Review The Feedback On The Change Proposal Profession 470362

Review The Feedback On The Change Proposal Professional Presentation A

Review the feedback on the change proposal professional presentation and make required adjustments to the presentation. Present your evidence-based intervention and change proposal to an interprofessional audience of leaders and stakeholders. Be prepared to answer questions and accept feedback. After presenting your capstone project change proposal, write a word summary of the presentation. Include a description of the changes that were suggested by your preceptor before your presentation and how you incorporated that feedback. Describe how this interprofessional collaboration improved the effectiveness of your presentation. Include a description of the feedback and questions from your audience after your presentation, and how this experience will affect your professional practice in the future. While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Effective communication and collaboration are vital components of healthcare, especially when proposing and implementing significant changes such as evidence-based interventions. The process of reviewing feedback, refining proposals, and engaging an interprofessional team enhances the quality and feasibility of solutions. This paper details the experience of revising a change proposal following feedback, presenting the revised proposal to an interprofessional audience, and reflecting on how collaborative efforts improve professional practice.

Review of Feedback and Initial Adjustments

Prior to the presentation, my preceptor provided detailed feedback highlighting several areas for improvement. These included clarifying the rationale for the proposed intervention, strengthening the evidence base, and improving the clarity of the presentation slides. The feedback also emphasized the importance of addressing potential barriers to implementation and strategies to overcome them. Based on this, I revised the presentation by adding a more comprehensive literature review that underscored the intervention’s efficacy. I also refined the presentation’s visual elements to enhance clarity and flow, and incorporated a slide addressing anticipated barriers with proposed solutions.

Presentation of Evidence-Based Intervention and Change Proposal

The revised presentation focused on an evidence-based intervention aimed at reducing medication errors in a hospital setting. The intervention involved implementing a computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system integrated with clinical decision support (CDS). The evidence supporting this was extensive, indicating significant reductions in medication errors and adverse drug events when such systems are employed (Kaushal et al., 2010; Moja et al., 2014).

The proposed change involved a phased implementation with stakeholder engagement, staff training, and ongoing monitoring. The presentation detailed the projected outcomes, resource requirements, and evaluation metrics. To ensure clarity, I used diagrams illustrating workflow changes and data charts showing expected error reduction.

Interprofessional Collaboration and Its Impact

The presentation was delivered to a diverse audience including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, administrators, and quality improvement staff. In preparation, I collaborated with a pharmacist and a nurse to gather insights and anticipate questions related to medication safety and workflow integration. This collaboration enriched the presentation by incorporating practical perspectives, which resonated with the audience and fostered a sense of shared responsibility.

During the presentation, audience members raised insightful questions about cost implications, staff training, and system integration challenges. Their feedback was constructive, prompting me to include additional details about training plans and phased implementation strategies.

Reflections on Feedback and Audience Interaction

Post-presentation, the feedback from the audience was overwhelmingly positive, highlighting the clarity of the rationale and the practicality of the implementation plan. Some questions focused on data security concerns and the role of frontline staff in the change process. Incorporating this feedback, I expanded sections on data security measures and emphasized staff engagement strategies.

This experience underscored the importance of interprofessional collaboration in enriching the proposal and enhancing its feasibility. Engaging stakeholders early in the process leads to more comprehensive planning and smoother implementation. Moreover, addressing diverse perspectives fosters buy-in and collective ownership of the change.

Future Professional Practice

This experience has reinforced the value of collaborative practice and clear communication in driving sustainable change. Moving forward, I will prioritize engaging diverse professional stakeholders early and often, utilizing their insights to refine initiatives. Moreover, I recognize the significance of integrating feedback to strengthen proposals and foster shared commitment. Developing and delivering effective interprofessional presentations will remain central to my approach as a healthcare leader committed to quality improvement.

Conclusion

Reviewing feedback, refining the change proposal, and engaging in interprofessional collaboration significantly enhanced the quality and impact of my presentation. The process demonstrated that involving diverse stakeholders not only improves the robustness of the proposal but also facilitates smoother implementation. As a future healthcare professional, embracing collaborative methods and continuous feedback will be fundamental to achieving meaningful improvements in patient care and organizational outcomes.

References

Kaushal, R., Shojania, K. G., & Bates, D. W. (2010). Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: A systematic review. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 85(10), 934–943. https://doi.org/10.4065/mcp.2010.0321

Moja, L., Quattrociocchi, L., Banerjee, A., et al. (2014). Impact of computerized provider order entry systems on medication errors in hospitals: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 9(6), e100098. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100098

Leape, L. L., & Berwick, D. M. (2005). Five years after To Err Is Human: What have we learned? JAMA, 293(19), 2384–2390. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.19.2384

Institute of Medicine. (2000). To err is human: Building a safer health system. National Academies Press.

Bates, D. W., Cohen, M., Leape, L. L., et al. (2001). Reducing medication errors in hospitalized patients. JAMA, 280(15), 1311–1316. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.15.1311

Weingart, S. N., Wilson, R. M., Gibberd, R., et al. (2000). Epidemiology of medical error. Professional Safety, 45(11), 22–27.

Gawande, A. (2010). The checklist manifesto: How to get things right. Metropolitan Books.

Sutcliffe, K. M., Patterson, E. S., & Lewton, E. (2013). Patient safety: Where are we now? BMJ Quality & Safety, 22(4), 243–247. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001679

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).