Essay on HIT Recommendation Report to the Board of Trustees for Nursing Students
This article covers a Report to Board of Trustees: HIT Recommendation.
Essay on HIT Recommendation Report to the Board of Trustees for Nursing Students-Solution
Report to Board of Trustees: HIT Recommendation
Like several other personal and social activities, healthcare has been revolutionized by the unfolding changes in information technology. People possess the same biological features that our forefathers lived tens of thousands of years ago, but modern people’s approach and their capacity to promote and restore health conditions have changed dramatically. Whether at the individual or population level, this change cannot solely be attributed to the information age as people also experience waves of change that emerged before the dawn of the information age, like the industrial revolution age. However, since health care is an information-intensive industry, the continuum of change from the time of the industrial revolution is assumed to have witnessed significant leaps resulting from disruptive information technologies. The penetration rates of information technology bypassed their critical mass thresholds as societies evolved towards the current state of the so-called information society.
The World Health Organization (2015) notes that evaluating how these information technologies impact human health is a very complex exercise. The same report acknowledges that health care is not the only determinant of the health condition but is one of the other determinants like genetics, gender, education, and the social-economic status or physical environment. As a way out, one can investigate the impact of health technology and systems in health care by evaluating how IT and systems interact with healthcare within the context of health information technology (HIT) and subsequent health information systems (HIS). Consequently, this essay purposes of presenting a report for the Board of Trustees of the selected healthcare organization that evaluates some HIS and recommends the best system for the healthcare organization that the author works for.
Part I- Evaluation of at Least Evaluate at least Two HIS
In modern times, health care organizations are continually looking for ways to improve patient outcomes and create efficient facilities. Ebnehoseini et al. (2019) note that since the hospital information system is one of the HIS that has been widely utilized, there is a need to evaluate the hospital information systems as serious concerns regarding these systems’ quality are raised. With the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009 stipulating that each hospital in the US receives about $10 million, the post-implementation evaluation of HIS success is of critical importance evaluation framework ISSM model can be utilized in the assessment process.
ISSM was developed by Delone and Mclean in the 1990s and focuses on seven dimensions: system quality, information quality, service quality, system use, usefulness, satisfaction, and net benefits. The HIS evaluated in this report is a clinical information system (CIS), which is contextually defined as an information system used to collect, integrate and distribute information to the appropriate areas of responsibility. These areas include but are not limited to clinical, billing, inventory management, research schedule, and planning purposes. The CISs evaluated using the seven parameters above are electronic health/ medical records, clinical decision support tools, and CPOE systems.
To evaluate the EHRs system, one should begin by setting the expectations so that the practice in context clearly understands and can define the reasons for implementing the EHRs system and the expected benefits. The next one has to factor in the standards compliance that revolves around patient data privacy and the interoperability and efficiency of the integrated systems. This implies that the EHRs system should be compliant with HIPAA Act. Meaningful usage and ICD new stand should be ICD-10 as mandated by HIPAA. Other evaluation components for this CIS touch on ease of use and the retrieval of the patient’s insurance details since the easier it is to retrieve the patient’s insurance records, the smoother the claims settlement process will be.
Most importantly, adopting a EHRs system should not be based on the national government’s monetary benefits but on the hospital’s need to improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness. As Gellert et al. (2015) quip, the EH/MRs replace the paper version of a patient’s medical and health history. The EHRs are designed to share data with other EHRs to enable the healthcare providers to access a patient’s healthcare data at the click of a button. On the other hand, Greenes et al. (2019) observe that to evaluate CDS’ success, one can use clinical and non-clinical domains like patient outcomes and workflow fit. The successful CDS tool implemented in a hospital is the one that solves the issue it was developed to address and can be measured and monitored.
Additionally, the end-user should feel transparent, accessible, useful, and non-interruptive. Clinical decision support systems analyze data from various clinics and administrative systems to facilitate healthcare providers’ clinical decisions. The data derived can help prepare diagnoses or predict medical events like drug interactions as they help filter data and subsequent information to help the care team offer the appropriate services to individual patients (Sutton et al., 2020). However, despite the positive impact the two CISs can have on the community hospital where I work, I believe that CPOE is the best CIS to implement.
