Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies Literature
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies Literature
New technology—and the application of existing technology—only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research. The stakes are high, and new clinical systems need to offer evidence of positive impact on outcomes or efficiencies.
Nurse informaticists and healthcare leaders formulate clinical system strategies. As these strategies are often based on technology trends, informaticists and others have then benefited from consulting existing research to inform their thinking. Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies Literature
In this Assignment, you will review existing research focused on the application of clinical systems. After reviewing, you will summarize your findings.
To Prepare:
- Review the Resources and reflect on the impact of clinical systems on outcomes and efficiencies within the context of nursing practice and healthcare delivery.
- Conduct a search for recent (within the last 5 years) research focused on the application of clinical systems. The research should provide evidence to support the use of one type of clinical system to improve outcomes and/or efficiencies, such as “the use of personal health records or portals to support patients newly diagnosed with diabetes.”
- Identify and select 5 peer-reviewed articles from your research.
The Assignment: (4-5 pages)
In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Be sure to address the following:
- Identify the 5 peer-reviewed articles you reviewed, citing each in APA format.
- Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
RESOURCES:
https://www.healthit.gov/faq/what-electronic-health-record-ehr
https://www.himss.org/electronic-health-records
Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D. Leak, L. D., Tieman, L. A., & Manworren, R. C. B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to Improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221. doi:10.1016/j.pmn.2017.11.002
Skiba, D. (2017). Evaluation tools to appraise social media and mobile applications. Informatics, 4(3), 32–40. doi:10.3390/informatics4030032
IN A 4- TO 5-PAGE PAPER, SYNTHESIZE THE PEER-REVIEWED RESEARCH YOU REVIEWED. BE SURE TO ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING: Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies Literature
· PROPERLY IDENTIFY 5 PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES SELECTED.
· SUMMARIZE EACH STUDY, EXPLAINING THE IMPROVEMENT TO OUTCOMES, EFFICIENCIES, AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE APPLICATION OF THE CLINICAL SYSTEM EACH PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE DESCRIBED. BE SPECIFIC AND PROVIDE EXAMPLES.–Excellent 77 (77%) – 85 (85%)
The responses accurately and clearly identify 5 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.
The responses accurately and thoroughly summarize in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.
Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which fully support the responses.
Good 68 (68%) – 76 (76%)
The responses identify 5 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.
The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.
Accurate examples are provided which support the responses provided.
Fair 60 (60%) – 67 (67%)
The responses vaguely or inaccurately identify 5 or less peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment.
The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described that is vague or inaccurate.
Examples provided to support the responses are vague or inaccurate.
Poor 0 (0%) – 59 (59%)
The responses vaguely and inaccurately identify less than 5 peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment, or are missing.
The responses vaguely and inaccurately summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described, or are missing.
Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies Literature
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