Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation Essay

Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation Essay

Healthcare institutions are governed by goals and objectives that inform their interventions and directions of care. Dashboard metrics are integral tools in measuring an organization’s performance against the set metrics by the local, state, and federal governments. Chastain Park Memorial Hospital is a reputable healthcare institution in the region. Vila Health is affiliated and accredited by several other institutions such as Medicaid. The hospital is recognized for its outstanding performance in safe surgeries, high patient satisfaction reports, best emergency care services, and high-quality mother and child healthcare services. The quality assurance department leader and the institution’s leadership evaluated the diabetes dashboard metrics to help improve on the underperforming areas. This paper focuses on these underperforming metrics, reviews the relevant metrics set by the local, state, and federal governments, analyzes challenges in meeting these metrics, and ethical action on the underperforming metrics.

Brief Description of Organizational Settings

CPMH is a large hospital with an inpatient bed capacity of 1500. The hospital’s catchment population is 35,100, with 13,545 under 20 years old, 17,454 21-65-year-olds, and 4391 above 65 years old. The hospital serves a culturally diverse population consisting of 25 890 Whites, 1565 Hispanic whites, 2355 African Americans, 2190 Asian Americans, 600 inter-racial, and 2500 other races (Vila Health, n.d.). According to the hospital public health data, the metrics focus on a population of 545 new diabetic patients. Among them, 249 are males, and 296 are females. There are 365 whites, 32 African Americans, 28 Hispanic whites, 30 Asian Americans, and 90 unidentified races. The age distribution is 111 patients below 20 years old, 283 between 20-65 years old, and 151 above 65 years old (Vila Health, n.d.). The public health diabetes metrics include eye reports, foot and HgbA1c exams that form the normal assessment for diabetic patients. The available 2017-2018 data shows 120-foot exams, 200 HgbA1c exams, and 135 eye exams. In 2018, these metrics dropped with 50 eye exams and 38-foot exams, while the HgbA1C exams increased by 30.

Benchmark set forth by Local, State and Federal Law

The benchmarking process measures the healthcare institution’s performance against a set external or internal standard. It is a source of motivation and breeds competition. Benchmark processes can be local, regional, or national. Common areas include health resources and services administration, disease-specific benchmark data, and other types used by the specific agencies. Agencies majorly involved in benchmarking funded by the agency for healthcare research and quality include DARTnet and SAFTInet and local and national benchmarking (AHRQ, n.d.).

The National Diabetes Quality measures inform diabetic care and provide specific measures regarding dilated eye examination, foot examination, and hemoglobin A1c measurements derived from the reports of the best states. The measures are that diabetic foot examination should entail at least 75.2% of diabetic patients should annual eye exams, 84% diabetic foot exams, and 79.5% should have at least two HgbA1c examinations annually (AHRQ, n.d.). After comparing the hospitals’ standards to those set by the law, diabetic foot exams and annual dilated eye exams fall below the expected rates. Diabetic foot and retinopathy are diabetes complications, and specific exams help detect these complications early for effective management. They also help determine the effectiveness of the current medications and other interventions to manage diabetes. African Americans are more susceptible to diabetes compared to the Whites and the Hispanics (CDC, n.d.). Cultural diversity to ensure all patients are comfortable to attend this hospital is thus a prerequisite (Shepherds et al., 2019). In addition, communities should also receive education on human care to increase their ability to take care of their health in the community. Education programs targeting diabetic patients are thus integral.

Analyze Challenges Meeting Benchmarks

Meeting benchmarks can be challenging, and understanding challenges help healthcare leaders plan on ethical improvement to meet the benchmark. Inadequate staffing is a global health issue and a major cause of inadequacy in meeting major benchmarks (Winter et al., 2020). Inadequate staff may not complete all the necessary benchmarks on patients considering the large number of patients waiting and the heavy workload. The number of staff, cultural diversity, and education greatly determine their interventions and the quality of care they provide. Cultural diversity interferes with communication, patient comfort, and understanding patient needs in a culturally diverse population (Shepherds et al., 2019). All these staffing issues contribute to underperformance. When patients visit a hospital and perceive any injustice, poor quality care, or their needs are not met, they most likely fail to come back and do not recommend the hospital to friends and family. Failure to come back or receive patients contributes to the declining examinations.