CPOE as the Best CIS for the Community Hospital
CPOE was selected for this community hospital because it purports to enhance patient safety by eliminating transcribing errors as the provider enters the orders directly into the hospital information system. Patient safety is a pertinent healthcare issue to both patients and care providers, yet preventable medical errors continue to claim hundreds of thousands of lives of patients annually. By 2015, more than 800 000 injuries and deaths were attributed to adverse drug events like wrong medications, dosing errors, harmful medical interactions, and allergic reactions (Charles et al., 2014).
Summary of the Value of CPOE in Terms of Improvements in Healthcare Service Delivery
Ensuring providers produce standardized, legible, and complete orders means CPOEs improve patient safety by avoiding medication errors and improving the quality of care since they get the correct prescription (Rabiei et al., 2018). Preventing medication errors triggers better patient outcomes as adverse drug events are avoided. A hospital that successfully uses the CPOE system becomes more efficient because of decreased healthcare costs. Freedman (2015) posits that as good patient outcomes attract more clients to the community hospital, the facility’s productivity would increase while adequate revenue would translate to improved service ‘through the use of best available evidence-based medicine more patients express better satisfaction with the care services offered.
Summary of specific attributes of The CPOE System
Like other hospitals, the implementation of CPOE in the community hospital will improve the quality of care where patient safety has greatly been enhanced and improved efficiency and reimbursement. The CPOE system to be implemented has functionalities on patient attributes where amongst other things, patient medications are displayed when prescribing, ask for a prescription signature, and indicate any disturbance in the electronic prescription service. The system also has prescription support attributes where all medications can be renewed with one key tap, display generic drugs at the time of prescription, display all orders including current, stopped, and interrupted.
In contrast, the decision support attributes are designed to generate alerts about interactions, allergies, contraindications, and laboratory results (Rabiei et al., 2018). The CPOE system can also link with other hospital information systems’ subsystems. At this point, it is essential to acknowledge that CPOE can be implemented either with or without a full EHRs. However, it is a prerequisite for any hospital implementing CPOE to implement a clinical data repository within a patient setting. The selected facility should be implemented before full electronic charting as doing so would mean a higher value in returns on investment.
Analysis of Key Areas of Concern the Community Hospital Will Need to Address in the Implementation and Evaluation of the CPOE as the Recommended HIS
Although CPOE technology has been around since the 1970s, successful implementation of CPOE in a hospital largely relies on provider compliance, meaning that the organization must address some critical areas before implementing and evaluating the proposed project. The critical areas of concern for this medium-sized community hospital with a 120 –bed capacity located in suburban central California were high initial implementation cost, staff resistance, and productivity loss. Be that as it may, CPOE capability has been there since 2016.
With high implementation and maintenance costs, small and medium-sized hospitals like the selected hospital have been unable to afford implementation costs, leading to lower CPOE adoption rates than large hospitals. Stevens et al. (2015) also remarked that adequate healthcare professionals’ adequate training has proven costly for hospitals. For providers who are not computer literate, their resistance to learning the new technology would need to be resolved first. Lastly, workflow interruption leads to a loss of about 0.8 hours every day due to CPOE use (Nuckols et al., 2015).
In a nutshell, through HIT, electronic records continue to transform the way healthcare operates by storing all patient records and tests in a central place where the medical staff can instantly access them, thus improving physician-patient interactions. In any facility, the hospital executive is committed to using HIS that utilizes the latest technology to retrofit the selected hospital’s fleet of clinical information to comply with the current HIS.
Part II: In-depth Research Supporting the CPOE Implementation Recommendation
CPOE implementation at this 120-bed community hospital would permit the providers to order medications and laboratory tests, and radiology studies electronically within the EHRs. Furthermore, the CDS can be annexed to the CPOE system, thereby alerting the provider to patient allergies and drug interactions. The hospital’s mission is to improve the community’s health and the world by setting the standard of excellence in clinical care, research, and health education. Its goals are to push the limits of discovery to transform healthcare and inspire hope for humanity.
As you continue, premiumacademicaffiates.com has the top and most qualified writers to help with any of your assignments. All you need to do is place an order with us. (Report to Board of Trustees: HIT Recommendation)
The hospital’s core values are to be the best, be a role model, embrace and value all aspects of diversity and listen to understand and embrace other people’s distinct skills. The implementation of CPOE is compatible with and through its functionalities reinforces the organization’s mission to be the leading hospital of choice for patients in central California by excelling in healthcare. CPOE also reinforces the organizational goals’ achievement since the system would facilitate prescribing the best- evidence-based medicine in line with its four core values.
