design a software system , a device or website that can help to decrease the wait time in the EMR

Prepare a PowerPoint presentation of 10-15 slides that covers all major sections of your final capstone project paper.Describe a health care barrier or issue that needs to be addressed.
include all of the components written to date (incorporating revisions), as well as the remaining sections. These sections include:
Title Page
Introduction
Problem or Issue
Proposed Solution
Implementation Plan
Timeline
Evaluation Plan
Dissemination Plan
Conclusion/Summary
Reference Page
Appendices (i.e., Literature Evaluation Table)
Describe your proposed solution and how the proposed solution will resolve a barrier or issue in health care.
Justify major organizational resources that may be needed to accomplish changes.
Identify strategies to create a clear vision for internal and external stakeholders.
Identify stakeholders with expertise to create effective work groups or collaborators.
Discuss the expected outcomes for you initiating your proposal.

The PowerPoint presentation should cover all major sections referenced in your Benchmark-Final Capstone Project Paper. In addition, include a slide that summarizes plans for disseminating evidence. Include the following:

Professional organizations, conferences, journals, or employers you would present your findings to.
One professional publication or conference in your dissemination plan and explain why you chose this professional venue over others.
Include slide notes in which you annotate the explanation of the information in each slide.

Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” provided in the study materials, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.

While APA format is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and references should be presented using APA documentation guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

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

Rubric

Content Sections From the Benchmark Capstone Project Paper
37.5 points

Dissemination Plan for Professional Organizations, Conferences, Journals, or Employers
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Dissemination Plan for Professional Organizations, Conferences, Journals, or Employers

5. Excellent
7.5 points
The description of the dissemination plan for professional organizations, conferences, journals, or employers is thorough.

4. Good
6.38 points
The description of the dissemination plan for professional organizations, conferences, journals, or employers is detailed.

3. Satifactory
5.63 points
The description of the dissemination plan for professional organizations, conferences, journals, or employers is present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.88 points
The description of the dissemination plan for professional organizations, conferences, journals, or employers is present but lacks detail or evidence.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The description of the dissemination plan for professional organizations, conferences, journals, or employers is not present.

Justification of Dissemination Plan for Professional Publication or Conference
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Justification of Dissemination Plan for Professional Publication or Conference

5. Excellent
7.5 points
The justification of dissemination plan for a professional publication or conference is thorough.

4. Good
6.38 points
The justification of dissemination plan for a professional publication or conference is detailed.

3. Satifactory
5.63 points
The justification of dissemination plan for a professional publication or conference is present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.88 points
The justification of dissemination plan for a professional publication or conference is present but lacks detail or evidence.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The justification of dissemination plan for a professional publication or conference is not present.

Dissemination Plan for Career Readiness
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Dissemination Plan for Career Readiness

5. Excellent
7.5 points
The explanation of dissemination plan for career readiness is thorough.

4. Good
6.38 points
The explanation of dissemination plan for career readiness is detailed.

3. Satifactory
5.63 points
The explanation of dissemination plan for career readiness is present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.88 points
The explanation of dissemination plan for career readiness is present but lacks detail or evidence.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The explanation of dissemination plan for career readiness is not present.

Presentation of Content
45 points
Criteria Description
Presentation of Content

5. Excellent
45 points
The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea. Persuasive, authoritative information from at least the minimum required number of reliable, credible sources is included.

4. Good
38.25 points
The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Persuasive information is included from the minimum required number of reliable sources.

3. Satifactory
33.75 points
The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other. Some persuasive information from the minimum required number of reliable sources is included.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
29.25 points
The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Some persuasive information from reliable sources is included. Some persuasive information is included, but the minimum required number of sources may not be met, and information may be unreliable or lack credibility.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information is unclear. Little or no persuasive information from reliable sources is included.

Layout
15 points
Criteria Description
Layout

5. Excellent
15 points
The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.

4. Good
12.75 points
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.

3. Satifactory
11.25 points
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
9.75 points
The layout shows some structure but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

Language Use and Audience Awareness
15 points
Criteria Description
Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.

5. Excellent
15 points
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

4. Good
12.75 points
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

3. Satifactory
11.25 points
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
9.75 points
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.

Mechanics of Writing
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use.

5. Excellent
7.5 points
Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.

4. Good
6.38 points
Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.

3. Satifactory
5.63 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.88 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Documentation of Sources
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.

5. Excellent
7.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Good
6.38 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Satifactory
5.63 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.88 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.

ANSWER

 

 

 

 

 

Decrease Wait Time in the Emergency Rooms

 

Anastasie Sakina

Grand Canyon University

HLT-494

Pascale Lee

10/24/2021

 

 

Introduction

Long wait time is a prevalent problem among various Emergency departments. Most patients complain of long wait times, as they usually have to wait several hours before they receive the proper treatment. For a patient to be seen within a reasonable amount of time, they would have to go to the Emergency department during off-peak hours or on a holiday. Still, these patients are of precarious condition and cannot afford to wait until the next day for an appointment with their primary care physician. This project will offer a solution to long wait times in emergency departments to improve health outcomes.

Health Issue

Long wait times have resulted to several grievances from patients, that have been escalating over the years. The majority of the patients tend to go to the ED when they are unstable, but this doesn’t stop them from waiting several hours before being seen. Long wait times in emergency departments have shown to have several adverse effects on patients who are already suffering from various conditions (Ramsey et al., 2018). Some of these changes include becoming more severely injured due to lack of immediate care, delay in diagnosis or treatment, death of the patient, and increase in cost of healthcare services.

