Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
1. Using information below, complete the Aim statement and Plan portion of the worksheet. Remember to cite one peer reviewed, scholarly nursing source for your change.
Case Study Part A
Patient satisfaction scores are down in your 44-bed medical-surgical unit from last year’s scores. Current scores are at 44% this year. Patients felt the nursing staff does not have time to care or listen and the nurses are unprofessional. The Quality Improvement Committee wants to bring the patient satisfaction scores back up to 88% or higher. The unit has limited finances and many new staff members.
2. Using information below, complete the Do portion of the worksheet. Note: Implementation is hypothetical. You may add extra details as if you were implementing the plan in real life.
Case Study Part B
During implementing the plan, the staff complains about the plan. The nurse leader notifies the Quality Improvement Committee that the nurses are finding it difficult to implement by the target date. Some nurses do not understand why the plan is important.
3. Using information below, complete the Study and Act portions of the worksheet.
Case Study Part C
After implementation, the patient satisfaction scores have increased to 75%.
PDSA WORKSHEET
NR392
Aim Statement
Aim Statement (Measurable goal including what, when, how much, and for whom)
Example: Within the next two months, the rate of falls will decrease by 50% for patients on this unit.
Type your Aim statement here:
Plan
1. Describe the situation and problem that needs improvement.
2. Describe the change that should be implemented. (For Week 6 only, provide one scholary source supporting the intervention. Provide reference at the end of this worksheet.)
3. Describe the predicted outcome.
4. Identify who will be involved in implementing the change.
5. Identify who will evaluate the change.
6. Describe how the outcomes will be evaluated.
7. Identify when this implementation will begin.
8. Identify the target date for completion.
Do
1. Describe the implementation in detail.
2. Describe any problems or unexpected events that occurred during implementation.
Study
1. Describe in detail the outcome(s) of the implementation.
2. Describe how the problem was improved or not improved.
3. Identify whether the goal was met by the target date or delayed.
4. Describe how the actual outcome compared to the predicted outcome.
Act
1. If the problem improved, describe how it will be maintained in the future. If the problem was not improved, describe how the plan will change in the next PDSA cycle. State at least two actions.
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow |
Patient satisfaction scores case study worksheet