Core Functions Of the Recommended CPOE and the Specific Impact These Capabilities Will Have on the Community Hospital
Healthcare delivery in the 2020s and beyond rely heavily on HIT utilization, where EHRs and CPOEs form the bedrock of critical transformation in the healthcare industry (Saluvan & Ozonoff, 2018). The core functions of CPOE systems are to replace the paper-based ordering system in a hospital as they allow the end-users to electronically write the full range of orders, keep an online medication administration record, and review any changes made to order by successive personnel.
All these capabilities will positively impact the community hospital by reducing medical errors resulting from poor handwriting, ambiguous abbreviations, or inadequate knowledge on ordering by the provider. Ensuring that the orders are standardized, legible, and complete, the implemented CPOE system would prevent medical errors during the ordering and transcribing stages.
Evaluation of the Usability Factors You Addressed With the Healthcare Information Vendor and the Recommended Strategy to Evaluate the Usability Factor
Before evaluating usability factors of the CPOE system, the term usability in this context refers to the quality of a user’s experience when interacting with a product or a system like a website, software, device, or application. To evaluate the CPOE systems’ usability, the exercise will focus on 5Es, namely effectiveness, efficiency, engagement, error tolerance, and ease of learning. Under effectiveness evaluation, functionality testing is carried out to determine that the end-user will achieve the set goal or reduce medication errors.
To test effectiveness, one should test the CPOE features, functionality, and content. Secondly, efficiency will evaluate the speed at which the goal is achieved. An ideal assessment strategy for this factor in determining the number of strokes required to perform a specific task- the lesser the number of keystrokes, the higher the efficiency. The third usability evaluation factor is an engagement where one assesses the CPOE system’s capacity to tending the user to stay on the product at the optimal time by having attractive design elements like good visuals and micro-interactions and better graphics.
Here, the evaluating strategy is to keep an eye on average session time, bounce rate, and the total number of sessions. The fourth factor is error tolerance. The CPOE system will have the functionality to minimize errors occurring on the product through inclusions like undo or redo, among others with functionalities that enable the user to correct an error or repair it being the evaluating strategy. The fifth and last usability evaluation factors are the ease of learning, which assesses how easily the CPOE system users will use the new product and feature updates. Likewise, the recommended evaluation strategy for ease of learning is to perform thorough testing from an end user’s perspective.
The reason why the 5Es were used to evaluate the usability factors are that doing so will help the implementer to ascertain if the product meets the user expectations, identify the flaws in the product before the users find them while getting a candid picture of how successful the users are in executing their tasks.
How the CPOE System Will Integrate With Other Products and How CPOE Products Ensure Absolute Privacy and Security
The pioneer CPOEs were marketed as standalone systems, but today many of these modules are integrated into many EHRs products. When integrated into EHRs, the CPOEs allow the physician to enter patient data electronically into text boxes and drop–down menus instead of handwritten notes. Although some physicians have demonstrated some reluctance to adopt CPOE citing high implementation costs, the CPOE modules offer several benefits like meaningful use stage one and stage two requirements. Kruse et al. (2017) opine that confidentiality and security of protected health information matter as low privacy and security practices are likely to compromise the patient information stored in the HIS, exposing them to cyber-attack. Therefore CPOE modules have to adhere to HIPAA.
Vendor Support That Will Be Supplied If the CPOE System Is Adopted and Evaluation of Vendor Reliability and Stability
Some vendors disappear as soon as the CPOE system is adopted. However, the CPOE vendor selected is expected to have an account manager-type individual allocated to the community hospital for questions that arise and insight into upcoming upgrades and enhancements. The selected vendor will have high quality and reliable products, meaning deliveries are prompt, and the supplies are constant as the vendor is financially stable.
Cost Estimate of the CPOE System
The proposed CPOE system implementation led to developing a cost estimate model, which ended with the CPOE implementation costs. The Board of Trustees is reminded that capital software costs include CPOE application, medication administration, and upgrade to the pharmacy application if required. The costs included in the budget include capita costs for the hardware, software, and computer networking equipment, while the second part estimates the annual operating costs associated with maintaining the hardware, software, network equipment, and computer interface, among other devices.
