Please, No Plagiarized Work

Topic: Case Report: Application of Quality and Safety Concepts

In this assignment, learners are required to write a case report addressing the personal knowledge and skills gained in this course and potentially solving an identified practice problem.

General Guidelines:

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

· Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments.

· This assignment requires the inclusion of at least three additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source.

· You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.  

Directions:

Construct a case report (2,500-3,000 words/approximately 10-12 pages) that includes a problem or situation consistent with a DNP area of practice.

1. Review the AHRQ and the IOM report (“To Err Is Human” and “Crossing the Quality Chasm”) to develop the case report.

2. Apply quality and/or safety concepts to describe the understanding of the problem or situation of focus.

3. Apply one or more quality and/or safety concepts to the recommended intervention or solution being proposed.

4. Develop the case report across the entire scenario from the identification of the clinical or health care problem through the proposal for an intervention, implementation, and evaluation using an appropriate research instrument.

5. Describe the evaluation of the selected research instrument in the case report.

6. Lastly, explain in full the tenets, rationale for selection (empirical evidence), and clear application using the language of quality and/or safety within the case report.

Case Report Requirements:

In addition, your case report must include the following:

1. Introduction with a problem statement.

2. Brief literature review.

3. Description of the case/situation/conditions explained from a theoretical perspective.

4. Discussion that includes a detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings.

5. Summary of the case.

6. Proposed solutions to remedy gaps, inefficiencies, or other issues from a theoretical approach.

7. Identification of a data collection instrument to evaluate the proposed solution along with a description of how the instrument could be evaluated.

8. Conclusion.

You are required to complete your assignment using real-world application. Real-world application requires the use of evidence-based data, contemporary theories, and concepts presented in the course. The culmination of your assignment must present a viable application in a current practice setting. For more information on parameters for practice immersion hours, please refer to the DNP resources in the DC Network.

Study Materials

Read Chapter 6 in Outcome Assessment in Advanced Practice Nursing 4e.

https://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/springer-publishing-company/2017/outcome-assessment-in-advanced-practice-nursing_4e.php

 Tucker, C., Arthur, T., & Roncoroni, J. (2013). Patient-centered, culturally sensitive health care. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 9(1), 63-77. doi:10.1177/1559827613498065

https://journals-sagepub-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1177/1559827613498065

Park, Y., & Martin, E. G. (2018). Geographic disparities in access to nursing home services: Assessing fiscal stress and quality of care. Health Services Research, 53, 2932-2951. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12801

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=130899122&site=ehost-live&scope=site

 Barsell, J., Everhart, R. S., Miadich, S. A., & Trujillo, M. A. (2018). Examining health behaviors, health literacy, and self-efficacy in college students with chronic conditions. American Journal of Health Education, 49(5), 305-311.

https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/19325037.2018.1486758

 Nguyen, T. H., Park, H., Han, H-R., Chan, K. S., Paasche-Orlow, M. K., Haun, J., & Kim, M. T. (2015). State of the science of health literacy measures: Validity implications for minority populations. Patient Education & Counseling, 98(12), 1492-1512. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2015.07.013

https://www-sciencedirect-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S0738399115300215?via%3Dihub

Pronovost, P. J., Cleeman, J. I., Wright, D., & Srinivasan, A. (2016). Fifteen years after To Err is Human: A success story to learn from. BMJ Quality & Safety, 25(6), 396. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004720

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/docview/1793871405?accountid=7374

Mitchell, I., Schuster, A., Smith, K., Pronovost, P., & Wu, A. (2016). Patient safety incident reporting: A qualitative study of thoughts and perceptions of experts 15 years after “To Err is Human.” BMJ Quality & Safety, 25(2), 92. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004405

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/docview/1778837381?accountid=7374

Califf, R. M., Robb, M. A., Bindman, A. B., Briggs, J. P., Collins, F. S., Conway, P. H., & Sherman, R. E. (2016). Transforming evidence generation to support health and health care decisions. The New England Journal of Medicine, 375(24), 2395-2400. doi:10.1056/NEJMsb1610128

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/docview/1849409554?accountid=7374

AHRQ: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (n.d.). Health literacy measurement tools (revised).

http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/quality-patient-safety/quality-resources/tools/literacy/index.html

Explore the National Committee for Quality Assurance website.

http://www.ncqa.org/

Institute of Medicine. (1999). To err is human: Building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/1999/To-Err-is-Human/To%20Err%20is%20Human%201999%20%20report%20brief.pdf

Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2001/Crossing-the-Quality-Chasm/Quality%20Chasm%202001%20%20report%20brief.pdf

Explore the Patient Centered Medical Home: Resource Center page on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality website.

http://www.pcmh.ahrq.gov/

Explore the Primary Care Collaborative website.

http://www.pcpcc.org/

Explore the Health Literacy page on the National Network of Libraries of Medicine website.

http://nnlm.gov/outreach/consumer/hlthlit.html

Explore the Health Literacy Online page on the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion website.

http://www.health.gov/healthliteracyonline/

Wk 8 Discussion: When the People You Love Don’t Think Like You

 

Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:

• Textbook: Chapter 16
• Lesson
• Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)

Introduction
Facione & Gittens (2016) state, “Strong critical thinking about complex and difficult social policies demands that we respect those with whom we disagree” (p. 344). The authors of your text ask us to take seriously the points of view of those with whom we disagree.

• Should I respect the point of view of a misogynist – a person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against women?
• Should I respect the point of view of a racist?
• How about someone who believes marriage is only between one man and one woman?
• How about someone who does not believe that humans are contributing to the conditions that cause climate change?
• How about someone who denies that the Holocaust occurred?

Initial Post Instructions
For the initial post, pick one point of view from the five questions above that you find particularly repugnant – one that you think is completely unjustifiable. If you were in conversation with such a person, how could you ethically respond to the statement of such a point of view? Keep in mind that you are expressing a value opinion, which requires ideological reasoning, so you may want to review Chapter 13.

As you form your response, keep in mind the following; these are things you need to think about but not necessarily to write about in your initial post:

• Reflect if you are using System-1 or System-2 thinking? Are your responses tinged with cognitive bias?
• Do you think there is a qualitative difference between believing some races are inferior and the belief that marriage should only be between one man and one woman?
• Do you think there is a qualitative difference between not believing in human contribution to climate change and not believing in the Holocaust?