NURS 8302 Quality Indicators Discussion

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NURS 8302 Quality Indicators Discussion

NURS 8302 Quality Indicators Discussion

Florence Nightingale introduced research to the field of nursing, and with this introduction, a
focus on improving patient care has continued to be at the forefront of nursing practice.
Improving patient care lends itself to the study of quality care and patient safety, and nurse-
sensitive quality indicators highlight the elements of healthcare in which patients are directly
impacted by the care provided by nurses.

Photo Credit: Coloures-Pic / Adobe
What are nurse-sensitive indicators? What elements of a patient’s care are directly impacted by
the role and delivery of care of nurses? How might these nurse-sensitive indicators change
healthcare delivery and the nursing profession for a future DNP-prepared nurse?
For this Discussion, you will explore your understanding of nurse-sensitive indicators of quality
by reflecting on those quality indicators that may pertain most to your practice setting. You will
conduct a literature search for articles that address these quality indicators and reflect on the
connections between the quality indicators and quality improvement theories and philosophies.
To Prepare:
 Review the Learning Resources on quality indicators for this week. Focus on those
quality indicators that most pertain to your practice setting.
 Consider the influence of early quality improvement theories and philosophies on the
development of those quality indicators.
 Using the Walden Library, locate at least two scholarly research articles to focus on, for
this Discussion, that discuss how quality indicators may influence your practice setting.
 Select one definition of quality published by any peer-reviewed source that particularly
resonates with your thinking about quality.
 Identify and select at least two nurse-sensitive indicators of quality related to patient care.
Note: Do not select nurse-sensitive indicators related to staffing.
By Day 3 of Week 2
Post a brief description of the two nurse-sensitive indicators of quality that you selected.
Analyze the influence of early quality improvement theories and philosophies on the
development of the quality indicators you selected. Be specific. Then, cite the two (2) nursing
research articles you selected, and explain how these indicators may influence your practice
setting. Be specific and provide examples.
By Day 6 of Week 2

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues
on two different days by expanding on your colleague’s post and explaining how the quality
indicators selected by your colleague may influence your practice setting.
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able
to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the "Post to Discussion
Question" link and then select "Create Thread" to complete your initial post. Remember, once
you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously.
Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:
Week 2 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 of Week 2 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 2

To Participate in this Discussion:
Week 2 Discussion
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
Name: NURS_8302_Week2_Discussion_Rubric
 Grid View
 List View

 

Excellent
90–100

Good
80–89

Fair
70–79

Poor
: 0–69

Main Posting: Points Range: 40
(40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly
responds to the

Points Range: 35
(35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most
of the Discussion

Points Range: 31
(31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some
of the Discussion

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond
to the Discussion

Response to the
Discussion
question is
reflective with
critical analysis
and synthesis
representative of
knowledge
gained from the
course readings
for the module
and current
credible sources.

Discussion
question(s).
Is reflective with
critical analysis
and synthesis
representative of
knowledge gained
from the course
readings for the
module and
current credible
sources.
No less than 75%
of post has
exceptional depth
and breadth.
Supported by at
least three current
credible sources.

question(s).
Is somewhat
reflective with
critical analysis
and synthesis
representative of
knowledge gained
from the course
readings for the
module.
50% of the post
has exceptional
depth and breadth.
Supported by at
least three
credible
references.

question(s).
One to 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.
Cited with fewer
than two credible
references.

question(s).
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
references.

Main Posting:

Writing

Points Range: 6
(6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly
and concisely.
Contains no
grammatical or
spelling errors.
Adheres to current
APA manual
writing rules and
style.

Points Range: 5
(5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely.
May contain one
to two
grammatical or
spelling errors.
Adheres to current
APA manual
writing rules and
style.

Points Range: 4
(4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat
concisely.
May contain more
than two spelling
or grammatical
errors.
Contains some
APA formatting
errors.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 3 (3%)
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 Posting:

Timely and full
participation

Points Range: 9
(9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets
requirements for
timely, full, and
active
participation.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 8302 Quality Indicators Discussion

Points Range: 8
(8%) – 8 (8%)
Meets
requirements for
full participation.
Posts main

Points Range: 7
(7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main
Discussion by due
date.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet
requirements for
full participation.
Does not post

Posts main
Discussion by due
date.

Discussion by due
date.

main Discussion
by due date.

First Response:

Post to
colleague's main
post that is
reflective and
justified with
credible sources.

Points Range: 9
(9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits
critical thinking
and application to
practice settings.
Responds to
questions posed
by faculty.
The use of
scholarly sources
to support ideas
demonstrates
synthesis and
understanding of
learning
objectives.

Points Range: 8
(8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has
some depth and
may exhibit
critical thinking or
application to
practice setting.

Points Range: 7
(7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on
topic and may
have some depth.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not
be on topic and
lacks depth.

First Response:
Writing

Points Range: 6
(6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is
professional and
respectful to
colleagues.
Response to
faculty questions
are fully
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

Points Range: 5
(5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is
mostly
professional and
respectful to
colleagues.
Response to
faculty questions
are mostly
answered, if
posed.
Provides opinions
and ideas that are
supported by few
credible sources.
Response is
written in
standard, edited
English.

Points Range: 4
(4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in
the Discussion
may lack effective
professional
communication.
Response to
faculty questions
are somewhat
answered, if
posed.
Few or no
credible sources
are cited.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted
in the Discussion
lack effective
communication.
Response to
faculty questions
are missing.
No credible
sources are cited.

English.

First Response:
Timely and full
participation

Points Range: 5
(5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets
requirements for
timely, full, and
active
participation.
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4
(4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets
requirements for
full participation.
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3
(3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet
requirements for
full participation.
Does not post by
due date.

Second
Response:
Post to
colleague's main
post that is
reflective and
justified with
credible sources.

Points Range: 9
(9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits
critical thinking
and application to
practice settings.
Responds to
questions posed
by faculty.
The use of
scholarly sources
to support ideas
demonstrates
synthesis and
understanding of
learning
objectives.

Points Range: 8
(8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has
some depth and
may exhibit
critical thinking or
application to
practice setting.

Points Range: 7
(7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on
topic and may
have some depth.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not
be on topic and
lacks depth.

Second
Response:
Writing

Points Range: 6
(6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is
professional and
respectful to
colleagues.
Response to
faculty questions
are fully
answered, if
posed.
Provides clear,
concise opinions
and ideas that are
supported by two

Points Range: 5
(5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is
mostly
professional and
respectful to
colleagues.
Response to
faculty questions
are mostly
answered, if
posed.
Provides opinions
and ideas that are
supported by few

Points Range: 4
(4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in
the Discussion
may lack effective
professional
communication.
Response to
faculty questions
are somewhat
answered, if
posed.
Few or no
credible sources
are cited.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted
in the Discussion
lack effective
communication.
Response to
faculty questions
are missing.
No credible
sources are cited.

or more credible
sources.
Response is
effectively written
in standard, edited
English.

credible sources.
Response is
written in
standard, edited
English.

Second
Response:
Timely and full
participation

Points Range: 5
(5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets
requirements for
timely, full, and
active
participation.
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4
(4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets
requirements for
full participation.
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3
(3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet
requirements for
full participation.
Does not post by
due date.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.