Module 5 - SLP
QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
SLP: Final Part
This is the final part of applying information that you gained in your interview of a healthcare manager. Please answer the following questions:
- Describe the program's quality improvement model.
- Discuss with your interviewee procedures used to address quality assurance in the healthcare program.
- Discuss what issues have impacted quality of services (e.g. economics, human error, technology, etc.)
- Determine how accountability for quality assurance services is assessed.
- What measures are in place to ensure that quality services are provided by employees of the program?
You may also want to include other themes that were presented in this module related to quality assurance and accountability. Please summarize how conducting this interview helped you understand the role of the healthcare manager in being responsible for the delivery of effective and efficient healthcare services.
SLP Assignment Expectations
- Please make sure that you include scholarly references to support your interview.
- Be sure to conduct additional research to gather sufficient information to familiarize yourself with the facts of the case and be sure to justify/support your position.
- Limit your responses to aÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â maximum of three pages.
- Please support your discussions with scholarly support (3-5 references). Be sure to properly cite all references.
this is a copy of module 4 SLP paper for you review
antimicrobial stewardship is an imperative element in medical care institutions. According to (Yam et.al, 2012), there has been a substantial increment in mortality rate in rural hospitals and, therefore, the implementation of the Antimicrobial stewardship is paramount. Statistics was done by (National Research Council 2009) to assess the pharmacist's involvement in antimicrobial stewardship ascertained that only 5 percent of the total number of hospitals reported 24 hours pharmacist availability. Notably, only 71 percent had measures related to antimicrobial use and monitoring. Also, only 28 percent had systems in place for monitoring compliance with existing policies. The survey proved that only 30 percent of the hospitals had an established method of recommending antimicrobial therapy changes based on susceptibility test results, and less than 30% had the ability to monitor prescriber compliance with pharmacist-recommended doses. A considerable number of the survey respondents indicated that they did not have the essential components of AMS programs outlined by various organizations (Yam et.al, 2012).
According to (Yam et.al, 2012) most of the health institutions were not monitoring antimicrobial use. Moreover, there was no clinical surveillance system that would adequately support such monitoring. Notably, the hospitals did not have a designated clinical pharmacist position in the patient's care unit. The principal aim if the program was to make Creative use of a remotely located physician specialist in ID, improvement of existing information technology, and education and training of pharmacists to provide daily antimicrobial reviews were the primary strategies employed to provide a strong AMS program suitable for use in a rural setting (Langbein, Felbinger, 2006).
When choosing an evaluation approach, it is imperative for a manager to review three major critical types of evaluation. The assessment plan should address these major considerations; goal based evaluation, process-based assessment, and outcome-based evaluation. In the Goal-based assessment, frequent projects are built up to meet one or more particular objectives. These goals are regularly portrayed in the first program plans. Goal-based assessments assess the degree to which projects are meeting foreordained objectives.
Process-based assessments are adapted to entirely seeing how a system functions - how can it deliver that outcomes that it does. These assessments are valuable if projects are long-standing and have changed throughout the years. The representatives or clients report countless about the system, there seem, by all accounts, to be vast inefficiencies in conveying system administrations and they are additionally helpful for precisely depicting to outside parties how a project actually works. Numerous inquiries may be tended to in a process assessment. These questions can be chosen by deliberately considering what is vital to think about the project.
According to (Langbein, Felbinger 2006), Program evaluation with results, is progressively essential for nonprofits and requested by funders. An outcome-based assessment encourages examining as to whether your association is truly doing the right program exercises to achieve the results you accept to be required by your customers. Results are advantages to customers from cooperation in the system. Results are frequently mistaken for system yields or units of administrations, e.g., the quantity of clients who experienced a project.
Goal-based evaluation is paramount in any organization as it fosters unity among the workers in achieving the overall goal of the organization. Moreover, it assists the company to prioritize and focus on important factors within the organization. Contrarily, goal-based evaluation has its fair share of limitations. Not all employees share a common objective concerning the prosperity of the organization. Materialistic desires drive a substantial number of workers and aim to get the best out of themselves from the business.
Process-based assessment aims to comprehend fully how a program works. It helps the employees determine the needs of the customers. The prosperity of business solely depends on customer satisfaction. Process- based evaluation aids in giving the customers the best services or products. However, the process might be cost intensive as it involves conducting a substantial number of surveys.
According to (Langbein, Felbinger 2006) outcome evaluation facilitates determining if the organization has taken the right measures in realizing its objectives. Notably, the assessment helps in scrutinizing and evaluating the weak areas or actions that were in the initial plan and have not been implemented. Moreover, it helps in measuring the progress of an organization within a given period. On the other hand akin to process-based evaluation, it involves numerous researches determining the outcomes of the initial strategy.
In the article by (Yam el al. 2012), the goal-based evaluation is evident. The primary objective was to determine and monitor the used of antimicrobial in the clinical centers. After reviewing data, a novel process for AMS was developed. Its main purpose was to follow the standard guidelines. However, this was not the best strategy for implementing the program. It would be imperative to increase the 5 percent of the number of hospitals with 24 hours pharmacist services and reinforce the implementation of the policies related to microbial use and monitoring. The pharmacistsÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ reviews concerning microbial therapy drastically increased within the first year after implementation (Yam et.al, 2012). It would be imperative to implement the same strategy in all rural hospitals in order to render quality health services.
Langbein, L. I., & Felbinger, C. L. (2006). Public program evaluation: A statistical guide
Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
National Research Council (U.S.). (2009). The Health Hazard Evaluation Program at NIOSH:
Reviews of research programs of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
United States. (2009). Hearing to review the state of health care in rural areas and the role of
federal programs in addressing rural health care needs: Hearing before the Subcommittee on
Specialty Crops, Rural Develop
Yam, P., Fales, D., Jemison, J., Gillum, M., & Bernstein, M. (2012). Implementation of an
antimicrobial stewardship program in a rural hospital. American Journal Of Health-
System Pharmacy,69(13), 1142-1148.
|Due By (Pacific Time)
||09/09/2015 09:00 am