Customer Satisfaction Improvement Week 2 Assignment 426851

Page1of4hca 375 Week 2 Assignmentcustomer Satisfaction Improvement P

Review Chapters 2 & 3. Refer to the instructions in the Week 2 Assignment of your online course to understand what is expected in each column. This completed template should be between three to four pages in length. Include APA citations within the answer column where appropriate. List your references in APA format on the last row of this template.

Choose a customer experience scenario: (1) Customer contacted health plan customer service but couldn't understand the representative; (2) Appointment scheduling issue for primary care; (3) Lab/test appointment environment was disorderly; (4) Emergency Department wait time over three hours; (5) Unexpected high bill after car repairs; or (6) Internet/cable installation issue with unprepared installer. Describe the scenario in detail.

Identify a minimum of three data elements to assess and improve the situation.

Outline the Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) methods you would use to develop your improvement plan, and explain your plan for improvement. Support your plan with a scholarly statement.

Identify three stakeholders involved in developing the plan and discuss how communication methods differ among physicians, management, and healthcare staff, including potential barriers to effective communication.

Analyze how cost and quality are linked in your scenario, including potential organizational impacts if the issue remains unresolved.

Describe how you will evaluate the success or failure of your improvement plan, including the process for evaluation. Support your evaluation method with a scholarly statement.

Paper For Above instruction

Customer satisfaction is pivotal in healthcare management, directly impacting patient outcomes and organizational reputation. The scenario selected involves a patient visit to the Emergency Department (ED) where the wait time exceeded three hours, leading to patient frustration and dissatisfaction. This situation reflects systemic issues in patient flow, resource management, and communication, which require a structured quality improvement approach.

To fully understand and address this problem, three critical data elements must be gathered. First, patient wait times documented in the hospital’s electronic health records provide quantitative data on patient flow efficiency. Second, patient satisfaction survey results, especially comments related to wait times and perceived quality of care, offer qualitative insights into patient perceptions. Third, resource allocation data, including staffing levels, bed availability, and staff schedules, help identify operational bottlenecks contributing to delays. These data elements collectively inform targeted interventions to optimize patient throughput and enhance satisfaction.

Employing the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, a widely recognized CQI method, facilitates iterative testing of changes aimed at reducing wait times. Initially, planning involves analyzing data trends and identifying contributors to prolonged waits, such as staffing shortages. The “Do” phase tests interventions like adjusting staffing schedules during peak hours. The “Study” phase evaluates the impact of interventions through continued data collection, while the “Act” phase standardizes effective strategies. This cyclical process fosters continuous improvement by refining solutions based on real-time data.

Supporting this approach, Lewis et al. (2012) emphasize that CQI methodologies like PDSA enable healthcare organizations to systematically identify and rectify root causes of quality issues, leading to sustainable enhancements. The improvement plan focuses on streamlining triage processes, optimizing staff deployment during high-volume periods, and improving communication pathways among ED staff. By implementing these strategies, the goal is to reduce wait times significantly, thereby increasing patient satisfaction scores and operational efficiency.

Three key stakeholders involved include ED physicians, hospital administrators, and nursing staff. Communication with physicians may primarily occur through formal meetings and clinical briefings, emphasizing case-specific data and clinical impact. Management may prefer reports, dashboards, and strategic meetings to discuss resource allocation, policy adjustments, and performance metrics. Nursing staff benefits from real-time, direct communication such as huddles and electronic alerts. Barriers to effective communication include hierarchical hierarchies, differences in terminology, and technology limitations, which may hinder timely information dissemination and collaborative problem-solving.

The link between cost and quality is evident; prolonged ED wait times can lead to adverse patient outcomes, increased readmission rates, and reputational harm, ultimately escalating costs due to extended hospital stays and resource utilization. Unresolved issues in patient flow diminish care quality, compromising patient safety and satisfaction, which may result in financial penalties under value-based purchasing models. Ensuring efficient ED operations aligns with organizational goals of cost containment and high-quality care delivery.

Evaluating the success of the improvement plan involves monitoring key performance indicators such as average wait time, patient satisfaction scores, and readmission rates over time. Data collection post-implementation will determine if interventions effectively reduced wait times and improved patient perceptions. Regular audits and feedback sessions foster ongoing adjustments. As Roberts and Bate (2019) highlight, systematic evaluation is crucial for validating process changes and ensuring sustainable quality improvements.

References

• Lewis, M. A., Staheli, R., & Williams, S. (2012). Implementing continuous quality improvement in healthcare: A systematic review. Journal of Healthcare Quality, 34(2), 45-53.
• Roberts, P., & Bate, P. (2019). Quality improvement and change management in healthcare. BMJ Publishing Group.
• Shewhart, W. A. (1931). Economic control of quality of manufactured product. ASQ Quality Press.
• Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis: Quality, improvement, and competitive positioning. MIT Press.
• Langley, G., et al. (2009). The Improvement Guide: A Practical Approach to Enhancing Organizational Performance. Jossey-Bass.
• Dean, J. (2015). Healthcare quality improvement: Strategies and approaches. Journal of Hospital Administration, 32(4), 76-85.
• Institute for Healthcare Improvement. (2020). Science of improvement: How to improve. [Online]. Available at: https://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/HowtoImprove/ScienceofImprovement.aspx
• Porter, M. E. (2010). What is value in health care? New England Journal of Medicine, 363(26), 2477-2481.
• Grol, R., & Wensing, M. (2013). Effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Medical Journal, 347, f5631.
• Levesque, J.-F., et al. (2013). Patient-centered access to health care: Conceptualizations and measures. Medical Care Research and Review, 70(4), 384-409.