Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630

Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630

Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630

Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630 Topic 5 DQ 1

Measurement is required to determine the success of your CQI project. What is the difference between outcome and process measures? Which are more important? Why? Support your reasoning with an example.

Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630

Example DQ 1 of Topic 5

According to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2015), process measures indicate what a provider does to maintain or improve health well outcome measures reflect the impact of health care services or interventions on a patient’s health status. An example of a process measure would be a specific percentage of patients that are receiving preventive services such as immunizations or diabetic screenings. An example of an outcome measure would be the rate of hospital acquired infections such as catheter associated urinary tract infection.

When measuring the quality of care, process measures may be more useful when trying to link an intervention to an outcome. Both measurements are clearly important, but it is believed that outcome measures lacks the ability to pinpoint the issue. For instance, it could be so that a patient who comes in for a stroke receive the most atrocious care, yet survive their hospital stay thus contributing to a hospital’s outcome measure.

There are advantages to both process and outcome measures and it is important to determine the type of quality data that is needed to make the appropriate decision. If the nature of what we’re trying to measure is quality of health care given that process is linked to an outcome, then process measures would be the appropriate measure (Mant, 2001). For example, if there is a true difference between utilizing two different interventions in treating myocardial infarction could result in a reduction compared to other organization, the percentage (being a process measure) would be useful and easy to interpret. 

The advantages of outcome measures is that it will reflect all of the possible processes of care (Mant, 2001). This is more of global view of performance rather than quality. As outcome measures are an indicator of health, these types of measures are better to determine if health services are efficient and effective.  

References:

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2015). Types of health care quality measures. Retrieved from https://www.ahrq.gov/talkingquality/measures/types.html

Mant, J. (2001). Process versus outcome indicators in the assessment of quality of health care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 13(6), pp. 475-480.

Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630 Topic 5 DQ 2

Identify which one of the following approaches you would choose to assist in determining and measuring outcomes: FMEA, Pareto principle, and control charts. Describe the best approach and explain why you chose it.

Resources

1. Continuous Quality Improvement in Health Care

Read Chapter 4 in Continuous Quality Improvement in Health Care.

 

2. Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Review Chapters 2 and 4 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

 

3. Key Questions When Choosing Health Care Quality Measures

Read “Key Questions When Choosing Health Care Quality Measures,” located on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) website. Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630

https://www.ahrq.gov/talkingquality/measures/measure-questions.html

4. Select Health Care Quality Measures for a Consumer Report

Explore the Select Measures to Report page of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) website.

https://www.ahrq.gov/talkingquality/measures/index.html

5. Data-Driven Quality Improvement, Culture Change, and the High Reliability Journey at a Special Hospital for People With Medically Complex Developmental Disabilities

Read “Data-Driven Quality Improvement, Culture Change, and the High Reliability Journey at a Special Hospital for People With Medically Complex Developmental Disabilities,” by Barba, Foreman, and Robey, from International Journal of Healthcare Management (2021).

 

6. Using the Quality Improvement (QI) Tool Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to Examine Implementation Barriers to Common Workflows in Integrated Pediatric Care

Read “Using the Quality Improvement (QI) Tool Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to Examine Implementation Barriers to Common Workflows in Integrated Pediatric Care,” by Tamene, Morris, Feinberg, and Bair-Merritt, from Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology (2020).

 

7. Developing a Data-Driven Approach in Order to Improve the Safety and Quality of Patient Care

Read “Developing a Data-Driven Approach in Order to Improve the Safety and Quality of Patient Care,” by Cascini, Santaroni, Lanzetti, Failla, Gentili, and Ricciardi, from Frontiers in Public Health (2021).

https://doaj.org/article/9449fe29b8b84e7c806950b4e3f6345e

8. Applying the Pareto Principle and a Targeted Education Intervention Following Audit and Feedback to Drive Behavior Changes in the Use of Technology

Read “Applying the Pareto Principle and a Targeted Education Intervention Following Audit and Feedback to Drive Behavior Changes in the Use of Technology,” by Saathoff, Dipietro, MacDonald, and Krenzischek, from Journal of Informatics Nursing (2019).

 

9. Measuring Nursing Care Value, Big Data, and the Challenges of Estimating Causal Effects

Read “Measuring Nursing Care Value, Big Data, and the Challenges of Estimating Causal Effects,” by Perraillon, Welton, and Jenkins, from Nursing Economic$ (2019).

