NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 4 Quality Improvement Proposal

Name

Capella university

NURS-FPX 8010 Executive Leadership in Contemporary Nursing

Prof. Name

Date

Quality Improvement Proposal

[Slide 1] Hi everyone! My name is______. Today, I am presenting the Quality Improvement (QI) proposal for Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center (OSUWMC). 

[Slide 2] The QI proposal centers on investing in staff growth, research, and innovation to offer health and wellness to the Ohio community by raising the medical care standards of OSUWMC. The OSUWMC is committed to improving the health of Ohio through equitable and efficient patient care, education, and research (Ohio State Medical Center, n.d.). The OSUWMC has developed strategic priorities, which are crucial for accomplishing the organization’s overarching objectives to deliver efficient care to the Ohio community and improve patient satisfaction.

The QI proposal emphasizes the strategic priority of “knowledge and education of staff and improves expertise” and “promoting research and innovation” to enhance the well-being and patient care through improved medical care standards of OSUWMC. Strategic priority guides the OSUWMC in fulfilling its mission and achieving its long-term goals. Aligning departmental priorities with corporate goals enables OSUWMC to overcome barriers and improve its performance by enhancing patient outcomes (Dion & Evans, 2024).

Rationale of Strategic Priority

[Slide 3] Developing a strategic priority enables medical organizations to make well-informed decisions that lead to the achievement of their objectives. Prioritizing the organization’s initiatives is crucial for implementing successful changes that enhance healthcare and patient satisfaction. Evidence supports the strategic priority of developing staff abilities and knowledge (Mlambo et al., 2021).

Educated staff can assist in delivering secure and efficient care to patients, contributing to improved health outcomes and medical organizational reputation. The justification for prioritization is supported by evidence literature, as research demonstrated the necessity of competent and trained personnel for medical care in health organizations (Mlambo et al., 2021). For instance, Konttila et al. (2019), asserted that improved knowledge and skills related to innovative technologies are crucial to providing high-quality care and improving patient satisfaction.

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 4 Quality Improvement Proposal

Opportunities for ongoing education and growth enable employees to use new technologies to care for patients. Prioritizing employee skills and talents as a strategic priority has logical repercussions and outcomes. For example, the trained staff contributes to effective patient care that represents the hospital’s dedication to upholding efficient guidelines (Hoed et al., 2022). Mlambo et al. (2020), highlighted that medical personnel can update their abilities through education and Continued Professional Development (CPD). CPD assists health organizations like OSUWMC to improve healthcare standards. Investing in the training program for employees allows the medical center to promote a culture of research and innovation (Hoed et al., 2022). 

Evidence supports the strategic priority of improving research and innovation. Innovations in healthcare organizations drive treatment procedure improvement, leading to higher service quality (Flessa & Huebner, 2021). Healthcare research and innovation help introduce novel services and products while also improving the delivery of care through the integration of new technologies. The justification for prioritization is supported by evidence literature, as research demonstrated that innovation and conducting research in healthcare improves the health organization’s performance.

For instance, Akinwale and AboAlsamh (2023), stated that innovation in technology leads to improved medical outcomes, efficient care, and improved effectiveness for patients and medical organizations. The implication of strategic priority underlines the significance of skilled employees and therapeutic innovation in the provision of healthcare, which improves health. The OSUWMC fosters a culture of ongoing education, research, and innovation, ensuring that personnel remain at the cutting edge of medical practice, leading to favorable consequences for patients and the medical organization.

SWOT Analysis for Chosen Strategic Priority

[Slide 4] OSUWMC’s ability to provide safe and effective care to the Ohio community is dependent on maintaining efficient medical practices and patient satisfaction. The fundamental strategic aim is to increase employee abilities and expertise through research and innovation to sustain a talented staff at OSUWMC. SWOT analysis offers useful information about the significance and opportunities for the advancement of strategic priorities (Siddiqui, 2021). SWOT is an abbreviation for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. The SWOT structure is a strategic evaluation method that allows the investigation of the difficulties between external factors and internal abilities and competencies for facilitating effective strategic planning (Siddiqui, 2021). 

Strengths

Investing in staff growth and clinical research programs improves employee performance during healthcare. Awareness and education enable personnel to deliver secure treatment, which enhances the well-being of patients. Furthermore, boosting staff abilities leads to increased fulfillment with work, which has an advantageous influence on organizational talent culture (Konttila et al., 2019). Improving clinical research and adopting technology increases efficiency and service quality, which aligns with the organization’s strategic aim of providing high-quality medical care. Training employees through education and awareness also promotes an atmosphere of research and innovation. Furthermore, investing in research and innovation helps to improve employees’ ability to fulfill their duties by equipping them with advanced clinical practices. Technological innovations enhance the medical delivery process, harmonizing with the organization’s strategic aim of improving patients’ health and wellness (Akinwale & AboAlsamh, 2023). 

