Assignment: Dashboard Analysis and Nursing Plan

Dr. Rempher and Ms. Manna discussed this week, data from the NDNQI is used to improve nursing practices and support the strategic outcomes of an organization. This data is also used to create the Dashboard. The Dashboard, then, is used to create an action plan. Correctly interpreting information presented on the Dashboard provides nurses with a better understanding of the goals of the action plan.

To prepare

For this Assignment, use the Dashboard located in this week’s Resources, to interpret the data and frame a nursing plan based on best practices.

• Review the Week 5 Assignment Rubric, provided in the Course Information area.
• Review the Week 4 Resources that pertain to the NDNQI and use of dashboards
• Choose a Nurse-Sensitive Quality Indicator that needs improvement based on the data presented in the Dashboard. Reflect on how you would develop a nursing plan with suggestions on how to improve performance in the chosen area.
• Develop a nursing plan that outlines suggestions on how to improve performance in the chosen area.
• Provide at least three best practices from evidenced-based literature to support your nursing plan.

Assignment

• Draft a 3- to 4 page paper analyzing areas where there is good performance and areas of opportunity from the sample Dashboard.
• Analyze the data provided in the Dashboard and select an area of performance that needs improvement. Include information on why this area was chosen.
• Develop a nursing plan that includes suggestions on how to improve performance on the selected indicator. Be sure to provide at least three best practices from the evidenced-based literature to support your suggested nursing plan.
• Be sure to include an introduction and conclusion in your paper.

Learning Resources

Required Readings

Brown, D. S., Aydin, C. E., & Donaldson, N. (2008). Quartile dashboards: Translating large data sets into performance improvement priorities. Journal of Healthcare Quality, 30(6), 18–30. http://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1945-1474.2008.tb01166.x

 

Typically, references should be within five to seven years of publication. However, this publication is considered a classical research reference pertaining to quality improvement and the use of data sets.

 

Cole, C., Wellard, S., & Mummery, J. (2014). Problematising autonomy and advocacy in nursing. Nursing Ethics, 21(5), 576–582. http://doi.org/10.1177/0969733013511362

 

Garrard, L., Boyle, D. K., Simon, M., Dunton, N., & Gajewski, B. (2016). Reliability and validity of the NDNQI® injury falls measure. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 38(1), 111-128. http://doi.org/10.1177/019394591454281

 

Giancarlo, C., Comparcini, D., & Simonetti, V. (2014). Workplace empowerment and nurses’ job satisfaction: A systematic literature review. Journal of Nursing Management, 22(7), 855-871. http://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12028

 

Guglielmi, C. L., Stratton, M., Healy, G. B., Shapiro, D., Duffy, W. J., Dean, B. L., & Groah, L. K. (2014). The growing role of patient engagement: Relationship-based care in a changing health care system. Association of PerOperative Registered Nurses Journal, 99(4), 517–528. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2014.02.007

 

Rock, M.J. & Hoebeke, R. (2014). Informed consent: Whose duty to inform? MedSurg Nursing, 23(3), 189-194.

 

American Hospital Association. (2003). The patient care partnership: Understanding expectations, rights and responsibilities. http://www.aha.org/content/00-10/pcp_english_030730.pdf

 

Read through this document created by the American Hospital Association. This document was created for inpatient hospital stays. However, it is applicable to other practice settings as well.

 

Montalvo, I. (2007). The national database of nursing quality indicators. The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 12(3). http://www.nursingworld.org/MainMenuCategories/ANAMarketplace/ANAPeriodicals/OJIN/TableofContents/Volume122007/No3Sept07/NursingQualityIndicators.html

 

Institute for Healthcare Improvement. (2016). http://www.ihi.org/Pages/default.aspx

 

The IHI offers numerous resources for improving nursing practice and patient care. Explore a variety of topics and examine some of the resources available.

 

National Quality Forum. (2016). http://www.qualityforum.org/Home.aspx

 

The National Quality Forum (NQF) strives to improve patient safety and reduce medical errors. Explore the NQF’s endorsed standards and consider how they apply to nursing practice.

 

Document: Dashboard Directions (Word document)

 

Document: Sample Dashboard (Excel workbook)

 

Required Media

Walden University, LLC. (2009). Topics in clinical nursing: Accountability and nursing practice [Video]. Walden University Blackboard. https://class.waldenu.edu 

 

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 15 minutes.

 

Accessible player –Downloads–Download Video w/CCDownload AudioDownload Transcript

Provided a brief paragraph that included an overview of the assignment and its purpose.