The high number attendance, ageing population, disease complexities and manpower limitations have made it difficult to reduce the wait times in emergency rooms. Some of the factors that lead to long wait times are overcrowding, understaffing, and inexperienced staff (Recio-Saucedo et al., 2015). Inadequate staffing is a major factor for the long wait times. It is no secret that the healthcare system has been severely understaffed; hospitals are forced to operate with fewer staff than what they need, this results in long hours of work, leading to overworked and tired doctors.

Patients who have to wait a long time before being seen, may begin to lose hope on receiving proper care or treatment. This is especially true for patients already experiencing an emergency condition such as acute chest pain, difficulty breathing, and serious bleeding. Patients with these conditions would usually be seen right away by a triage nurse because their life may depend on it, but patients whose conditions are not urgent will often find themselves waiting several hours. In some cases, these patients become more injured due to the lack of immediate attention from medical professionals. Those who experience more severe injuries due to delay in care typically require additional treatments once they are finally seen by medical staff increasing healthcare costs.

Proposed solution

Emergency departments (EDs) in hospitals are areas that can be exceptionally stressful and chaotic. Considerably, healthcare providers encounter workload challenges that hinder efficiency in healthcare provision. It has been estimated that ED physicians and nurses manage over 200 patients per day on average. With such a high patient load, it becomes increasingly difficult to ensure all patients receive the proper attention and care they require when they present in an ED. Adequate staffing is the most suitable intervention in reducing delays in emergency departments and boosting performance (Recio-Saucedo et al., 2015). Adequate staffing is a solution to the issue of long wait times in emergency rooms. Adequate staffing entails placing nurses, physician assistants, and doctors at the point of care based upon each patient’s understanding or severity. Adequate staffing in the emergency department means having sufficient nurses and other providers (including physicians and physician assistants) to provide quality care. The exact number of patients a nurse can adequately care for at any one time varies depending on the patient’s understanding, but research shows that higher numbers of nurses result in better outcomes for patients. By having enough staff on duty, hospitals can limit the variability in nursing skill mix and team structure, affecting the flow, safety, and satisfaction.

Adequate staffing in emergency rooms will improve patient safety, satisfaction, and clinical outcomes due to reduced wait times and better healthcare. Adequate staffing maintains the flow of patients through the emergency department, limits waiting times for patients, and reduces stress on staff. Ideally, emergency department flow relies upon many factors, including nursing skill mix, team structure, staffing ratios, and patient acuity (Liu and Xie, 2018). Therefore, the number of healthcare providers determines the number of patients seen, waiting times, and patient satisfaction. Emergency departments that do not meet these minimum staffing ratios can experience increased infection rates, accidents, falls, increased patient wait times, poorer quality of care, and adverse events.

Organizational Resources

The proposed change will require financial resources, recruitment resources, training resources, and a staffing model. The recruitment resources will be used to source high-quality healthcare providers. For instance, the employee referral program, a structured and organized program, will be used to recommend suitable candidates for positions in the emergency departments. The training resources will include online and onsite education programs for the healthcare providers and nurses to improve their skills and knowledge, which will reduce the amount of time they spend on offering care for a single patient. The staffing model is designed to ensure that the nursing staff qualification, managers, and clinical expertise are consistent with the patient care needs and quality of care. This will also offer guidance on the nurse-patient rations. Ideally, the staffing model will offer guidelines and rules determining the nurses required to offer patient care in emergency rooms.

Strategies for a Clear Vision

For the change to be implemented, there is a need to have a clear vision for the external and internal stakeholders. The most important thing is to ensure that all the stakeholders understand the change and their part in the change process. Clear communication of the health issue, the solution, and the benefits will be paramount to gaining support from stakeholders. Therefore, communicating the vision will need creating a schedule of dates, meetings, and communication plans. Indicating to the stakeholders the concrete targets for the vision will create a clear understanding of how the vision will be achieved.

Effective Stakeholders

Various stakeholders will be required for strategizing, implementing, and monitoring the change. These stakeholders will include the government, healthcare organizations, healthcare professionals, pharmaceutical firms, insurance companies, patients, and the community. Each of these stakeholders will help address the problem of long wait times in ED and offer the best solutions and approaches for this problem. The stakeholders will work in groups depending on their knowledge, skills, and scope of practice.

Expected Outcomes

Frequently, the emergency rooms are filled with many patients, making it difficult for the healthcare providers to attend to all patients within the time frame and promptly. Adequate staffing is a low-cost intervention aimed at reducing wait time in the emergency department and facilitating equitable workload. The supply of adequate staff will balance the care provider-patient ratio, thus reducing the rates of mortality and morbidity associated with wait times in emergency departments. Reduced wait times will also be expected to lower the cost of healthcare, resulting from long wait times in ED.

 

 

References

Liu, R., & Xie, X. (2018). Physician staffing for emergency departments with time-varying demand. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 30(3), 588-607.

Ramsey, Z., Palter, J. S., Hardwick, J., Moskoff, J., Christian, E. L., & Bailitz, J. (2018). Decreased nursing staffing adversely affects emergency department throughput metrics. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 19(3), 496.

Recio-Saucedo, A., Pope, C., Dall’Ora, C., Griffiths, P., Jones, J., Crouch, R., & Drennan, J. (2015). Safe staffing for nursing in emergency departments: evidence review. Emergency Medicine Journal, 32(11), 888-894.