Weaknesses

The QI program also has significant shortcomings, like funding limits. Implementing employee growth and technology integration programs necessitates resources that exceed the OSUWMC’s budget and assets. Furthermore, specific stakeholders can be reluctant to engage in employee growth efforts because of fear of change and workload (Cheraghi et al., 2023). The employee’s unwillingness to take part in education sessions also hinders the organization’s capacity to keep competent employees. Moreover, medical staff also act as a barrier because of a lack of skills and knowledge. They can exhibit a negative attitude toward the adoption of innovative technologies in clinical care, negatively impacting the achievement of strategic goals (Pakulska & Religioni, 2023).

Opportunities

The QI project offers an opportunity to establish a competent staff that will boost the organization’s image and performance. Investing in employee training allows OSUWMC to sustain educated employees who contribute to managing the Ohio community’s medical demands (Makuku & Mosadeghrad, 2022). The QI initiative supports investments in innovation and research to provide high-quality healthcare. Partnerships with clinical research institutions also aid in the scheduling of resources to support hospital patient care activities. Multidisciplinary cooperation supports innovative efforts to improve clinical practices (Shakhman et al., 2020).

Threats

Possible risks include a shortage of resources, which inhibits firms from engaging in research innovation and employee development initiatives. Lack of information and training impedes the retention of competent employees and reduces organizational efficiency (Renukappa et al., 2023). Furthermore, internal constraints like political instability and opposition from prominent stakeholders impede initiatives to prioritize research, innovation initiatives, and employee training, impacting the organization’s performance (Cheraghi et al., 2023). External factors like financial crises and changes in government medical policy can also limit organizations like OSUWMC’s capacity to devote funds to QI initiatives (Adebisi et al., 2020). Managing these threats is vital for effectively implementing strategic approaches. 

Key Performance Indicators

[slide 5] Identifying Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) is required to assess the efficacy of QI initiatives in organizations such as OSUWMC (Housawi et al., 2020). The endeavor invests in employee education and awareness, as well as research and innovation implementation for QI. Patient satisfaction is the first KPI that assists in assessing the efficacy of the proposed plan. Enhanced staff understanding and abilities allow them to deliver more effective care, leading to better patient satisfaction (Konttila et al., 2019). Passing rates for advanced certificates can be used to assess the effectiveness of educational programs.

The KPI examines whether having competent employees at OSUWMC improves patient satisfaction. The second KPI is OSUWMC’s research funding, which helps to identify innovations and research-related activities. Improved research and the adoption of novel technology reform health organizations’ clinical procedures, resulting in high-quality care (Flessa & Huebner, 2021). The last KPI measures OSUWMC’s fiscal stability following the implementation of QI activities. Training sessions and modern technologies assist personnel in providing appropriate treatment to patients in the OSUWMC, lowering the likelihood of medical issues Effective care increases patient influx in medical facilities, leading to revenue (Akinwale & AboAlsamh, 2023).

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 4 Quality Improvement Proposal

The current metrics, such as patient satisfaction, highlight the need for QI initiatives. Evaluation informed that patient satisfaction score rate of 60%. The desired outcome is to improve the patient satisfaction score to 90% within two years, improving healthcare service quality through education and training initiatives. Another KPI is research funding, which requires a QI strategy.

The present research funding rate is below 3%. The desired aim is to increase research funding by 10% per year. These indicators are consistent with the strategic objectives and department balance scorecard, which assist in assessing the efficacy of QI programs. These KPIs are quantifiable metrics that are consistent with the QI initiative’s strategic aims (Housawi et al., 2020). Analyzing indicators frequently facilitates assessing the effectiveness of OSUWMC’s QI initiatives to foster ongoing advancement in healthcare.

Stakeholder Collaboration and Feedback

[Slide 6] Identifying and collaborating with stakeholders is critical to implementing the QI effort at OSUWMC. The process of cooperating with stakeholders involves multiple steps, such as stakeholder recognition, team conversations, and feedback (Murphy et al., 2021). The initial step is to identify significant stakeholders, including medical professionals, finance staff, administrators, legislators, information technology personnel, and community groups. The second phase is collaboration to involve stakeholders in the QI program, which includes training for staff, research, and technology adoption initiatives to improve health outcomes (Murphy et al., 2021). An open and transparent communication approach will be employed to interact with stakeholders effectively (Wei et al., 2020). Stakeholder participation through various methods, such as community meetings and online discussions, aids in clarifying the different viewpoints of stakeholders. The third phase is feedback, assisting in the identification of prevalent trends and aspects of conflict (Brown et al. 2019).