10. Sepsis and Septic Shock After Craniotomy: Predicting a Significant Patient Safety and Quality Outcome Measure

Read “Sepsis and Septic Shock After Craniotomy: Predicting a Significant Patient Safety and Quality Outcome Measure,” by Zhang, Li, Pieters, Towner, Li, Al-Dhahir, Childers, and Li, from PLoS One (2020).

NUR 630 Benchmark – Outcome and Process Measures

Assessment Description

In a 1,000-1,250-word paper, consider the outcome and process measures that can be used for CQI. Include the following in your essay:

  1. At least two process measures that can be used for CQI.
  2. At least one outcome measure that can be used for CQI.
  3. A description of why each measure was chosen. Outcome Measures Vs Process Measures NUR630
  4. An explanation of how data would be collected for each (how each will be measured).
  5. An explanation of how success would be determined.
  6. One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge.

Use a minimum of three peer-reviewed scholarly references as evidence.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:

MSN Leadership in Health Care Systems

6.5: Generate data-driven, cost-effective solutions to organizational challenges.

NUR630 Rubric Criteria Scored

Format/Documentation

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

5. Target

6 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

4. Acceptable

5.52 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching

5.28 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2. Insufficient

4.8 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Process Measures

Criteria Description

Process Measures

5. Target

13.2 points

Two process measures are present.

4. Acceptable

12.14 points

NA

3. Approaching

11.62 points

NA

2. Insufficient

10.56 points

Two process measures are incomplete or not applicable.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Two process measures are not present.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. Target

8.4 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. Acceptable

7.73 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. Approaching

7.39 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. Insufficient

6.72 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Mechanics of Writing

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target

6 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable

5.52 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

3. Approaching

5.28 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient

4.8 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Scholarly Sources

Criteria Description
5. Target

6 points

A minimum of three peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are present. Sources are distinctive and address all of the requirements stated in the assignment criteria.

4. Acceptable

5.52 points

A minimum of three peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are present. Sources address all of the requirements stated in the assignment criteria.

3. Approaching

5.28 points

A minimum of three peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are present.

2. Insufficient

4.8 points

Two or three peer-reviewed, sources are present, but are not scholarly. Limited research is present.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are not present.

Argument Logic and Construction

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. Target

9.6 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. Acceptable

8.83 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. Approaching

8.45 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. Insufficient

7.68 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Data Driven, Cost-Effective Solutions (C6.5.)

Criteria Description

Data Driven, Cost-Effective Solutions (C6.5.)

5. Target

14.4 points

One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are present and thorough. Solutions provided are appropriate for the task.

4. Acceptable

13.25 points

One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are detailed.

3. Approaching

12.67 points

One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are present.

2. Insufficient

11.52 points

One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are incomplete or not applicable.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are not present.

Description of Why Each Measure Was Chosen

Criteria Description

Description of Why Each Measure Was Chosen

5. Target

14.4 points

A description of why each measure was chosen is present and thorough.

4. Acceptable

13.25 points

A description of why each measure was chosen is present and detailed.

3. Approaching

12.67 points

A description of why each measure was chosen is present.

2. Insufficient

11.52 points

A description of why each measure was chosen is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of why each measure was chosen is not present.

Explanation of How Success Would Be Determined

Criteria Description

Explanation of How Success Would Be Determined

5. Target

14.4 points

An explanation of how success would be determined is present and thorough.

4. Acceptable

13.25 points

An explanation of how success would be determined is present and detailed.

3. Approaching

12.67 points

An explanation of how success would be determined is present.

2. Insufficient

11.52 points

An explanation of how success would be determined is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of how success would be determined is not present.

Outcome Measures

Criteria Description

Outcome Measures

5. Target

13.2 points

One outcome measure is present.

4. Acceptable

12.14 points

NA

3. Approaching

11.62 points

NA

2. Insufficient

10.56 points

One outcome measure is incomplete or not applicable.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

One outcome measure is not present.

Explanation of How Data Would Be Collected for Each Measure

Criteria Description

Explanation of How Data Would Be Collected for Each Measure

5. Target

14.4 points

An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present and thorough.

4. Acceptable

13.25 points

An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present and detailed.

3. Approaching

12.67 points

An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present.

2. Insufficient

11.52 points

An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is not present.

Total120 points