NURS 5051 MODULE 4 WEEK 8 ASSIGNMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW: THE USE OF CLINICAL SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE OUTCOMES AND EFFICIENCIES

NURS 5051 MODULE 4 WEEK 8 ASSIGNMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW: THE USE OF CLINICAL SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE OUTCOMES AND EFFICIENCIES

NURS 5051 MODULE 4 WEEK 8 ASSIGNMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW: THE USE OF CLINICAL SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE OUTCOMES AND EFFICIENCIES

New technology—and the application of existing technology—only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research. The stakes are high, and new clinical systems need to offer evidence of positive impact on outcomes or efficiencies.

Nurse informaticists and healthcare leaders formulate clinical system strategies. As these strategies are often based on technology trends, informaticists and others have then benefited from consulting existing research to inform their thinking.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

In this Assignment, you will review existing research focused on the application of clinical systems. After reviewing, you will summarize your findings.

To Prepare:

Review the Resources and reflect on the impact of clinical systems on outcomes and efficiencies within the context of nursing practice and healthcare delivery.

Conduct a search for recent (within the last 5 years) research focused on the application of clinical systems. The research should provide evidence to support the use of one type of clinical system to improve outcomes and/or efficiencies, such as “the use of personal health records or portals to support patients newly diagnosed with diabetes.”

Identify and select 4 peer-reviewed research articles from your research.

For information about annotated bibliographies, visit https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/annotatedbibliographiesLinks to an external site.

The Assignment: (4-5 pages not including the title and reference page)

In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:

Identify the 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed, citing each in APA format.

Include an introduction explaining the purpose of the paper.

Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.

In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.

Use APA format and include a title page.

Use the Safe Assign Drafts to check your match percentage before submitting your work.

Required Readings:

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2022). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (5th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Chapter 14, “The Electronic Health Record and Clinical Informatics” (pp. 293–316)

Chapter 15, “Informatics Tools to Promote Patient Safety, Quality Outcomes, and Interdisciplinary Collaboration” (pp. 323–349)

Chapter 16, “Patient Engagement and Connected Health” (pp. 357–378)

Chapter 17, “Using Informatics to Promote Community/Population Health” (pp. 383–397)

Chapter 18, “Telenursing and Remote Access Telehealth” (pp. 403–432)

Benda, N. C., Veinot, T. C., Sieck, C. J., & Ancker, J. S. (2020). Broadband internet access is a social determinant of health!Links to an external site..?American Journal of Public Health,?110(8), 1123-1125. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.305784

Dykes, P. C., Rozenblum, R., Dalal, A., Massaro, A., Chang, F., Clements, M., Collins, S. …Bates, D. W. (2017). Prospective evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to improve outcomes in intensive care: The Promoting Respect and Ongoing Safety Through Patient Engagement Communication and Technology Study Download Prospective evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to improve outcomes in intensive care: The Promoting Respect and Ongoing Safety Through Patient Engagement Communication and Technology Study. Critical Care Medicine, 45(8), e806–e813. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002449

HealthIT.gov. (2018c). What is an electronic health record (EHR)?Links to an external site. Retrieved from

https://www.healthit.gov/faq/what-electronic-health-record-ehr

Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D. Leak, L. D., Tieman, L. A., & Manworren, R. C. B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to Improve pain management engagementLinks to an external site.. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221.

Sieck, C. J., Sheon, A., Ancker, J. S., Castek, J., Callahan, B., & Siefer, A. (2021). Digital inclusion as a social determinant of healthLinks to an external site..?NPJ Digital Medicine,?4(1), 52. ?https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00413-8

Skiba, D. (2017). Evaluation tools to appraise social media and mobile applicationsLinks to an external site.. Informatics, 4(3), 32–40.

Sharma, P., & Patten, C. A. (2022). A need for digitally inclusive health care service in the United States: Recommendations for clinicians and health care systemsLinks to an external site..?Permanente Journal,?26(3). https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/21.156

Optional resources:

Iott, B. E., Adler-Milstein, J., Gottlieb, L. M., & Pantell, M. S. (2022). Characterizing the relative frequency of clinician engagement with structured social determinants of health dataLinks to an external site..?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 30(3), 503-510. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocac251 Links to an external site.

Lyles, C. R., Sharma, A. E., Fields, J. D., Getachew, Y., Sarkar, U., & Zephyrin, L. (2022). Centering health equity in telemedicineLinks to an external site..?The Annals of Family Medicine,?20(4), 362-367. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2823

Romain, C. V., Trinidad, S., & Kotagal, M. (2022). The effect of social determinants of health on telemedicine access during the COVID-19 pandemicLinks to an external site..?Pediatric Annals,?51(8), e311-e315. https://doi.org/10.3928/19382359-20220606-04

Singh, P., Jonnalagadda, P., Morgan, E., & Fareed, N. (2022). Outpatient portal use in prenatal care: differential use by race, risk, and area social determinants of healthLinks to an external site..?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association,?29(2), 364-371. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab242

Ye, J., & Ma, Q. (2021). The effects and patterns among mobile health, social determinants, and physical activity: a nationally representative cross-sectional studyLinks to an external site.. AMIA Summits on Translational Science Proceedings, 653-662.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8378627/

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Please follow rubric:

NURS_5051_Module04_Week08_Assignment_Rubric

NURS_5051_Module04_Week08_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:· Properly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response identifies 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response identifies 3 peer-reviewed research articles and one peer-reviewed article for the Assignment.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response identifies 4 or less peer-reviewed articles

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response identifies less than 4 peer-reviewed articles or peer-reviewed articles are missing
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
40 to >35.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and thoroughly summarizes in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described….Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which fully support the response.

35 to >31.0 pts

Good

The response summarizes each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described….Accurate examples are provided which support the response provided.

31 to >27.0 pts

Fair

The response is missing one or two of the required elements or summaries are superficially addressed.

27 to >0 pts

Poor

The response is missing three or more required elements or the summaries are superficially addressed.

40 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles in a cohesive conclusion.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

Response includes a synthesis of the findings in an exceptionally well-written conclusion.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

Response includes a synthesis of the findings in a well-written conclusion.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response is missing a synthesis of the findings or the conclusion is superficial.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response is missing a synthesis of the findings and the conclusion is not accurate or is missing.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – APA:The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts

Total Points: 100