18 (7.2%) – 20 (8%)

Provided a fully developed overview of the assignment and its purpose with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

16 (6.4%) – 17 (6.8%)

Provided a developed overview of the assignment and its purpose with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.

14 (5.6%) – 15 (6%)

Provided a minimally developed overview of the assignment and its purpose with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.

0 (0%) – 13 (5.2%)

Provided an under-developed overview of the assignment and its purpose with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues.

Presented an analysis of the data from the Sample Dashboard. Provided a thorough description of the area of performance selected that needs improvement and discussed the statistical findings and why the area was selected.

54 (21.6%) – 60 (24%)

Provided a fully developed analysis of the dashboard data focused on needs for improvement and statistical findings with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

48 (19.2%) – 53 (21.2%)

Provided a developed analysis of the dashboard data focused on needs for improvement and statistical findings with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.

42 (16.8%) – 47 (18.8%)

Provided a minimally developed analysis of the dashboard data focused on needs for improvement and statistical findings with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.

0 (0%) – 41 (16.4%)

Provided an under-developed analysis of the dashboard data focused on needs for improvement and statistical findings with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues.

Presented a nursing plan on three or more best practices that could be implemented to improve performance on the selected indicator. Included how each best practice could address the selected performance. Each best practice was supported by the professional literature.

108 (43.2%) – 120 (48%)

Provided a fully developed nursing plan on three or more best practices to improve performance with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues

96 (38.4%) – 107 (42.8%)

Provided a developed nursing plan on three or more best practices to improve performance with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.

84 (33.6%) – 95 (38%)

Provided a minimally developed nursing plan on three or more best practices to improve performance with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.

0 (0%) – 83 (33.2%)

Provided an under-developed nursing plan on three or more best practices to improve performancewith little or no analysis of concepts and related issues.

Provided a summary of the main points in the paper.

18 (7.2%) – 20 (8%)

Provided a fully developed summary of the main points with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

16 (6.4%) – 17 (6.8%)

Provided a developed summary of the main points with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.

14 (5.6%) – 15 (6%)

Provided a minimally-developed summary of the main points with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.

0 (0%) – 13 (5.2%)

Provided an under-developed summary of the main points with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues.

Professional Writing: Clarity, Flow, and Organization

9 (3.6%) – 10 (4%)

Content is free from spelling, punctuation, and grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates very well-formed sentence and paragraph structure. Content presented is completely clear, logical, and well-organized.

8 (3.2%) – 8 (3.2%)

Content contains minor spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates appropriate sentence and paragraph structure. Content presented is mostly clear, logical, and well-organized.

7 (2.8%) – 7 (2.8%)

Content contains moderate spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates adequate sentence and paragraph structure and may require some editing. Content presented is adequately clear, logical, and/or organized, but could benefit from additional editing/revision.

0 (0%) – 6 (2.4%)

Content contains significant spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing does not demonstrate adequate sentence and paragraph structure and requires additional editing/proofreading. Key sections of presented content lack clarity, logical flow, and/or organization.

Professional Writing: Context, Audience, Purpose, and Tone

9 (3.6%) – 10 (4%)

Content clearly demonstrates awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is highly professional, scholarly, and free from bias, and style is appropriate for the professional setting/workplace context.

8 (3.2%) – 8 (3.2%)

Content demonstrates satisfactory awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is adequately professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is consistent with the professional setting/workplace context.

7 (2.8%) – 7 (2.8%)

Content demonstrates basic awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is somewhat professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is mostly consistent with the professional setting/workplace context.

0 (0%) – 6 (2.4%)

Content minimally or does not demonstrate awareness of context, audience, and/or purpose. Writing is not reflective of professional/scholarly tone and/or is not free of bias. Style is inconsistent with the professional setting/workplace context and reflects the need for additional editing.

Professional Writing: Originality, Source Credibility, and Attribution of Ideas

9 (3.6%) – 10 (4%)

Content reflects original thought and writing and proper paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates full adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.

8 (3.2%) – 8 (3.2%)

Content adequately reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates adequate adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.

7 (2.8%) – 7 (2.8%)

Content somewhat reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing somewhat demonstrates adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.

0 (0%) – 6 (2.4%)

Content does not adequately reflect original writing and/or paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates inconsistent adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and reference.

Total Points: 250

Name: NURS_4005_Week5_Assignment_Rubric

Description: NURS 4006 Assignment Week 5 Rubric