Evaluation of Underperforming Benchmark

CPMH reports on the diabetes dashboard present significant deviations being declining eye exams and diabetic foot exams. The HgbA1c results have recorded an increase but need consideration to reach the benchmark requirements. The national benchmark for diabetic foot exams, as stated earlier, is 84%, and CPMH reports fall below 45% diabetic foot examinations (Vila Health, n.d.). Low rates of diabetic foot examinations relay significant health risks to patients. Patients who sustain foot injuries and are unseen take considerable time to heal and are exposed to significant other risks such as infection, gangrene, and subsequent amputation, negatively affecting the individual, staff, and the community (Navarro-Flores et al., 2019).

Healthcare institutions should set clear strategies to ensure quality care meets set benchmarks. Proper education and necessary training are the best opportunities for improving healthcare outcomes. Thus, healthcare institutions must ensure they employ adequate, culturally-diverse staff and train them extensively to ensure quality and acceptable care by all individuals in society (Shepherds et al., 2019). Periodic surveys on staff values, needs, attitudes, and knowledge will help determine care gaps, allowing the organization to manage them (Nikitara et al., 2019). In addition, interprofessional collaboration, staff respect, and clear and open communication help improve interprofessional care processes.

Ethical Action on Benchmark Underperformance

Determining gaps in achieving benchmarks is not enough, and clear and precise quality improvement strategies are essential. Implementing quality improvement strategies requires collaboration for all stakeholders: donors, leaders, patients, and healthcare providers. The involvement of all stakeholders ensures high-quality decisions, considering all ideas from all disciplines in the healthcare settings. Failure to act on the metric places the patients at high risk for diabetes complications, which increases healthcare costs to the individual and the system. Elaborate staff training on the benchmark requirements improves understanding and skills, which improves their professional responsibility (Nikitara et al., 2019) According to Nikitara et al. (2019), staff education is the cornerstone of . Persistent training also creates a culture of responsibility and accountability, improving the metrics performance.

Healthcare institutions should employ adequate staff with relevant training in diabetes care because adequate staff will ensure they perform all required interventions without the limitations of the normally high workload. Highly trained staff set examples for good performance and quality care delivery. Another effective strategy is patient education on diabetes care and evaluating the learning through the teach-back method (Gregory, 2018). Patients are often given special days for diabetes care clinics, and the hospital should prepare education programs to teach patients the importance of self-care and follow-up. By doing so, patients will also seek these services, improving diabetes healthcare coverage.

Conclusion

Healthcare institutions require periodic evaluations to ensure compliance with set benchmarks as a surety of quality care. Understanding the set dashboard metrics ensures healthcare institutions know their position in performance relative to the set guidelines and other institutions. The reports help create strong and effective quality improvement actions for the specific metrics. With strong and dedicated leadership and interprofessional collaboration, CPMH can benefit from periodic evaluations to improve diabetic patients’ care. From the metrics identified, the institutions require enhancing their staff knowledge and skills and expanding their workforce to meet the set benchmarks. They also need to educate their patients to enhance their healthcare-seeking behavior. Stakeholders’ input in preparing these strategies will also enhance the quality improvement projects.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

References

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (n.d.). National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report. The National Diabetes Quality Measures. https://nhqrnet.ahrq.gov/inhprdr/national/benchmark/table/diseases_and_conditions/diabetes

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (n.d.). Practice Facilitation Handbook, Module 7. Measuring and Benchmarking Clinical Performance. AHRQ. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. https://www.ahrq.gov/ncepcr/tools/pf-handbook/mod7.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (n.d.).Diabetes.Hispanic/Latino Americans and Type 2 Diabetes.CDC.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/library/features/hispanic-diabetes.html

Gregory, S. (2018). Diabetes care in care home and residential settings. British journal of community nursing, 23(10), 510-513. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjcn.2018.23.10.510

Navarro-Flores, E., Pérez-Ros, P., Martínez-Arnau, F. M., Julían-Rochina, I., & Cauli, O. (2019). Neuro-psychiatric alterations in patients with diabetic foot syndrome. CNS & Neurological Disorders-Drug Targets (Formerly Current Drug Targets-CNS & Neurological Disorders), 18(8), 598-608. https://doi.org/10.2174/1871527318666191002094406

Nikitara, M., Constantinou, C. S., Andreou, E., & Diomidous, M. (2019). The role of nurses and the facilitators and barriers in diabetes care: A mixed methods systematic literature review. Behavioral Sciences, 9(6), 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs9060061

