You Are An Analyst In Quality Assurance At St. Anthony Medic ✓ Solved

You are an analyst in Quality Assurance at St. Anthony Medic

You are an analyst in Quality Assurance at St. Anthony Medical Center. Analyze hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) and prepare a board presentation focusing on relationship between HACs and nurse staffing levels and skill mix. Use provided variables: HAC_Rate (HACs per 1,000 discharges), Nursing_HPPD (nursing staff hours per patient day), Skill_Mix (% of nursing hours by RNs), ALOS (average length of stay). Use the following data: annual discharges = 10,000; cost per nurse = $72,000; cost per registered nurse = $85,000; cost per licensed practical nurse = $52,000; cost per inpatient day = $2,600; penalty per HAC = $5,700. Review AHRQ National Scorecard on HACs, CMS HAC Reduction Program, and published research about staffing and HACs. Decide which statistical results to include for the board, explain why those numbers matter, recommend staffing/skill-mix actions that are data-driven, and draft the reply email listing the specific numbers you will include in the presentation.

Paper For Above Instructions

Executive summary

This brief translates the assigned analysis into a concise, actionable set of statistics and recommendations for the hospital board. It identifies the specific numbers to include in the slide deck, explains why each is important for non-technical stakeholders, quantifies financial exposure using available cost data, and proposes data-driven staffing and skill-mix interventions supported by the literature. The goal is to show how changes in nurse staffing levels and registered nurse (RN) share can reduce HACs and associated costs (AHRQ, CMS; Needleman et al., 2002).

Key data and variables

Use these variables exactly as defined: HAC_Rate = HACs per 1,000 discharges; Nursing_HPPD = nursing staff hours per patient day; Skill_Mix = percentage of nursing hours provided by registered nurses (RNs); ALOS = average length of stay (days per discharge). Provided institutional figures: annual discharges = 10,000; cost per nurse = $72,000; cost per RN = $85,000; cost per LPN = $52,000; cost per inpatient day = $2,600; penalty per HAC = $5,700.

Numbers to include in the board presentation (and why)

  1. Current HAC rate (HAC_Rate, per 1,000 discharges) — Primary outcome measure. Present the current rate and trend (year-over-year). Translate into an annual count: Annual HACs = (HAC_Rate / 1,000) × 10,000 = 10 × HAC_Rate. Showing the absolute number of events makes impact tangible for the board (AHRQ; CMS).

  2. Total annual HACs (count) — Provides the raw numerator and grounds financial calculations and patient-safety storytelling.

  3. Estimated incremental cost per HAC — Combine penalty ($5,700) with estimated excess inpatient days × $2,600/day. Use a conservative literature-based estimate for extra LOS (e.g., 3–7 days) to bound annual cost exposure (Zimlichman et al., 2013; AHRQ).

  4. Annual financial exposure from HACs — Show low/central/high scenarios: penalties alone and penalties plus incremental bed-day costs; convert to annual $ impact.

  5. Current Nursing_HPPD and Skill_Mix (RN %) — Staffing level and RN share are the primary levers. Present current values and benchmark to peer hospitals or recommended staffing targets (Needleman et al., 2002; Kane et al., 2007).

  6. Relationship between staffing measures and HACs — Present model results from the attached analysis (e.g., regression coefficients, confidence intervals, p-values) showing the change in HAC_Rate per unit change in Nursing_HPPD and per percentage-point change in Skill_Mix. Convert coefficients into expected annual HAC reductions for easy interpretation.

  7. Projected HAC reductions under proposed staffing scenarios — For example, present impact of increasing Nursing_HPPD by 0.5 hours/day or increasing RN proportion by 5 percentage points. Show expected reduction in HACs and dollars saved (Cimiotti et al., 2012; Mchugh et al., 2013).

  8. Budget impact and ROI — Compare the recurring cost of added nursing FTEs (use cost per RN = $85,000) against estimated annual savings from fewer HACs (penalties + bed-day costs). Include breakeven calculations and multi-year ROI.

  9. Patient impact metrics — Projected decrease in readmissions, complications, and incremental patient days avoided; translate to improved patient outcomes and reputational benefit (Needleman et al., 2002; Kutney‑Lee et al., 2009).

  10. Recommended targets and next steps — Concrete, timebound staffing and skill-mix goals and the data required to monitor progress (monthly HAC_Rate, HPPD, RN %, financials).