CPOE Implementation costs Estimates
|Cost in thousands
|Budgeted Yes(Y) or No(N)
|Servers and OS
|Application License costs for CPOE Application License costs for BCMA
|Business continuity plans /tools
|Single sign-on and integration
|Network Install Wireless LAN Network monitoring equipment
|Implementation Vendor costs
|Training Nurse training Pharmacy training
A cost estimate of the CPOE Cost Estimate Maintenance for the Community Hospital
|Cost in ‘000of dollars $
|Budgeted Yes(Y) or No(N) Y/N
|Application software maintenance
|Third-party software maintenance
|Workstation Maintenance and spares
|Single sign-on maintenance
|Staffing Required to support CPOE
|Clinical analyst/ informaticists Pharmacy analyst CPOE Project Manager Additional help desk support Liaison
|150 75 200 150 150
|N N N N
The Selection and Acquisition Process by Developing a Timeline Noting the Major Milestones of the Process
One must acknowledge that the number of variables will either increase or decrease the time needed to implement the CPOE project. However, the six main steps are plan, design and build, test, train and go live. Step 1 called the planning stage depending on the CPOE demonstration and evaluation of the auditioned vendors. This ends when a final vendor is selected. The second step is designing and incorporates the user group of representatives, namely the project manager, technical members like the application analyst and application developer, application test engineer and consultant, and the user group comprising end-users, mainly nurses.
Thirdly the step involves building change management, which ends with fine-tuning the CPOE implementation budget by going through the vendor implementation fees, employee overtime, and extra administration staff. Step for follows with CPOE data audit and migration test and software testing. The fifth step is marked by training and preparation for the end-users through e-learning modules and seminars depending on the chosen training method. The sixth and last step involves going live with specific activities, including patient communication, staff scheduling, and the like. After going live, the CPOE system performance evaluation concludes the section and acquisition process of the CPOE health information system.
This report has established that the modern healthcare industry faces the challenge of balancing computerized technology and offering safe patient care efficiently, which is also cost-effective. The report has been outlined in two main parts. Part I evaluated two HISs (with particular reference to clinical information system like the electronic health/ medical records(EH/MRs), clinical decision support system(CDSSs), and computerized provider order entries(CPOEs) before selecting CPOE as the one which in the author’s considered opinion would work best for the selected organization. The report then summarized the value of the chosen HIS within the context of improved quality, efficiency, and satisfaction together with its specific attributes.
Next, a brief analysis of key areas of concern the hospital will need to be prepared to address during the implementation and evaluation of the selected HIS. After exploring information needed for a foundational understanding of the capabilities and the need for the proposed HIS, Part II delved into supporting literature that supports the CPOE implementation at this community hospital by, amongst other aspects, identifying the recommended HIS, evaluates the compatibility of the system to the organization’s mission, goals and values all the way to estimate a cost estimate of the HIS before describing the selection and acquisition process with a timeline denoting the significant milestones of the process.
Charles, K., Cannon, M., Hall, R., & Coustasse, A. (2014). Can a computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system prevent hospital medical errors and adverse drug events? Perspectives in Health Information Management, 11(Fall).
Dey, P. K., Bhattacharya, A., Ho, W., & Clegg, B. (2015). Strategic supplier performance evaluation: A case-based action research of a UK manufacturing organization. International Journal of Production Economics, 166, 192-214.
Ebnehoseini, Z., Tabesh, H., Deldar, K., Mostafavi, S. M., & Tara, M. (2019). Determining the hospital information system (His) success rate: Developing a new instrument and case study. Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences, 7(9), 1407.
Fischer, S. H., Rudin, R. S., Shi, Y., Shekelle, P., Amill-Rosario, A., Scanlon, D., & Damberg, C. L. (2020). Trends in computerized physician order entry by health-system affiliated ambulatory clinics in the United States, 2014–2016. BMC health services research, 20(1), 1-6.
Freedman, D. B. (2015). Towards better test utilization–strategies to improve physician ordering and their impact on patient outcomes. Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 26, 15-30.
Greenes, R. A., Bates, D. W., Kawamoto, K., Middleton, B., Osheroff, J., & Shahar, Y. (2018). Clinical decision support models and frameworks: seeking to address research issues underlying implementation successes and failures. Journal of biomedical informatics, 78, 134-143.
Kruse, C. S., Smith, B., Vanderlinden, H., & Nealand, A. (2017). Security techniques for electronic health records. Journal of medical systems, 41(8), 1-9.
Rabiei, R., Moghaddasi, H., Asadi, F., & Heydari, M. (2018). Evaluation of computerized provider order entry systems: assessing the usability of electronic prescription systems. Electronic physician, 10(8), 7196.