Shepherd, S. M., Willis-Esqueda, C., Newton, D., Sivasubramaniam, D., & Paradies, Y. (2019). The challenge of cultural competence in the workplace: perspectives of healthcare providers. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-3959-7

Vila Health. (n.d.). Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation. Capella University. https://media.capella.edu/coursemedia/nhs6004element17010/wrapper.asp#

Winter, V., Schreyögg, J., & Thiel, A. (2020). Hospital staff shortages: Environmental and organizational determinants and implications for patient satisfaction. Health Policy, 124(4), 380-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.01.001

Assessment 1 Instructions: Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation

Option 2: Actual Dashboard

Use an actual dashboard from a professional practice setting for your evaluation. If you decide to use actual dashboard metrics, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

• The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
• The specific type of care delivery.
• The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
• The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.

Note: Ensure your data are Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

Option 3: Hypothetical Dashboard

If you have a sophisticated understanding of dashboards relevant to your own practice, you may also construct a hypothetical dashboard for your evaluation. Your hypothetical dashboard must present at least four different metrics, at least two of which must be underperforming the prescribed benchmark set forth by a federal, state, or local laws or policies. In addition, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

• The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
• The specific type of care delivery.
• The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
• The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.

Note: Ensure your data are HIPAA compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

Instructions

Note: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent assessments are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.

Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.

Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.

Requirements

The report requirements outlined below correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so be sure to address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, be sure to note the requirements for document format and length and for supporting evidence.

• Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.

• • Which metrics are not meeting the benchmark for the organization?
  • What are the local, state, or federal health care policies or laws that establish these benchmarks?
  • What conclusions can you draw from your evaluation?
  • Are there any unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty where additional information could improve your evaluation?
• Analyze one challenge that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or interprofessional team.

• • Consider the following examples:

• • • Strategic direction.
    • Organizational mission.
    • Resources.
    • Staffing.
    • Financial: Operational and capital funding.
    • Logistical considerations: Physical space.
    • Support services (any ancillary department that gives support to a specific care unit in the organization, such as pharmacy, cleaning services, dietary, et cetera).
    • Cultural diversity in the organization and community.
    • Procedures and processes.
  • Address the following:

• • • Why do the challenges you identified contribute, potentially, to benchmark underperformance?
    • What assumptions underlie your conclusions?
• Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.

• • Focus on the benchmark you chose to target for improvement. Which metric is underperforming its benchmark by the greatest degree?
  • State the benchmark underperformance that is the most widespread throughout the organization or interprofessional team.
  • State the benchmark that affects the greatest number of patients. Which benchmark affects the greatest number of staff?
  • Include how this underperformance affect the community that the organization serves.
  • Include the greatest opportunity to improve the overall quality of care or performance of the organization or interpersonal team and, ultimately, to improve patient outcomes, as you think about the issue and the current poor benchmark outcomes.
• Advocate for ethical action, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, to address a benchmark underperformance.

• • Who would be an appropriate group of stakeholders to act on improving your identified benchmark metric?
  • Why should the stakeholder group take action?
  • What are some ethical actions the stakeholder group could take that support improved benchmark performance?
• Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.

• • Proofread your report, before you submit it, to minimize errors that could distract readers and make it more difficult for them to focus on the substance of your evaluation and analysis.
• Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.

• • Be sure to apply correct APA formatting to source citations and references.

 

 

• Report Format and Length

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Format your report using APA style.

• Use the APA Style Paper Template [DOCX]. An APA Style Paper Tutorial [DOCX] is also provided to help you in writing and formatting your report. Be sure to include:

• •  A title page and references page. An abstract is not required.
  • A running head on all pages.
  • Appropriate section headings.
• Be sure your report is 4–6 pages in length, not including the title page and references page.

Supporting Evidence

Cite 4–6 credible sources from peer-reviewed journals or professional industry publications to support your analysis of challenges, evaluation of potential for improvement, and your advocacy for ethical action.

Competencies Measured

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the course competencies through the following assessment scoring guide criteria:

• Competency 1: Analyze relevant health care laws, policies, and regulations; their application; and their effects on organizations, interprofessional teams, and professional practice.

• • Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or interprofessional team.
• Competency 2: Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations.

• • Advocate for ethical action, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, to address a benchmark underperformance.
• Competency 3: Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, to inform health care laws and policies for patients, organizations, and populations.

• • Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
  • Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
• Competency 5: Produce clear, coherent, and professional written work, in accordance with Capella’s writing standards.

• • Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
  • Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.

Write a 4-6 page report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.

Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.