AMAIZING OFFER GET 25% OFF YOUR FIRST ORDER CODE FIRST25
http://www.ihi.org/Pages/default.aspxhttps://www.leapfroggroup.org/PART 1 In this Discussion, you will describe strategic health care quality initiatives in two organizations attempting to accomplish their goals and objectives in quality improvement. You will also examine the purpose of the initiatives(s) and share the issues and opportunities for improvement, as well as address any elements crucial to improving quality in your health care organization or one you are familiar with.To prepare:Read and review the resources in the Learning Resources section as they relate to initiatives in strategic health care organizations.Select ONE organization from each of the TWO groups listed:Group I:Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI)
Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP)
Group II:ANCC Magnet Recognition Program
Baldrige Performance Excellence Program
The Leapfrog Group
The Assignment:In a 3- to 4-page paper (excluding title page and references):Describe strategic health care quality initiatives in two of the organizations. Compareand contrast the purposes of the initiatives.
Analyze strategic quality issues and opportunities for improvement within the two organizations.
Evaluatewhich elements of the initiatives are crucial to the quality-improvement opportunities of your health care organization or an organization with which you are familiar.
PART 2–Accountable health care leaders must respond to external factors in a way that is advantageous for the organization and the community. While health care organizations must strive to improve their financial positions, it should never be at the expense of the populations they are serving. For this Assignment, examine the following scenario and consider strategies to limit the negative impact of external factors and improve organizational success.Scenario: A small independent hospital in rural Georgia is seeking to attain Magnet Status. This designation demonstrates to stakeholders that the organization is committed to delivering high-quality patient care. With this designation, the organization can easily attract and retain a highly-engaged clinical staff. Moreover, it provides the organization an opportunity to market itself to potential patients as the place to receive top-quality care. This means that the organization could realize a greater market share of insured and private pay patients traveling as far as 100 miles just to receive the quality services. It also positions the organization to enter into joint ventures with physician groups eager to provide new services, which would lead to increased revenue streams.Although the designation sounds like a great opportunity for the organization, the board of directors is split on their support of this designation. The board members in support of the designation understand the great value that this program will bring to the facility; however, those in opposition learned from a research study that non-magnet hospitals had better infection control and less post-operative sepsis. They also learned from another study that working conditions in a magnet facility are not better than those in non-magnet facilities. Therefore, the dissenting directors have concluded that the organization should not invest its time and resources to seek this credential. The CEO must get support from an overwhelming majority of the board to move forward with pursuing this designation.To prepare:Review the provided scenario and consider external environmental factors that may impact the organization’s strategic planning (e.g., policy and economics, laws and ethics, health care quality, and population health).The AssignmentIn a 2-page executive summary, do the following:Identify and evaluate the impact of external environmental factors on the strategic planning of the organization in the scenario.
Recommend strategies to address these external factors and limit their influence on organizational operations.
PART 3– DISCUSSION 300 WORDS… Shewhart’s Theory for Statistical Process Control (SPC) requires a change in thinking from error detection to error prevention and has a number of benefits in health care. Several of the benefits include patient focus, increased quality awareness, decisions based on data, implementing predictable health care processes, reduced costs, fewer errors resulting in increased patient safety, and improved processes that result in improved health care outcomes and better quality care. However, every process varies. In SPC terminology as it relates to a control chart, a common cause variation does not suggest that a process functions at a desirable or undesirable level, but whether the nature of the variation is stable or predictable within certain limits. A special cause variation is a negative finding, and any changes made in a health care organization should not be made until it identifies and eliminates special causes. A control chart will tell a health care organization if a variation is a common or special cause and how to approach an improvement process. If it is a special cause the health care organization should investigate it and eliminate the variation, not change the process. If there is a common cause variation, the implementation of a process change is what will address the variation. Control charts will reveal whether the change was effective (Joshi et.al, 2014).In this Discussion, you will look at these statistical tools for quality improvement and describe the differences between common cause variation and special cause variation. You will also explain any ethical, legal, or moral obligations that would support your rationale.To prepare:Review the Learning Resources for the week as they relate to Statistical Process Control, common cause, and special cause variation.Read the following situations and determine whether each situation is a common cause variation or a special cause variation:Dispensing the wrong medication to a patient
Dispensing the correct medication several hours after it was supposed to be dispensed
For both of these examples, apply data-collection and statistical tools to measure and explain your rationale for your determination.
Requirements: .doc file