graduate level replies to two classmates

graduate level replies to two classmates ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON graduate level replies to two classmates respond to my 2 classmates in a discussion board not hard at all thank you in advance! respond_to_classmate.docx busi_611__1_.pdf busi_611_discussion_board_rubric_new__3_.docx respond_to_classmate.docx Respond to Classmate #1 Process Improvement Methodology In order to understand the major phases in the process improvement methodology, one must, first, understand what process improvement methodology is and what it does. The process improvement methodology is used to “help plan and prioritize efforts, analyze and collect data, benchmark, de-bottleneck and deploy, and then report and adjust as necessary” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 95). Additionally, process improvement methodology is used to “increase efficiency by eliminating non-valued-added steps” (Cima et al., 2011, p. 83). Furthermore, “process improvement methodology can inform and guide successful care redesign” (Wiler et al, 2017, p. 172). With this, it is important to note that the major phases in the process improvement methodology are plan and prioritize, collect and analyze, benchmark, and de-bottle neck and deploy pilot, and report and adjust (Langabeer & Helton, 2016). For the plan and prioritize phase, this is the phase where hospitals are encouraged to identify their processes and “think through all areas of the organization and then prioritize and plan the improvement efforts” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81). With this, prioritization should be based off “potential gains in cost, quality, patient satisfaction, or some other performance category” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81). Once this is complete, the hospital can identify which process is in the most need for help and place that at the top of the list to fix. After the list has been established, a plan can be developed to address the problems. The plan should include the “project schedule and time lines, team members, and project goals” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81). Furthermore, the team should have diverse strengths in order to excel at fixing each process on the list, the project goals should be precisely defined, and quantitative targets should be established (Langabeer & Helton, 2016). The second phase, collect and analyze, involves “collecting all key data elements that need to be analyzed” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81). It is important to note that in this phase it is vital to have “management engineer or performance improvement specialist” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 18), lead the group to ensure that everyone is working to their fullest extent. This used to collect data and “provide a complete picture of the causes and effects for the current process performance” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81). graduate level replies to two classmates The information that must be collected during this process includes “productivity, costs, quality, service levels, staffing, cycle times, number of steps and points of interaction, and key deliverables” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81). The analysis for this phase is used to analyze “process performance over a board range of time periods and dates to ensure that the sample data collected can be extrapolated and are representative of all times and dates” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81-82). The third phase, benchmarking, is the “process of identifying best practices and comparing performance relative to others, with the intent of making improvements to your own organization” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 83). Benchmarking takes place after the businesses processes are fully understood. There are two ways that benchmarking can be used. First, benchmarking can be done through observing other organizations or, second, it can be done through “direct comparisons of secondary published data” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 83). The steps of benchmarking include picking a hospital or organization to benchmark against and then, once the other organizations information is obtained, determine what the differences are between you and your benchmark (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 83). The fourth phase, de-bottleneck and deploy pilot, is used to “eliminate constraints that limit efficient throughput in a process” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 84). In order to debottleneck the improvement teams must finds ways to “increase process throughput, expand productivity, reduce unnecessary steps, or otherwise improve the process being considered” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 84). Through this, variations and their causes can be found and worked on to be eliminated. The pilot is an “initial test of the proposed new process, under limited conditions, to help gauge issues and success in achieving the desired goals” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 86). The pilot is used to see if the project’s goals are being met and if they are not, they can reevaluate before the final project is complete. Phase five, report and adjust, should provide a report on “the changes, procedures, findings, and performance levels for the process” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 86). This helps to show the before and after phases of the project, to help evaluate if the changes have been helpful. Additionally, the “feedback and adjustment process is necessary for at least 3 to 6 months following any improvement process” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 86). Through the discussion of reevaluating and changing it is important to remember to “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding; In all you ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct you paths” (Proverbs 3:5-6, New King James Version). This Bible verse reminds that nothing is ever finalized. graduate level replies to two classmates Meaning that there is always room for growth and development no matter what path you are on. Major Types of Customer and/or Patient Service-level Issues The major types of customer and/or patient service-level issues that exist in healthcare today are “patient outcomes, patient safety, financial, administrative, and patient logistics flow and facilities” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 86). Patient outcomes are based on the quality of care that patients received, if their health improved during their stay, how long they stayed, if it should have been longer or shorter, and the facilities rate of diseases and deaths (Langabeer & Helton, 2016). Patient safety entails whether there were any medication errors, medical complications, and/or patient injuries (Langabeer & Helton, 2016). Financial services show whether there were any billing error or complications and whether the payer “cause the discharge or reimbursement process to be slower or more painful than normal” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 87). The administrative service-level shows whether the staff were nice and accommodating and whether there were any issues with patient confidentiality (Langabeer & Helton, 2016). Patient logistics flow and facilities shows if patients were able to find their way around, if there were any excessive wait times, why there were wait times, if patients were given correct directions throughout hospital, and if the guests of patients were accommodated properly (Langabeer & Helton, 2016). It is important to remember that “customer service and quality cannot suffer as a result of improving health care efficiency and productivity, so metrics around each of these core quality outcome categories must be managed simultaneously” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 87). Process Improvement Methodology’s Impact on Patient Safety Process improvement methodology can impact patient safety by helping to ensure that there are less medication errors, medical complications, and patient injuries. Along with lower rates of misdiagnoses, missed diagnoses, and delayed diagnoses (Dinius, Gaupp, Becker, Goritz, & Korner, 2017, p.1). Through planning and prioritizing, hospitals can work to plan which areas of patient safety need to be improved and prioritize the process from the most needed change to the least needed. Next, through collecting and analyzing, the hospital can collect “all the key data elements that need to be analyzed” (Langabeer & Helton, 2016, p. 81). Once the data is collected, it must be analyzed to ensure that the data can be used and is representative of the issues. For benchmarking, the hospital must choose a hospital or organization to compare their best practices and performances against. Once they have the data to compare, they must determine what make the benchmarking facility different from themselves. The hospital can then use this information to help better their future performance.graduate level replies to two classmates In order to de-bottleneck, the hospital must eliminate the constraints that effect the throughput. Once this is completed a pilot can be run to show how effective the new process is and if it needs updating before it is officially launched. Finally, once the changes have been made a summary report can be made. Additionally, feedback and adjustments should be made for at least the first 3 to 6 months following the improvements that have been made for patient safety (Langabeer & Helton, 2016). References Cima, Robert R., Brown, M. J., MD, Hebl, J. R., Moore, R., Rogers, J. C., Kollengode, Anantha. Surgical Process Improvement Team, Mayo Clinic, Rochester. (2011). Use of lean and six sigma methodology to improve operating room efficiency in a high-volume tertiary- care academic medical center. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 213(1), 83- 92. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.02.009 Dinius, J., Gaupp, R., Becker, S., Göritz, A. S., & Körner, M. (2017). Patient safety in hospitals: What we do and what we Need—Focus groups with stakeholders of hospitals in southern germany. Journal of Patient Safety, 1. doi:10.1097/PTS.0000000000000452 Langabeer, J. R., & Helton, J. (2016). Health care operations management: A systems perspective. Burlington, Ma: Jones & Bartlett learning. Wiler, J. L., Bookman, K., Birznieks, D. B., Leeret, R., Koehler, A., Planck, S., & Zane, R. (2017). Rapid process optimization: A novel process improvement methodology to innovate health care delivery. American Journal of Medical Quality, 32(2), 172-177. doi:10.1177/1062860616637683 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Respond to classmate #2 Greetings classmates, this week’s topic focused on Quality Management and the methods which could be used to improve methodology. In this discussion, the major phases in the process improvement methodology will be discussed. This discussion will also describe the major types of patient service-level issues that still exist in the health care industry to this day. Furthermore, this discussion will explain how a process improvement methodology could impact the service outcome. As addressed in previous discussions, health care professionals are to provide efficient and quality care when rendering services. Langabeer II and Helton explained the major phases of process improvement methodology as: planning and prioritizing, collecting and analyzing, benchmarking, de-bottlenecking and piloting (Langabeer II & Helton, 2016, p. 80). All four phases of the process improvement methodology analyze steps in making health care facility visits painless not only for the patients, but also for the providers. Scholars identified that one of the main objectives of a health delivery system is to, “provide cost effective health services that meet certain established standards of quality to an entire nation” (Shi & Singh, p.25, 2017). Each step is needed to effectively create a better quality of service for each patient seen in a health care facility. As the health care industry has developed over the years, quality care continues to be a concern that is not fully addressed. Langabeer II and Helton explained that patient outcomes, patient safety, financial, administrative, and patient logistics flow and facilities are the major types of issues quality care resolves around (Langabeer II & Helton, 2016, p. 86). Of the five issues, patient safety is an issue that could be assessed using the process improvement methodology. Patient safety can be defined as “undesirable outcomes attributable to medical care rather than to the underlying disease process” (Forster, Dervin, Martin, & Papp, 2012, p.2). graduate level replies to two classmates Keeping a patient safe goes beyond voluntary observation when hospitalized. Patient safety is also practicing hand hygiene, protecting them from infection, and managing their well-being. For example, if a clinician visits patient A, and patient A has a MRSA, methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus infection, that clinician must practice hand hygiene to prevent the spread of infection to the next patient. Process improvement methodology can impact the service outcome of patient safety by assessing the importance of hand hygiene. The first step, planning and prioritizing, can assess practicing hand hygiene, and the effect it has on everyone, including the clinicians. Collecting and analyzing can be utilized