NURS 5051/ NURS 6051 week 1 Discussion: The Application of Data to Problem-Solving Essay
Stefankiuk, Bosacka, Wanke-Rytt & Hryniewicz (2017) reports viral pharyngitis is the most common cause of acute pharyngitis, yet over 50% of patients are being treated with antibiotics. When a patient presents to a clinic seeking treatment for acute pharyngitis a culture can be obtained to help the provider determine the best plan of action (Mastrian & McGonigle, 2017). In other words, getting a throat swab and performing a rapid strep test can help the provider determine if prescribing antibiotics would be adequate. If the rapid strep test is positive than prescribing antibiotics is appropriate. Rapid strep tests are not 100% accurate, but are able to detect the Group A streptococci (GAS) in about 90% of the time (Stefankiuk, Bosacka, Wanke-Rytt & Hryniewicz, 2017). Chang, Chursri, Sangthong, McNeil, Hu, Du, Li, Fan, Zhou, Chongsuvivatwong & Twang (2019) states that antibiotic resistance is a health problem that continues to increase. Within the last decade the consumption of antibiotics has doubled which means that antibiotics once used to treat simple infections will not work(Chang et al., 2019).
References
Chang, Y., Chusri, S., Sangthong, R., McNeil, E., Hu, J., Du, W., Li, D., Fan, X., Zhou, H., Chongsuvivatwog, V., & Tang, L. (2019). Clinical pattern of antibiotic overuse and misuse in primary healthcare hospitals in southwest China. PLoS ONE, 14 (6), 1-12. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214779
Mastrian, K., & McGonigle, D. (2017). Introduction to information, information science, and information systems. In D. McGonigle & K. Mastrian (Eds.), Nursing Informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Stefaniuk, E., Bosacka, K., Wanke-Rytt, M., & Hryniewicz, W. (2017). The use of rapid test QuikRead go Strep A in bacterial pharyngotonsillitis diagnosing and therapeutic decisions. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 36(10), 1733–1738. Doi: 10.1007/s10096-017-2986-8
Discussion: The Application of Data to Problem-Solving
In the modern era, there are few professions that do not to some extent rely on data. Stockbrokers rely on market data to advise clients on financial matters. Meteorologists rely on weather data to forecast weather conditions, while realtors rely on data to advise on the purchase and sale of property. In these and other cases, data not only helps solve problems, but adds to the practitioner’s and the discipline’s body of knowledge.
Of course, the nursing profession also relies heavily on data. The field of nursing informatics aims to make sure nurses have access to the appropriate date to solve healthcare problems, make decisions in the interest of patients, and add to knowledge.
In this Discussion, you will consider a scenario that would benefit from access to data and how such access could facilitate both problem-solving and knowledge formation.
To Prepare:
- Reflect on the concepts of informatics and knowledge work as presented in the Resources.
- Consider a hypothetical scenario based on your own healthcare practice or organization that would require or benefit from the access/collection and application of data. Your scenario may involve a patient, staff, or management problem or gap.
By Day 3 of Week 1
Post a description of the focus of your scenario. Describe the data that could be used and how the data might be collected and accessed. What knowledge might be derived from that data? How would a nurse leader use clinical reasoning and judgment in the formation of knowledge from this experience?
By Day 6 of Week 1
Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days, asking questions to help clarify the scenario and application of data, or offering additional/alternative ideas for the application of nursing informatics principles.
*Note: Throughout this program, your fellow students are referred to as colleagues.
Submission and Grading Information
ORDER SHADOW HEALTH ASSESSMENT HELP HERE
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Posting |
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
| Main Post: Timeliness |
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
|
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
|
| First Response |
17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
| Second Response |
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
| Participation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
|
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
|
| Total Points: 100 |
|---|
DON’T STRESS YOURSELF, JUST CHAT US AT THE RIGHT CORNER BELOW.
Once upon a time, there was an era of paper charting and this was the norm in many health care facilities. There were using MAR and TAR , I had an opportunity to be part of that generation where health care professionals where locked in this system .This paper system was very stressful and it was hard to find the information needed regarding patients .Little did we all know that technology was evolving so fast and later on , Many software with EMR and ETR emerged . Now, most hospitals I work for are using Electronic Medical Records (EMR) and life is so much better. Since the implementation of EMR, access to critical information or data has been faster and more convenient for all health care professionals.
In the ICU where our patients are usually in a state of shock or going to it, various data collection sets are used to predict the severity of shock or if a patient is going to septic. The use of MEWS or Modified Early Warning Score together with laboratory data has provided many hospital units to prevent delay in interventions of critically ill patients (Gardner-Thorpe et al., 2006). My current hospital integrated MEWS with our EPIC EMR which triggers or flags nurses to pay more attention to warning signs of sepsis or shock. The nurses will then contact the Rapid Response nurses to evaluate the patient and interventions are made to prevent further decline in health.
Without the integration of data as a useful source of information to drive nursing interventions, it would take nurses and other health care providers some time to gather information and formulate a solution. With our EPIC system, which is maintained by the Information Systems department, led by a Nursing Informatics graduate, the digital solution to electronic records and retrieval is modeled on the nursing science. McGonigle and Mastrian enumerated the foundations of nursing informatics being knowledge acquisition, generation, dissemination, processing and feedback (2018). These processes drive the current nursing practice model to that of information systems.
Access to a vast collection of data about any medical issues has also been integrated into our EPIC. Medline and Micromedex for drugs are excellent resources that enable the nurses to administer correct medications and know the side effects of each medication that are not familiar to them (Flynn, 2001). As we can see, technology has come a long way to help as a tool for health care professionals to work effectively and safely.
References
McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Gardner-Thorpe, J., Love, N., Wrightson, J., Walsh, S., & Keeling, N. (2006). The value of Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) in surgical in-patients: a prospective observational study. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 88(6), 571-5.
Flynn, M. B. (2001). Nursing and informatics: Implications for critical care practice. Critical Care Nurse, 21(4), 8-8, 10, 14, 16. Retrieved from https://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/docview/228169558?accountid=14872