A., & Teede, H. (2021). Learning health systems using data to drive healthcare improvement and impact: a systematic review. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06215-8
Haraldstad, K., Wahl, A. K., Andenæs, R., Andersen, J. R., Andersen, M. H., Beisland, E. G., Borge, C. R., Engebretsen, E., Eisemann, M., Halvorsrud, L., Hanssen, T. A., Haugstvedt, A., Haugland, T., Johansen, V. A., Larsen, M. H., Løvereide, L., Løyland, B., Kvarme, L. G., Moons, P., . . . Helseth, S. (2019). A systematic review of quality of life research in medicine and health sciences. Quality of Life Research, 28(10), 2641–2650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9
Palese, A., Navone, E., Danielis, M., Vryonides, S., Sermeus, W., & Papastavrou, E. (2020). Measurement tools used to assess unfinished nursing care: A systematic review of psychometric properties. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(2), 565–582. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14603
Reddy, S., Allan, S., Coghlan, S., & Cooper, P. (2019). A governance model for the application of AI in health care. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 27(3), 491–497. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz192
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., & Olbert, A. I. (2021). A review of water quality index models and their use for assessing surface water quality. Ecological Indicators, p. 122, 107218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107218
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_8302_Week4_Assignment2_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Describe the three rate-based measures of quality you selected, and explain why. | Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly describes in detail three rate-based measures of quality. The response provides accurate and specific details that fully support the selection of the three rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately describes three rate-based measures of quality. The response provides accurate details that support the selection of the three rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely describes three rate-based measures of quality. OR The response describes less than three rate-based measures of quality. The response provides inaccurate or vague details that may support the selection of the rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely describes three rate-based measures of quality, or it is missing. The response provides inaccurate and vague details that do not support the selection of the rate-based measures described, or it is missing. |
|
| Deconstruct each rate-based measure to include the definition of each measure, explanation of the numerical description of how the measure is constructed, explanation of how the data is collected, description of how the measure is compared externally, explanation of whether or not the measure is risk adjusted, and a description of the how goals might be set for each measure. Be specific, and provide examples. | Points Range: 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail each of the three rate-based measures. The response accurately and clearly explains all elements of each measure, including: the definition of the measure, explanation of the numerical description, explanation of how the data is collected, description of how the measure is compared, explanation of risk, and description of goals. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the three rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)
The response accurately explains each of the three rate-based measures. The response accurately explains the elements of each measure, including: the definition of the measure, explanation of the numerical description, explanation of how the data is collected, description of how the measure is compared, explanation of risk, and description of goals. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the three rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 18 (18%) – 19 (19%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains each of the three rate-based measures. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the elements of each measure. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the three rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 17 (17%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains each of the three rate-based measures, or it is missing. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the elements of each measure, or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the three rate-based measures described, or it is missing. |
|
| Describe the importance of each measure to a chosen clinical organization and setting. Be specific as to the setting. | Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the importance of each measure to a chosen clinical organization and setting. The response provides accurate and specific details that fully support the selection of the three rate-based measures and the clinical organization or setting described. |
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains the importance of each measure to a chosen clinical organization and setting. The response provides accurate details that support the selection of the three rate-based measures and the clinical organization or setting described. |
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the importance of each measure to a chosen clinical organization and setting. The response inaccurately or vaguely provides details that may support the selection of the three rate-based measures and the clinical organization or setting described. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the importance of each measure to a chosen clinical organization and setting, or it is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely provides details that do not support the selection of the three rate-based measures and the clinical organization or setting described, or it is missing. |
|
| Explain how each rate-based measure you selected relates to patient safety, to the cost of poor quality, and to the overall cost of healthcare delivery. Be specific, and provide examples. | Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how each rate-based measure relates to patient safety, cost of poor quality, and overall cost of healthcare delivery. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains how each measure relates to patient safety, cost of poor quality, and overall cost of healthcare delivery. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how each measure relates to patient safety, cost of poor quality, and overall cost of healthcare delivery. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the rate-based measures described. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how each measure relates to patient safety, cost of poor quality, and overall cost of healthcare delivery, or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the rate-based measures described, or it is missing. |
|
| Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. | Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. |
Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
|
| Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation | Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
|
| Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. | Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. |
Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||
Name: NURS_8302_Week4_Assignment2_Rubric
NURS 8302 WEEK 3 Assignment Tools for Measuring Quality INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Grading Rubric
| Performance Category | 100% or highest level of performance
100% 16 points |
Very good or high level of performance
88% 14 points |
Acceptable level of performance
81% 13 points |
Inadequate demonstration of expectations
68% 11 points |
Deficient level of performance
56% 9 points
|
Failing level
of performance 55% or less 0 points |
| Total Points Possible= 50 | 16 Points | 14 Points | 13 Points | 11 Points | 9 Points | 0 Points |
| Scholarliness
Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic topics. |
Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three or more of the following elements
|
| 16 Points | 14 Points | 13 Points | 11 Points | 9 Points | 0 Points | |
| Application of Course Knowledge
Demonstrate the ability to analyze and apply principles, knowledge and information learned in the outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations |
Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in the all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three of the following elements
|
| 10 Points | 9 Points | 6 Points | 0 Points | |||
| Interactive Dialogue
Initial post should be a minimum of 300 words (references do not count toward word count) The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each (references do not count toward word count) Responses are substantive and relate to the topic. |
Demonstrated all of the following:
|
Demonstrated 3 of the following:
|
Demonstrated 2 of the following:
|
Demonstrated 1 or less of the following:
|
||
| 8 Points | 7 Points | 6 Points | 5 Points | 4 Points | 0 Points | |
| Grammar, Syntax, APA
Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition Error is defined to be a unique APA error. Same type of error is only counted as one error. |
The following was present:
AND
AND
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
| 0 Points Deducted | 5 Points Lost | |||||
| Participation
Requirements |
Demonstrated the following:
|
Failed to demonstrate the following:
|
||||
| 0 Points Lost | 5 Points Lost | |||||
| Due Date Requirements | Demonstrated all of the following:
A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT. |
Demonstrates one or less of the following.
A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT. |