Russ, A. L., & Saleem, J. J. (2018). Ten factors to consider when developing usability scenarios and tasks for health information technology. Journal of biomedical informatics, 78, 123-133.
Saluvan, M., & Ozonoff, A. (2018). The functionality of hospital information systems: results from a survey of quality directors at Turkish hospitals. BMC medical informatics and decision making, 18(1), 1-12.
Sutton, R. T., Pincock, D., Baumgart, D. C., Sadowski, D. C., Fedorak, R. N., & Kroeker, K. I. (2020). An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and success strategies. NPJ digital medicine, 3(1), 1-10.
WHO (2015). Determinants of health. http://www.webcitation.org/6ckX1J6er.
Before submitting your Assessment, carefully review the rubric. This is the same rubric the assessor will use to evaluate your submission and it provides detailed criteria describing how to achieve or master the Competency. Many students find that understanding the requirements of the Assessment and the rubric criteria help them direct their focus and use their time most productively.
Access the following to complete this Assessment:
In this Assessment, you have been tasked with preparing a report for the Board of Trustees that evaluates several healthcare information systems and recommends the best system for your healthcare organization. Knowing that leadership experiences with health information systems vary widely, you will develop a report proposing your healthcare information system recommendation. You understand that for such an expensive and complex purchase, in-depth research must be disseminated beyond a simple recommendation. Your first objective, though, is to ensure that leadership approaches the acquisition with a solid understanding of the basic issues. Your report should be appropriate to the audience, succinct, and easily understood.
As you continue, premiumacademicaffiates.com has the top and most qualified writers to help with any of your assignments. All you need to do is place an order with us. (Report to Board of Trustees: HIT Recommendation)
- Report to Board of Trustees: HIT Recommendation
- To begin your report:
- Evaluate at least two healthcare information systems. Select one you think works best for the organization. Introduce and define the healthcare information system you selected. Explain core functions of the system and the impact these capabilities can have on the organization.
- Summarize the value of the healthcare information system in terms of:
- Improved quality, outcomes, and safety
- Improved efficiency, productivity, and cost reduction
- Improved service and satisfaction
- Summarize specific attributes of this system that are particularly noteworthy:
- Unique abilities to interface with currently implemented systems
- Alignments with other organizations within a system
- Briefly analyze key areas of concern the organization will need to be prepared to address in the implementation and evaluation of the healthcare information system.
- Now that board members have a foundational understanding of the capabilities of—and need for—the healthcare information system, you must provide more in-depth research to support your recommendation by including the following:
- Identify the healthcare information system you recommend.
- Evaluate how the health information system is compatible to the organization’s mission, goals, and values.
- Evaluate the core functions of the recommended healthcare information system and the specific impact these capabilities will have on the organization.
- Evaluate the usability factors you addressed with the healthcare information vendor. Explain why you chose to address these factors.
- Recommend strategies for evaluating the healthcare information system’s usability.
- Explain how the healthcare information system will integrate with other products.
- Explain how this system ensures absolute privacy and security.
- Describe the vendor support that will be supplied if the system is adopted.
- Evaluate vendor reliability and stability.
- Provide a cost estimate of the healthcare information system.
- Describe the selection and acquisition process by developing a timeline noting the major milestones of the process.
- To begin your report:
1. Does hit rate matter for recommendation system?
RATING HIT RATE Another way to look at Hit Rate — Break it down by predicted rating score. Note: Small improvements in MSE leads to large improvements in Hit Rate. It means that MSE matters as well. But it turns out that we can build a Recommendation System with high Hit Rate but poor RMSE.
2. How many hits are generated from top N recommendations?
If generated top N recommendations contain something that users rated — 1 hit! Note: While computing Hit Rate, priority is given more to the top N list, not to the user. Hit Rate is easy to understand but measuring it is tricky.
3. How to evaluate top-10 recommendation?
To evaluate top-10, we use hit rate, that is, if a user rated one of the top-10 we recommended, we consider it is a “hit”. The process of compute hit rate for a single user: Find all items in this user’s history in the training data. Intentionally remove one of these items ( Leave-One-Out cross-validation).
How to measure Hit rate?
Hit Rate is easy to understand but measuring it is tricky. Best way to measure it is using Leave One Out Cross-Validation. LEAVE ONE OUT CROSS VALIDATION: We compute the top N recommendation list for each user in training data and intentionally remove one of those items form user’s training data.