by reviewing the effect hand hygiene has on patients and the likelihood of decreasing infection. Benchmarking can also be utilized by reviewing published data that shows the results of effective, and ineffective hand hygiene. Haque and colleagues noted that according to the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention, “nearly 1.7 million hospitalized patients annually acquire HCAIs while being treated for other health issues and that more than 98,000 patients (one in 17) die due to these” (Haque, Sartelli, McKimm & Bakar, para. 1, 2018). To assess the final step of de-bottlenecking and piloting for the importance of hand hygiene, providing hand sanitizers in each patient room will eliminate any constraints. Proverbs 10:14 says, “Wise men lay up knowledge: but the mouth of the foolish is near destruction” (KKV). Unfortunately, everyone does not wash their hands after each patient intake. However, providing a hand sanitizer dispenser in each patient room can help minimize infection. Utilizing the process improvement methodology for patient safety with practicing hand hygiene would decrease the rate of infection seen in hospitals. This method thoroughly reviews the importance of hand hygiene and provides alternatives for those that are relentless to hand washing after each patient intake. References Forster, A.J., Dervin, G., Martin, C., & Papp, S. (2012). Improving patient safety through the systematic evaluation of patient outcomes. Canadian Journal of Surgery. Journal Canadien de Chirurgie, 55(6), 418-425. doi:10.1503/cjs.007811 Haque, M., Sartelli, M., McKimm, J., & Abu Bakar, M. (2018). Health care-associated infections – an overview. Infection and Drug Resistance, 11, 2321–2333. doi:10.2147/IDR.S177247 Holy Bible: King James Version Langabeer, J. R., & Helton, J. (2016). Health care operations management: A systems perspective. Jones & Bartlett Learning. Shi, L. & Singh, D. (2017). Essentials of the U.S. health care system. Jones & Bartlett Learning. SECOND EDITION HEALTH CARE OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT A Systems Perspective James R. Langabeer II, MBA, PhD Professor, Health Informatics, Management, and Emergency Medicine The University of Texas Health Science Center Houston, TX Jeffrey Helton, PhD, CMA, CFE, FHFMA Assistant Professor, Health Care Management College of Professional Studies Metropolitan State University of Denver Denver, CO World Headquarters Jones & Bartlett Learning 5 Wall Street Burlington, MA 01803 978-443-5000graduate level replies to two classmates [email protected] www.jblearning.com Jones & Bartlett Learning books and products are available through most bookstores and online booksellers. To contact Jones & Bartlett Learning directly, call 800-832-0034, fax 978-443-8000, or visit our website, www.jblearning.com. Substantial discounts on bulk quantities of Jones & Bartlett Learning publications are available to corporations, professional associations, and other qualified organizations. For details and specific discount information, contact the special sales department at Jones & Bartlett Learning via the above contact information or send an email to [email protected]. Copyright © 2016 by Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC, an Ascend Learning Company All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright may be reproduced or utilized in any form, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner. The content, statements, views, and opinions herein are the sole expression of the respective authors and not that of Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement or recommendation by Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC and such reference shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes. All trademarks displayed are the trademarks of the parties noted herein. Health Care Operations Management: A Systems Perspective, Second Edition is an independent publication and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by the owners of the trademarks or service marks referenced in this product. There may be images in this book that feature models; these models do not necessarily endorse, represent, or participate in the activities represented in the images. Any screenshots in this product are for educational and instructive purposes only. Any individuals and scenarios featured in the case studies throughout this product may be real or fictitious, but are used for instructional purposes only. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the Subject Matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the service of a competent professional person should be sought. Production Credits VP, Executive Publisher: David Cella Publisher: Michael Brown Associate Editor: Lindsey Mawhiney Editorial Assistant: Nicholas Alakel Production Manager: Tracey McCrea Senior Marketing Manager: Sophie Fleck Teague Art Development Editor: Joanna Lundeen Art Development Assistant: Shannon Sheehan Manufacturing and Inventory Control Supervisor: Amy Bacus Composition: Cenveo Publisher Services Cover Design: Kristin E. Parker Manager of Photo Research, Rights & Permissions: Lauren Miller Cover Image: © Steve Design/ShutterStock, Inc. Printing and Binding: Edwards Brothers Malloy Cover Printing: Edwards Brothers Malloy Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Langabeer, James R., 1969- , author. Health care operations management : a systems perspective / James R. Langabeer, Jeffrey Helton.— Second edition. p. ; cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-284-05006-6 I. Helton, Jeffrey, 1961-, author. II. Title. [DNLM: 1. Hospital Administration—methods. 2. Efficiency, Organizational. WX 157.1] RA971.3 362.11068—dc23 2014033878 6048 Printed in the United States of America 19 18 17 16 15 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 About the Authors Courtesy of James Langabeer II, PhD, MBA James R. Langabeer II, PhD, MBA Dr. James Langabeer is a professor of informatics, health care management, and emergency medicine at the University of Texas School of Public Health at Houston. He has spent most of his career focused on quality improvement and information technology in hospitals and health care. His career has involved hospital executive administration, information technology startups, management consulting, and health care research and teaching. Dr. Langabeer was the founding chief executive officer of Greater Houston Healthconnect (the regional health information network serving Southeast Texas) and helped move the organization from concept to reality. He was the executive vice president of a technology and consulting firm based in Boston that was widely toute … Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10

RECOMMENDED: Walden University Nursing Graduate Discussion Responses