Interprofessional organization and sysyems leadership nurs6053
Wk2Assignment: Analysis of a Pertinent Healthcare Issue
No plagiarism.
The Quadruple Aim provides broad categories of goals to pursue to maintain and improve healthcare. Within each goal are many issues that, if addressed successfully, may have a positive impact on outcomes. For example, healthcare leaders are being tasked to shift from an emphasis on disease management often provided in an acute care setting to health promotion and disease prevention delivered in primary care settings. Efforts in this area can have significant positive impacts by reducing the need for primary healthcare and by reducing the stress on the healthcare system.
Changes in the industry only serve to stress what has always been true; namely, that the healthcare field has always faced significant challenges, and that goals to improve healthcare will always involve multiple stakeholders. This should not seem surprising given the circumstances. Indeed, when a growing population needs care, there are factors involved such as the demands of providing that care and the rising costs associated with healthcare. Generally, it is not surprising that the field of healthcare is an industry facing multifaceted issues that evolve over time.
In this module’s Discussion, you reviewed some healthcare issues/stressors and selected one for further review. For this Assignment, you will consider in more detail the healthcare issue/stressor you selected. You will also review research that addresses the issue/stressor and write a white paper to your organization’s leadership that addresses the issue/stressor you selected.
To Prepare:
· Review the national healthcare issues/stressors presented in the Resources and reflect on the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected for study.
· Reflect on the feedback you received from your colleagues on your Discussion post for the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected.
· Identify and review two additional scholarly resources (not included in the Resources for this module) that focus on change strategies implemented by healthcare organizations to address your selected national healthcare issue/stressor.
The Assignment (3-4 Pages):
Analysis of a Pertinent Healthcare Issue
Develop a 3- to 4-page paper, written to your organization’s leadership team, addressing your selected national healthcare issue/stressor and how it is impacting your work setting. Be sure to address the following:
· Describe the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected and its impact on your organization. Use organizational data to quantify the impact (if necessary, seek assistance from leadership or appropriate stakeholders in your organization).
· Provide a brief summary of the two articles you reviewed from outside resources on the national healthcare issue/stressor. Explain how the healthcare issue/stressor is being addressed in other organizations.
· Summarize the strategies used to address the organizational impact of national healthcare issues/stressors presented in the scholarly resources you selected. Explain how they may impact your organization both positively and negatively. Be specific and provide examples.
Looking Ahead The paper you develop in Module 1 will be revisited and revised in Module 2.
RUBRIC
| Develop a 3- to 4-page paper, written to your organization’s leadership team, addressing the selected national healthcare issue/stressor and how it is impacting your work setting. Be sure to address the following: · Describe the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected and its impact on your organization. Use organizational data to quantify the impact (if necessary, seek assistance from leadership or appropriate stakeholders in your organization). | 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)
The response accurately and thoroughly describes in detail the national healthcare issue/stressor selected and its impact on an organization. The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed data to quantify the impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor selected. |
20 (20%) – 22 (22%)
The response describes the national healthcare issue/stressor selected and its impact on an organization. The response includes accurate data to quantify the impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor selected. |
18 (18%) – 19 (19%)
The response describes the national healthcare issue/stressor selected and its impact on an organization that is vague or inaccurate. The response includes vague or inaccurate data to quantify the impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor selected. |
0 (0%) – 17 (17%)
The response describes the national healthcare issue/stressor selected and its impact on an organization that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. The response includes vague and inaccurate data to quantify the impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor selected, or is missing. |
| · Provide a brief summary of the two articles you reviewed from outside resources, on the national healthcare issue/stressor and explain how the healthcare issue/stressor is being addressed in other organizations. | 27 (27%) – 30 (30%)
A complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources reviewed on the national healthcare issue/stressor selected is provided. The response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 2 or 3 course-specific resources that fully support the summary provided. The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the healthcare issue/stressor is being addressed in other organizations. |
24 (24%) – 26 (26%)
An accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource reviewed on the national healthcare issue/stressor selected is provided. The response integrates at least 1 outside resource and 2 or 3 course-specific resources that may support the summary provided. The response explains how the healthcare issue/stressor is being addressed in other organizations. |
21 (21%) – 23 (23%)
A vague or inaccurate summary of outside resources reviewed on the national healthcare issue/stressor selected is provided. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the summary provided. The response explains how the healthcare issue/stressor is being addressed in other organizations that is vague or inaccurate. |
0 (0%) – 20 (20%)
A vague and inaccurate summary of no outside resources reviewed on the national healthcare issue/stressor selected is provided, or is missing. The response fails to integrate any resources to support the summary provided. |
| · Summarize the strategies used to address the organizational impact of national healthcare issues/stressors presented in the scholarly resources you selected and explain how they may impact your organization both positively and negatively. Be specific and provide examples. | 27 (27%) – 30 (30%)
A complete, detailed, and accurate summary of the strategies used to address the organizational impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor is provided. The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the strategies may impact an organization both positively and negatively, with specific and accurate examples. |
24 (24%) – 26 (26%)
An accurate summary of the strategies used to address the organizational impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor is provided. The response explains how the strategies may impact an organization both positively and negatively. May include some specific examples. |
21 (21%) – 23 (23%)
A vague or inaccurate summary of the strategies used to address the organizational impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor is provided. The response explains how the strategies may impact an organization both positively and negatively that is vague or inaccurate. May include some vague or inaccurate examples. |
0 (0%) – 20 (20%)
A vague and inaccurate summary of the strategies used to address the organizational impact of the national healthcare issue/stressor is provided, or is missing. The response explains how the strategies may impact an organization both positively and negatively that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Does not include any examples. |
| 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. | 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. |
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. |
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. |
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 | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
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. | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
| Total Points: 100 |
Name: NURS_6053
Readings
Marshall, E., & Broome, M. (2017). Transformational leadership in nursing: From expert clinician to influential leader (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
· Chapter 2, “Understanding Contexts for Transformational Leadership: Complexity, Change, and Strategic Planning” (pp. 37–62)
· Chapter 3, “Current Challenges in Complex Health Care Organizations: The Triple Aim” (pp. 63–86)
Read any TWO of the following (plus TWO additional readings on your selected issue):
Auerbach, D. I., Staiger, D. O., & Buerhaus, P. I. (2018). Growing ranks of advanced practice clinicians—Implications for the physician workforce. New England Journal of Medicine, 378(25), 2358–2360. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1801869
Gerardi, T., Farmer, P., & Hoffman, B. (2018). Moving closer to the 2020 BSN-prepared workforce goal. American Journal of Nursing, 118(2), 43–45. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000530244.15217.aa
Jacobs, B., McGovern, J., Heinmiller, J., & Drenkard, K. (2018). Engaging employees in well-being: Moving from the Triple Aim to the Quadruple Aim. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 42(3), 231–245. doi:10.1097/NAQ.0000000000000303
Norful, A. A., de Jacq, K., Carlino, R., & Poghosyan, L. (2018). Nurse practitioner–physician comanagement: A theoretical model to alleviate primary care strain. Annals of Family Medicine, 16(3), 250–256. doi:10.1370/afm.2230
Palumbo, M., Rambur, B., & Hart, V. (2017). Is health care payment reform impacting nurses’ work settings, roles, and education preparation? Journal of Professional Nursing, 33(6), 400–404. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.11.005
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Park, B., Gold, S. B., Bazemore, A., & Liaw, W. (2018). How evolving United States payment models influence primary care and its impact on the Quadruple Aim. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 31(4), 588–604. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2018.04.170388
Pittman, P., & Scully-Russ, E. (2016). Workforce planning and development in times of delivery system transformation. Human Resources for Health, 14(56), 1–15. doi:10.1186/s12960-016-0154-3. Retrieved from https://human-resources-health.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12960-016-0154-3
Poghosyan, L., Norful, A., & Laugesen, M. (2018). Removing restrictions on nurse practitioners’ scope of practice in New York state: Physicians’ and nurse practitioners’ perspectives. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 30(6), 354–360. doi:10.1097/JXX.0000000000000040
Ricketts, T., & Fraher, E. (2013). Reconfiguring health workforce policy so that education, training, and actual delivery of care are closely connected. Health Affairs, 32(11), 1874–1880. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0531