 Establishing open communication with stakeholders throughout the program helps keep them informed about achievements and areas for further development (Wei et al., 2020). Stakeholder input helps OSUWMC refine its QI programs in education, training, and research. Coordinating with stakeholders guarantees that various viewpoints and aspects are addressed, resulting in improved sustainability efforts. Engaging stakeholders enables OSUWMC to gain buy-in for anticipated modifications, which will promote continuous enhancement. Recognizing stakeholder support raises the likelihood of success, resulting in improved performance in medical care (Renukappa et al., 2022).

Change Theory

[Slide 7] The Lewin Change Model provides a practical framework for implementing transformation through QI initiatives within the OSUWMC. The Lewin model aims to promote research improvement and educate staff to improve expertise and care standards. The change model aids in comprehending the requirement for change and implementing suitable adjustments to attain the desired results. The change model has three stages: unfreeze, change, and refreeze (Shafy et al., 2019). During the unfreeze stage, leadership determines the requirements for change and encourages stakeholder collaboration to enhance the standard of healthcare. Participating with stakeholders in discussions reduces reluctance to change and enhances support for the QI endeavor (Murphy et al., 2021).

During the change stage, leadership executes interventions and measures to improve the standard of care. focusing on education and training to improve staff growth and productivity to deliver high-quality care. Implementing interventions for efficient technology adoption and enhancing research, considering funding resources (Akinwale & AboAlsamh, 2023).  Employing these interventions enables employees to provide evidence-based treatment and enhance the well-being of patients. During the freeze stage, leadership strengthens improvements to ensure long-term success. The emphasis will be on updating current legislation to encourage ongoing enhancement by advocating for the implementation of new programs in medical facilities (Gonzalez et al., 2020).

Interpretation

[Slide 8] Lewin’s change model promotes change by involving stakeholders in making decisions. Complete knowledge regarding the change is required to build support for the proposed plan. The Lewin model assists change agents in overcoming the obstacles to executing QI efforts in hospitals. The approach offers an organized strategy for analyzing, managing, and encouraging change. Incorporating change contributes to the improvement of OSUWMC’s long-term medical care. The deliberate adoption of this transformation enables leadership to create a culture of innovation in medical services (Shafy et al., 2019).

Policy Recommendation

[Slide 9] Policy suggestions have been offered to promote research advancement and employee growth at OSUWMC, both of which contribute to providing patients with secure and efficient care and are consistent with the objectives of the planned QI project. To promote a planned QI program for research improvement and employee development in healthcare, encouraging government financial allocation is critical to fostering a research and education culture among medical staff (Adebisi et al., 2020).

Furthermore, accreditation requirements should be developed to promote research advancement, personnel growth, and ongoing education in hospitals to ensure quality care for patients (Vinas et al., 2020). Promoting monetary benefits for hospitals that undertake ongoing training programs for staff. Finally, building relationships between medical and research institutions to increase clinical research and refine medical procedures in hospitals like OSUWMC, providing high-quality treatment (Lorts et al., 2020).

Implications and Justification

[Slide 10] Policy proposals have an impact on OSUWMC’s medical care and contribute to higher levels of care quality. Focusing on employee education and clinical research provides personnel with the expertise and knowledge they need to enhance healthcare standards (Adebisi et al., 2020). Learning and development initiatives strengthen their ability to provide adequate care. Accreditation requirements further highlight that organizations make improvements to offer qualified employees in the medical system (Vinas et al., 2020). Legislators prefer to give incentives to those hospitals that spend on research and employee training.

Learning and research ensure that personnel have skills and capacities, resulting in enhanced patient satisfaction and safety (Konttila et al., 2019). Improving clinical research enables medical staff to provide high-quality care. In addition, collaboration among hospitals and academic and research centers is critical for employee growth and improving clinical care. Collaboration allows to fulfill organizational goals. The policy repercussions assist in promoting the development of employee capacities and innovative strategies, resulting in efficient care services at OSUWMC. (Lorts et al., 2020).

Conclusion

[Slide 11] The QI proposal concentrates on investing in employee development and research to improve OSUWMC’s quality of care. A SWOT evaluation provides significant insights into the barriers and opportunities for the advancement of strategic priorities. Moreover, stakeholder engagement is critical to accomplishing the QI effort at the OSUWMC. The Lewin change model provides a suitable structure for implementing transformation in the OSUWMC.