How to present statistics to a non-technical board

For each number, accompany the statistic with a short plain-language interpretation: what it is, why it matters (patient harm, penalties, costs), and the concrete decision it supports. Use visuals: a single slope chart showing HAC_Rate by month and a small table showing financial scenarios tied to staffing options. Emphasize absolute changes (e.g., “reducing HAC_Rate by 1 per 1,000 discharges means 10 fewer HACs per year and ~$57,000 in avoided penalties, plus avoided bed-day costs”) because absolute numbers are easier for non-technical audiences to grasp (AHRQ; CMS; Zimlichman et al., 2013).

Recommended staffing and skill-mix actions

Based on the literature and expected effect sizes, recommend a two-step approach: (1) Raise RN proportion (Skill_Mix) by 5 percentage points across inpatient units and (2) pilot a 0.5 HPPD increase on high-risk units (ICU step-down, surgical wards). Evidence shows higher RN staffing and better skill mix are consistently associated with lower adverse events and infections (Needleman et al., 2002; Kane et al., 2007; Cimiotti et al., 2012; Mchugh et al., 2013). Model the pilot ROI using local data; if pilot reduces HACs as expected, scale hospital-wide. Monitor monthly and report to the board after the first quarter of implementation.

Draft reply email (initial thoughts and list of numbers to include)

Subject: RE: HACs — initial numbers and presentation plan

Body:

David — Thanks. My plan is to keep the board slides concise and focused on the decision levers. Below are the specific numbers I will include in the presentation and why:

  • Current HAC_Rate (per 1,000 discharges) and 12‑month trend — shows incidence and direction.
  • Total annual HAC count = HAC_Rate × 10 (since discharges = 10,000) — converts rate to events.
  • Penalty per HAC = $5,700 — explicit and provided.
  • Estimated excess LOS per HAC (literature range: 3–7 days) and cost per inpatient day = $2,600 — used to compute bed-day costs attributable to HACs.
  • Current Nursing_HPPD and Skill_Mix (RN %) — our primary staffing levers.
  • Regression results from Rick’s analysis: coefficient (ΔHAC_Rate per 1 HPPD) and (ΔHAC_Rate per 1% RN) with 95% CIs — shows statistical link to support decisions.
  • Projected HAC reductions for two scenarios (0.5 HPPD increase; +5% RN share) and resulting $ savings vs. added nursing cost (RN cost = $85,000 FTE; cost per nurse = $72,000 average).
  • ROI / breakeven time for each scenario and recommended pilot unit(s).

I will include citations to AHRQ, CMS, and key peer-reviewed studies showing staffing–outcome relationships. I’ll prepare 6–8 slides: context and bottom line first, followed by data-driven options and recommended next steps. Let me know if you want a more conservative or more ambitious scenario set before I finalize the slides.

— [Your Name], Quality Assurance

Conclusion

Presenting a small set of translated, decision-focused statistics (current HAC rate and count, staffing levels, modeled impact of staffing changes, and financial ROI) will equip the board to make a clear, evidence-based choice. The recommended pilot approach allows measurement before committing to large staffing investments. The analysis will cite AHRQ and CMS guidance and peer-reviewed literature linking RN staffing and skill mix to reduced HACs (Needleman et al., 2002; Kane et al., 2007; Cimiotti et al., 2012).

References

  • AHRQ. AHRQ National Scorecard on Hospital-Acquired Conditions. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). https://www.ahrq.gov
  • Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. https://www.cms.gov
  • Needleman J, Buerhaus P, Mattke S, Stewart M, Zelevinsky K. Nurse-staffing levels and the quality of care in hospitals. New England Journal of Medicine. 2002;346(22):1715–1722.
  • Kane RL, Shamliyan T, Mueller C, Duval S, Wilt TJ. The association of registered nurse staffing and patient outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Care. 2007;45(12):1195–1204.
  • Cimiotti JP, Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Wu ES. Nurse staffing, burnout, and healthcare-associated infection. American Journal of Infection Control. 2012;40(6):486–490.
  • McHugh MD, Kelly LA, Smith HL, Wu ES, Vanak J, Aiken LH. Lower mortality in magnet hospitals. Medical Care. 2013;51(5):382–388.
  • Kutney‑Lee A, Stimpfel AW, Sloane DM, et al. Changes in hospital nurse work environments and nurse job outcomes: an observational study. Health Affairs. 2009;28(4):w678–w689.
  • Twigg D, Duffield C. A systematic review of nursing staffing and patient outcomes. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2013;50(2):176–187.
  • Zimlichman E, Henderson D, Tamir O, et al. Health care–associated infections: a meta-analysis of costs and financial burden. Journal of Healthcare Quality and Safety. 2013; (see AHRQ and CDC summaries).
  • Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI). Preventing Hospital-Acquired Conditions and Reducing Harm. IHI resources and toolkits. https://www.ihi.org

Related Assignments