Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application
Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application
Week 3: Quality Improvement Model Application
Guidelines With Scoring Rubric
The purpose of this assignment is to (a) provide examples of a quality improvement initiative or patient safety issue in any healthcare delivery setting, (b) explore the contributing factors for this adverse medical outcome, (c) apply quality improvement theories and philosophies to a healthcare management project, (d) demonstrate an understanding of quality improvement tools by correctly choosing and using them in specific cases, and (e) recognize the extent of problems of patient safety in medical care. Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application
Through this assignment, the student will demonstrate the ability to do the following.
- Apply frameworks and theories for improving quality of care in various healthcare systems. (CO 1)
- Use critical inquiry to evaluate the design, implementation, and outcomes of quality and safety improvement strategies. (CO 3)
- Advance knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary for the continuous improvement of quality and safety in healthcare. (CO 5)
Total Points Possible: 230
Requirements – Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application
Assignment Criteria for the Paper
1. Identify any existing quality concern or an existing patient safety issue and provide the rationale for choosing this issue.
2. Explain the background and scope of the problem.
3. Analyze the issue based on the appropriate quality philosophy.
- Identify the regulatory guidelines, internal and/or external benchmarks, or evidence-based practice standards surrounding the issue—explain what that expectation is and why.
5. Use the appropriate quality improvement tools to improve the quality outcome.
6. Describe how you could or will get involved in this initiative to make a difference and move it forward to enactment.
7. Summarize the content in concluding statements.
8. The body of the scholarly paper is to be 3–5 pages in length excluding title and reference pages.
9. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, references, and citations are consistent with formal academic writing and APA format as expressed in the current edition.
10. Include a minimum of four references published within the past 5 years, not including your textbook. References may include scholarly websites of organizations or government agencies and must be presented using APA current edition format for electronic media.
Preparing the paper
|Introduction and quality concern||25||11%||Identify a quality issue/patient safety issue and provide a rationale.|
|Background and scope of the problem||20||9%||Analyze the problem from a literature review and a practical point of view.|
|Goals of improvement||20||9%||Identify three goals to improve the problem.|
|Quality philosophy application||35||15%||Using a quality model, analyze the patient safety concern and the intervention to bridge the gaps.|
|Identification of the regulatory guidelines and internal/external benchmarks or EBP standards for this issue||40||17%||Discuss all related factors to this problem and explain what the expectation is and why. Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application|
|Quality process tool and improvement recommendation||40||17%||Apply appropriate quality improvement tools to improve the quality outcome; provide illustrations for all tools used (flowchart, gap analysis, root cause analysis, etc.). Choose at least two tools for implementation.|
|Conclusion||15||7%||Provide summary and concluding statements.|
|APA style||10||4%||Text, title page, and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA current edition format.|
|Scholarly references||15||7%||Paper is 3–5 pages in length, excluding the cover and reference pages. References include a minimum of 4 scholarly references, excluding the course text.|
|Grammar and spelling||10||4%||Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work.|
|Total||230||100%||A quality assignment will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.|
Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application Grading Rubric
Outstanding or highest level of performance
Very good or high level of performance
Competent or satisfactory level of performance
Poor or failing level of performance
Unsatisfactory level of performance
Possible Points = 195 Points
Introduction and quality concern
|25 Points||20 Points||16 Points||10 Points||0 Points|
|Introduction offers broad overview of topic narrowing to key concepts to be presented. Purpose statement is clear. All elements provided.||Introduction includes issue and purpose. Statement present but may lack a key component.||Introduction of topic issue lacks occasional important element or specificity. One element provided.||Introduction of topic issue has multiple instances of inaccuracies. None of the required elements present or no introduction.||Introduction is not present.|
|Background and scope of the problem||20 Points||18 Points||16 Points||8 Points||0 Points|
|Succinctly defines problem and population with significant demographics; describes depth of the problem and numbers affected.||Defines problem, some elements may not be fully developed; rare inaccuracy.||Identifies problem with lack of depth and occasional important elements or specificity.||Identifies problem with multiple instances of inaccuracies or one or more elements missing.||Overview of health problem is not present.|
|Goals of improvement||20 Points||18 Points||16 Points||8 Points||0 Points|
|Comprehensive and realistic benefits to nursing profession presented.||Benefits to nursing profession stated with adequate clarity or realism.||Benefits to nursing profession stated but lack clarity or realism.||Benefits to nursing profession stated but unrealistic.||Benefits to nursing profession absent.|
|Quality philosophy application||35 Points||25 Points||20 Points||15 Points||0 Points|
|Application to problem/concern is fully developed and comprehensive.||Application to problem/concern is adequately present or model mostly linked to project. Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application||Application to problem/concern is minimally present or model not always linked to project.||Model is not linked to project.||Application to problem/concern is absent.|
|Identify regulatory guidelines, internal/external benchmarks and EBP standards||40 Points||32 Points||25 Points||15 Points||0 Points|
|Able to discuss all related factors.||Able to discuss all related factors but there are some missing details.||Discussed some related factors but there are some that are missing.||Discussion is minimal and most of the factors are missing.||No discussion of related factors.|
|40 Points||32 Points||25 Points||15 Points||0 Points|
|Improvement process and recommendations||Decision recommendation thoroughly discussed.
