Quality Improvement And Patient Safety Initiatives

Quality Improvement And Patient Safety Initiatives the Vice President O

What are the macro systems that are affecting patient satisfaction at Dr. Mendez's facility? What micro systems should she also analyze to look at how the patient moves through—from entry, to possible admission, to possible discharge? How do these systems relate? What impacts each system?

The concepts presented in Week 8 serve as a foundation for this week as you continue to look at factors within an organization's environment that are barriers and facilitators for implementing change. In this Discussion, you examine the macro and micro systems within the organization (of your practicum setting) and identify changes that may need to take place to facilitate quality improvement and achievement of patient safety outcomes. To prepare: Reflect on the issue you have been addressing through your EBP Project. Identify the macro and micro systems that influence the issue. Review the McClusky and Middleton (2010) article for an example of this process (See attached file).

Determine the desired outcomes of resolving the EBP Project issue and how resolving it will improve quality and patient safety. (Note: Next week you will evaluate these outcomes. You may want to view the Week 10 Discussion as you prepare.) What procedures/processes would need to be modified to achieve the desired outcomes?

Post your PowerPoint presentation by tomorrow Tuesday 10/23/18, in APA format and include 3 scholarly references from the list of required readings below, developing a 5-slide Microsoft PowerPoint presentation for the business unit team and leadership within the organization. The presentation should share your issue, strategies for resolving the issue, and how it will improve quality and patient safety.

Note: The purpose of the presentation is to persuade the business unit team and leadership to accept your recommendations. Required Readings include works by Brooks et al. (2014), Jarden & Sutton (2014), McCluskey & Middleton (2010), and Murfet et al. (2014). Additionally, consider the PIICOT question regarding early mobilization in extended ICU settings and its effects on transfer times post-intervention.

Paper For Above instruction

In contemporary healthcare systems, patient satisfaction and safety are paramount objectives that significantly influence organizational reputation, reimbursement, and quality of care outcomes. A critical understanding of macro and micro systems within healthcare organizations offers insight into how various factors either facilitate or hinder these goals. Dr. Mendez’s scenario—where inpatient navigation challenges impact patient experience—serves as an illustrative case for exploring systemic influences and targeted interventions.

Macro systems affecting patient satisfaction

Macro systems encompass the broad external and internal environment factors exerting influence over healthcare quality and patient satisfaction. These include regulatory bodies such as The Joint Commission and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), which set standards and accreditation requirements impacting organizational policies. Policy frameworks like healthcare laws and reimbursement models further shape operational priorities. For Dr. Mendez’s facility, macro systems also involve health policy changes, societal expectations, demographic trends, and technological advancements that influence care delivery models.

Regional and national healthcare policies often dictate resource allocations, quality benchmarks, and focus areas such as mental health and patient-centered care. For example, mandates around care transitions aim to reduce hospital readmissions and improve continuity of care (Naylor et al., 2011). Economic factors such as funding shortages may limit staffing or technological upgrades, thus affecting patient satisfaction indirectly. Additionally, public health initiatives emphasizing mental health awareness can influence organizational priorities and resource distribution.

Micro systems influencing patient flow and experience

Micro systems refer to the specific internal processes and interactions within the organization that directly affect patient care. In Dr. Mendez’s context, micro systems involve patient admission processes, care delivery workflows, communication channels among staff, and discharge planning. These components determine how effectively patients transition through different care stages—from entry, assessment, to treatment, and ultimately discharge.

Analyzing micro systems involves mapping pathways, identifying bottlenecks, and evaluating team collaboration. For example, inefficient check-in procedures or inadequate coordination between emergency and admission staff could cause delays or patient dissatisfaction. Moreover, inpatient units’ internal routines, documentation practices, and interdisciplinary communication significantly influence the patient experience. Discharge procedures, especially for mental health patients, require careful coordination to ensure a smooth transition to home or community services.

Relationship between macro and micro systems

Macro and micro systems are interconnected; macro policies can shape micro processes through directives, funding priorities, and organizational culture. Conversely, micro system insights can inform macro-level policy adjustments. For example, if micro analysis identifies frequent discharge delays due to staff shortages, macro systems can address this through policy or resource enhancements.

Impacts on systems vary: macro systems influence funding, standards, and regulatory compliance, while micro systems affect daily patient interactions, safety protocols, and satisfaction. Disconnection or misalignment between these layers can exacerbate issues like patient dissatisfaction or safety risks (Anthony et al., 2014).

Strategies for improving patient satisfaction and safety

To address these systemic influences, organizational leaders must implement targeted strategies. At the macro level, advocacy for policy changes that streamline care transitions or increase funding for mental health services can create an enabling environment. At the micro level, process improvements such as standardized check-in procedures, staff training, interdisciplinary care rounds, and coordinated discharge planning can improve patient flow and experience.

Technology also plays a role; electronic health records (EHR) integration facilitates real-time information sharing, reducing delays and errors. Engaging patients through clear communication and education about their care pathways contributes to increased satisfaction and safety (Kovner et al., 2014). Leadership must foster a culture that encourages continuous quality improvement, staff accountability, and patient-centered care.

Desired outcomes and implications for practice

Resolving these systemic issues aims to enhance patient satisfaction scores, reduce care delays, and prevent adverse events—ultimately improving patient safety outcomes. Effective navigation from entry to discharge minimizes stress for mental health patients, promotes better health outcomes, and aligns with quality metrics tied to reimbursement.

To achieve these outcomes, procedural modifications are necessary: streamlining admission protocols, optimizing communication workflows, enhancing discharge procedures, and integrating technology solutions. Staff education and participatory leadership are critical to sustain improvements.

In conclusion, understanding and addressing macro and micro system dynamics within healthcare organizations is essential for ongoing quality improvement. By aligning policies, processes, and staff efforts, organizations can foster safer, more satisfying patient experiences, particularly in complex care settings like mental health units.

References

• Anthony, M. K., et al. (2014). Simulation to improve the discharge process. Journal of Nursing Administration, 44(4), 188-194.
• Brooks, P., Spillane, J. J., Dick, K., & Stuart-Shor, E. (2014). Developing a strategy to identify and treat older patients with postoperative delirium. AORN Journal, 99(2), 165-172.
• Jarden, R. J., & Sutton, L. J. (2014). A practice change initiative to improve the provision of enteral nutrition to intensive care patients. British Journal of Critical Care Nursing, 20(5), 219-226.
• Kovner, C., et al. (2014). Improving patient experience through nurse-led innovations. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 29(2), 150-157.
• Murfet, G. O., Allen, P., & Hingston, T. J. (2014). Maternal and neonatal health outcomes following the implementation of an innovative model of nurse-practitioner-led care for diabetes in pregnancy. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(5), 1020-1030.
• Naylor, M. D., et al. (2011). Translating research into practice: The use of transitional care models in nursing practice. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 43(3), 222-229.
• McCluskey, A., & Middleton, S. (2010). Delivering an evidence-based outdoor journey intervention to people with stroke: Barriers and enablers experienced by community rehabilitation teams. BMC Health Services Research, 10, 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-18