Case Study: Process of Effecting Change

Case Study: Process of Effecting Change

Case Study:Process of Process of Effecting Change Case StudyEffecting Change

Order for an original paperwork Assignment : Process of Effecting Change Case Study

Case Study: Process of Effecting Change

Question Description

I’m working on a Nursing exercise and need support.

Case Analysis Assignment Incorporating an Inter-professional Team Change Project

Purpose: The inter-professional leadership case analysis assignment will require the student to actively analyze a case study designed to present a realistic health care situation. The goal is to analyze the case from a leader perspective leading an inter-professional team using the information from the readings on cost, quality, access and accountability. Guidelines for the Case Analysis Assignment and the Grading rubric can be found on blackboard under the Course Information tab. This is the Signature Assignment for NURS 622.

Evidence from research should play a significant role in the decision making process for the interdisciplinary change proposed. Many opportunities for change occur in the delivery of health care. This will give the student practice in finding evidence to support resolving a clinical/ process problem, articulate possible solutions to anticipate consequences, propose inter-professional appropriate actions while leading the team.

For this paper each student will consider and explore the issue(s) and the complexities in making a clinical practice change based on research findings.

Each student will read the case study Interprofessional Team Change Project to Improve Emergency Department Triage Process and answer the following questions as the leader of this change project team. Three to four references are required.

Interprofessional Team Change Project to Improve Emergency Department Triage Process (Finkleman, 2018)

An interprofessional team of six members was formed to lead a change project to improve the triage process in the emergency department (ED) of a 250-bed hospital. The team membership included: one physician, representatives from admission, informatics, and medical records, a pharmacist, a staff nurse from ED, and the ED nurse manager. The ED nurse manager identified the problem and formed the team. At the team’s first meeting some of the members agreed that there was a problem, although two members wondered about the need for change at this time. The team met with ED staff one time—at an ED staff meeting—and meeting attendance was low. Staff members were told that there was a problem with the ED triage process and it must be corrected quickly. Two staff members were angry about the plan to change the process and complained about workload and staffing levels. No one said anything in the meeting, but afterward some felt that this effort was about reducing staff and wondered if the delay in getting treatment was related to increased volumes of patients coming in due to winter and flu season.

A week after the staff meeting the team asked administration for data about the number of patients in triage for the past year and admissions to the hospital. They also reviewed the current triage policy and procedures. After this, the team felt it was ready to complete the plan for the change. They made changes in the triage policy and procedure with the goal of reducing wait time for patients. The ED staff was informed of these changes and that all changes would be implemented in 3 weeks so that nurses could be oriented. All ED staff were informed via a memo posted on the ED bulletin board and an announcement at the ED staff meeting. It was a very busy time in the ED so attendance at this meeting was poor and few came in on off time, although they do receive pay for attending meetings when they are not scheduled to work. The orientation to the new policy and procedure was 1 hour long. The nurses figured they had no choice about the change

Two months after the change was implemented the team met and decided that the change was successful. They informed the administrator and said that they had had only five complaints from staff. The team collected data for 15 days during the 2-month period. The data indicated that patients waited 10 minutes less than in the past.

Questions

How effective was management and inter-professional teamwork? Give examples.

Describe the role as the leader of this inter-professional team and each member.

As the leader how would you address the issues surrounding the communication?

How effective was the planning? What are some of the strengths and weaknesses in the process?

What barriers to change can be identified in this case description?

What could have been done to reduce the barriers?

What data should be included?

What do you think about the evaluation and conclusions?

Describe how you would engage interdisciplinary staff.

How might you apply this to another clinical setting to improve care?

What are two – three takeaways from this case study?