Discusses at least two tools.
|Decision recommendation developed with rare inaccuracies;
Discusses at least one tool.
|Discussion of the decision recommendation lacks occasional important elements or specificity but
one tool is discussed.
|Discussion of the decision recommendation has multiple instances of inaccuracies and/or is vague.
One tool discussed.
|Discussion of the decision recommendation is absent.
No tools discussed.
|Conclusion||15 Points||12 Points||8 Points||4 Points||0 Points|
|Provides distinct summary with concluding statements regarding the future direction and focus of the project; reflects key elements of the paper.||Provides distinct summary with concluding statements regarding the future direction and focus of the project; does not summarize key elements of the paper.||Provides distinct summary with no concluding statements; no summarization of key elements of the paper.||No distinct summary; concluding statements found at the end in the general body of the paper.||No distinct summary or conclusion provided.|
| Content Subtotal _____ of 195 Points
Possible Points = 35 Points
|APA||10 Points||8 Points||6 Points||4 Points||0 Points|
|There are no APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).||There are 1–2 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).||There are 3–4 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).||There are 5 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).||There are 6 or more APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).|
|Scholarly||15 Points||12 Points||8 Points||4 Points||0 Points|
|The table provided is utilized. References include 2 or more scholarly resources, excluding the course text, and may include scholarly websites.||The table provided is utilized. References include a minimum of 2 scholarly resources, excluding course text. One of the references utilized was not scholarly.||The table provided is not utilized and/or references contain a minimum of 2 resources, excluding course text. One or more references utilized is not a scholarly resource.
|The table provided is not utilized and/or references utilized are not scholarly and/or fewer than 2 resources were utilized. Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application||Only one resource was utilized.|
|Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work.||10 Points||8 Points||6 Points||4 Points||0 Points|
|Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with no exceptions.||Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with 1–2 exceptions.||Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with 3–4 exceptions.||Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are not followed with errors.||Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are not followed with 6 or more errors.|
| Format Subtotal _____ of 35 Points
|Total Points _____ of 230 Points|
Example Student Paper
Quality improvement model application.
Name: Institution: Course: Instructor: Date:
The coronavirus scare has led to the upsurge of industries that manufacture personal protective equipment (PPE). The personal protective equipment produced is used by the medical personnel to protect themselves against the infection of the virus. It has, however, been noted that there has been an increase of fake PPEs that do not provide the necessary protection to the health persons (Gleason, P. 2019). The world over hospitals and medical personnel are in real need of PPEs that will meet the necessary protection measures. The coronavirus, a respiratory disease in very dire and spreads like a bush fire. It has affected the developed and underdeveloped countries with many people dead at the moment due to the virus impacts since the disease attack early last year. Much medical personnel have also been affected by the virus as some of them have also been affected by the illness during their work process of treating the coronavirus victims. There is a need for regular sanitation and proper disposal of the used PPEs. This forms the basis of my work as the PPEs are currently the essential equipment worldwide.
Due to the significant demand of PPEs all over the world, the supply of the PPEs has been limited with the application being very high as every nation is looking for the right PPEs for the medical personnel (Gleason, P. 2019). The problem has there led to the upsurge of industries that manufacture fake PPEs to get quick income. This had led to the rise of counterfeit PPEs that do not provide the right protection to the doctors and nurses and other medical personnel. This problem is not a preserve of a specific nation, but it is all over the world as almost all medical personnel in every country is looking for the PPEs. This problem is, therefore, one that requires immediate intervention as we have seen the medical personnel also being quarantined together with other patients of Coronavirus (Hempel, O’Hanlon, ., Lim, Danz, Larkin, & Rubenstein, 2019).