References

Adebisi, Y. A., Umah, J. O., Olaoye, O. C., Alaran, A. J., Sina-Odunsi, A. B., & Lucero-Prisno III, D. E. (2020). Assessment of health budgetary allocation and expenditure toward achieving universal health coverage in Nigeria. International Journal of Health and Life Sciences, 6(2), e102552. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijhls.102552

Akinwale, Y. O., & AboAlsamh, H. M. (2023). Technology innovation and healthcare performance among healthcare organizations in Saudi Arabia: A structural equation model analysis. Sustainability, 15(5), 3962–3962. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15053962

Brown, B., Gude, W. T., Blakeman, T., van der Veer, S. N., Ivers, N., Francis, J. J., & Daker-White, G. (2019). Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT): A new theory for designing, implementing, and evaluating feedback in health care based on a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Implementation Science, 14, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-019-0883-5

Cheraghi, R., Ebrahimi, H., Kheibar, N., & Sahebihagh, M. H. (2023). Reasons for resistance to change in nursing: An integrative review. BioMed Central Nursing, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01460-0

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 4 Quality Improvement Proposal

Dion, H., & Evans, M. (2024). Strategic frameworks for sustainability and corporate governance in healthcare facilities; approaches to energy-efficient hospital management. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 31(2), 353-390. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-04-2022-0219

Flessa, S., & Huebner, C. (2021). Innovations in health care—A conceptual framework. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(19), 10026. https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fijerph181910026

Gonzalez, C., Benrimoj, S. I., Scerri, M., & Garcia-Cardenas, V. (2020). Sustainability of innovations in healthcare: A systematic review and conceptual framework for professional pharmacy services. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 16(10), 1331-1343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.01.015

Hoed, M. W., Backhaus, R., de Vries, E., Hamers, J. P. H., & Daniëls, R. (2022). Factors contributing to innovation readiness in health care organizations: A scoping review. BioMed Central Health Services Research, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08185-x

Housawi, A., Al Amoudi, A., Alsaywid, B., Lytras, M., bin Μoreba, Y. H., Abuznadah, W., & Alhaidar, S. A. (2020). Evaluation of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for sustainable postgraduate medical training: An opportunity for implementing an innovative approach to advance the quality of training programs at the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS). Sustainability, 12(19), 8030. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198030

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 4 Quality Improvement Proposal

Konttila, J., Siira, H., Kyngäs, H., Lahtinen, M., Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., & Mikkonen, K. (2019). Healthcare professionals’ competence in digitalisation: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 28(5-6), 745-761. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14710

Lorts, A., Smyth, L., Gajarski, R. J., VanderPluym, C. J., Mehegan, M., Villa, C. R., & Rosenthal, D. N. (2020). The creation of a pediatric health care learning network: The action quality improvement collaborative. Asaio Journal, 66(4), 441-446. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAT.0000000000001133

Makuku, R., & Mosadeghrad, A. M. (2022). Health workforce retention in low-income settings: An application of the Root Stem Model. Journal of Public Health Policy, 43(3), 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-022-00361-x

Mlambo, M., Silén, C., & McGrath, C. (2021). Lifelong learning and nurses’ continuing professional development, a metasynthesis of the literature. BioMed Central Nursing, 20, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00579-2

Murphy, J., Qureshi, O., Tarik Endale, Georgina Miguel Esponda, Soumitra Pathare, Eaton, J., Mary De Silva, & Ryan, G. (2021). Barriers and drivers to stakeholder engagement in global mental health projects. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-021-00458-y

Ohio State Medical Center. (n.d.). Strategic plan. Wexnermedical.osu.edu. https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/about-us/strategic-plan 

Pakulska, T., & Religioni, U. (2023). Implementation of technology in healthcare entities–barriers and success factors. Journal of Medical Economics, 26(1), 821-823. https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2023.2226537

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 4 Quality Improvement Proposal

Renukappa, S., Mudiyi, P., Suresh, S., Abdalla, W., & Subbarao, C. (2022). Evaluation of challenges for adoption of smart healthcare strategies. Smart Health, 26, 100330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smhl.2022.100330

Shafy, A. I., Zapke, J., Sargeant, D., Prince, J. M., & Christopherson, N. A. (2019). Decreased pediatric trauma length of stay and improved disposition with implementation of Lewin’s change model. Journal of Trauma Nursing| JTN, 26(2), 84-88. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTN.0000000000000426

Shakhman, L. M., Omar Al Omari, Arulappan, J., & Wynaden, D. (2020). Interprofessional education and collaboration: Strategies for implementation. Oman Medical Journal, 35(4), e160–e160. https://doi.org/10.5001/omj.2020.83

Siddiqui, A. (2021). SWOT Analysis (or SWOT Matrix) Tool as a strategic planning and management technique in the health care industry and its advantages. Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, 40(2), 32035-32042. http://dx.doi.org/10.26717/BJSTR.2021.40.006419

Vinas, E. K., Schroedl, C. J., & Rayburn, W. F. (2020). Advancing academic continuing medical education/continuing professional development: adapting a classical framework to address contemporary challenges. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 40(2), 120-124. https://doi.org/10.1097/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000286

Wei, H., Corbett, R. W., Ray, J., & Wei, T. L. (2020). A culture of caring: The essence of healthcare interprofessional collaboration. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 34(3), 324-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2019.1641476

‌

‌