Quality of anything is the ability of that thing to satisfy the needs of the users. The PPEs needs to meet the taste of the users, particularly the doctors and the nurses. In health care settings, the quality of products is one that must be checked closely because failure to do that will mean poor services to the customers/ patients. The PPEs should be in great quality and meet the standards of the health sector. Quality provides assurance, reliability and responsiveness factors that some PPEs do not have (Gleason, P. 2019). According to the seven pillars of quality by Donabedian, acceptability, optimality, efficiency, legitimacy cost and equity should be check. The quality in medical services is measured by safety, timely, patient-centred, equitable and efficient. According to Deming’s theory of total quality management, one should not check on the price of a product when looking for the right item to use, the purpose of the items needs to be looked at closely and again look for a continuous supply of quality (Hempel, O’Hanlon, ., Lim, Danz, Larkin, & Rubenstein, 2019). This has lacked when it comes to the supply of PPEs in major hospitals in the world to curb the grown of coronavirus. In Crosby’s theory, Crosby believes that money spent on quality is money that has been properly used. Management should come up with ways in which the quality and continuous supply of PPEs is maintained. Crosby further says that quality should adhere to requirements, and must have no defects. These theories show the importance of quality in any health sector. If the quality does not meet the standard requirements, then efficiency in the health sector will be in question.
The COVID-19 response PPE like the face masks, respiratory protective items, surgical clothing and drapes should be of a high standard to avoid penetration of the virus causing agents. There needs to be a test method where the items will be tested to see their effectiveness, failure of these items to perform their duty effectively will mean giving room for the disease to spread even further. It is not shocking that in many countries, the health persons have also been infected by this disease in the line of duty (Gleason, P. 2019). Considering the way the disease spreads, there is a need for the appropriate training to be done when it comes to the handling of the PPEs. The spread of the virus by these PPEs also must be checked to make sure that proper sanitation is done on them to avoid any form of transmission of the virus (Hempel, O’Hanlon, ., Lim, Danz, Larkin, & Rubenstein, 2019). The management of any health sector should come up with ways of checking the PPEs in order to ensure they are of good quality. Failure to check on the quality of the PPEs will mean failure to offer quality work to the patients. From the use of PPE medical practitioners were to be protected from the virus but this is not the case as most medical personnel that have attended to COVID 19 patients are also testing positive of the virus signalling that the PPEs are not working or handling them is a problem. Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application
There is, therefore, a need for the improvement of quality in the PPE to meet the expected quality. The tools to be used for this test of quality are cause and effect tool that looks for the reason for the poor quality and makes changes to improve on the quality of the PPE. The other tool is the use of a check sheet tool that ensures that all the requirements for the right quality of PPE are checked in line with the quality monitoring levels in the check sheet (Gleason, P. 2019). The other tool will be stratification where the properties of a quality PPE are compared to the provided ones to see any deviation in the quality.
As a person sharing this document in all media will help those who are concerned get to read and understand the impacts of fake PPE and what the medical practitioners can do to make sure that they get the PPE that is worth their money and sacrifice.
I summary, PPE is very important in the control of the spread of coronavirus, particularly among the medical personnel in the health sector. If the quality of PPE is compromised, then the life of the patients and any person who gets in contact with them will be at risk of infection.
Quality should adhere to the laid down standards and tools like cause and effect, check sheets and stratification should be used to check on the quality of the PPE. Health managers and hospitals need to employ the discussions in this piece of work to ring quality in PPE.
Gleason, P. (2019). Protection of Public Safety Personnel and Responders through Certification of PPE. In Homeland Security and Public Safety: Research, Applications and Standards. ASTM International. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP161420180042
Hempel, S., O’Hanlon, C., Lim, Y. W., Danz, M., Larkin, J., & Rubenstein, L. (2019). Spread tools: a systematic review of components, uptake, and effectiveness of quality improvement toolkits. Implementation Science, 14(1), 83. Week 3 Quality Improvement Model Application