NURS 8100 Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment

NURS 8100 Week 5: Economic and Technological Influences on Policy
NURS 8100 Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment
Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment
In response to continually rising health care costs, the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) provision was created to promote the meaningful use of health care information technology through numerous incentive programs for health care providers. By enhancing data collection, streamlining electronic medical records, and increasing transparency, it is believed that significant cost savings can be realized as well as other positive outcomes. What are some of the tradeoffs involved in this type of policy?
To prepare for Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment:
Reflect on the challenges of containing health care costs in the U.S. presented in the Learning Resources and discussed by Dr. Kominski and Dr. Zelman in the media.
Consider how information technology may be used to address health care issues related to cost.
Examine the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) provision and its goals.
By Day 3 of Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment
Post a cohesive response that addresses the following:
Briefly summarize a significant challenge to containing health care costs.
How do policy makers envision technology could be utilized to address this challenge (above)? Provide at least one example to support your response.
Do you agree or disagree with the policy makers? Describe why you agree or disagree and include one or more insights from this analysis that relate to the question of how information technology could, or could not, help contain costs while supporting health care reform initiatives.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.
By Day 6 of Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment
Respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:
Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence or research.
Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
Note: Please see the Syllabus and Discussion Rubric for formal Discussion question posting and response evaluation criteria.
Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.
Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.
NURS 8100 Week 5: Economic and Technological Influences on Policy
Economic factors have long been a key driver of health care policy and reform efforts. As noted in previous weeks, for instance, health policies have attempted to improve the situation for millions of uninsured or underinsured individuals and to address the barriers to health care access that have arisen as a result of the high costs associated with insurance and health service delivery.
This week, you will examine how economics influences health policy and health care reform efforts. You will explore cost containment strategies from increasing administrative efficiency to health care rationing and the role of technology in health care reform and cost control efforts.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
Evaluate the use of technology to achieve health care reform and cost containment goals
Analyze the economic consequences of a health care policy
Photo Credit: [Robert Nicholas]/[OJO Images]/Getty Images
Learning Resources
Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
NURS 8100 Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment
Bodenheimer, T., & Grumbach, K. (2016). Understanding health policy: A clinical approach (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Medical.
Chapter 8, “Painful Versus Painless Cost Control”Chapter 8 focuses on the relationship between health care costs and health outcomes and its importance on the health policy agenda. This chapter also presents strategies for effectively utilizing resources as opposed to rationing health care services.
Chapter 9, “Mechanisms for Controlling Costs”Chapter 9 examines an array of policies aimed at controlling health care costs and reviews specific financial and reimbursement cost containment methods to health outcomes.
Buntin, M., Jain, S., & Blumenthal, D. (2010). Health information technology: Laying the infrastructure for national health reform. Health Affairs, 29(6), 1214–1219. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0503
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
In this article, the authors examine the role of health information technology as a major component in the restructuring of health care. They suggest it will improve quality, reduce costs, and allow for seamless access to data across providers.
Margolius, D., & Bodenheimer, T. (2010). Transforming primary care: From past practice to the practice of the future. Health Affairs, 29(5).
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
The authors propose a primary care practice of the future in which physicians act as leaders of a team of health care professionals. Reimbursement would shift from a pay-per-service model to a comprehensive model that incorporates both a standardized payment per patient and performance pay based on improved patient health outcomes.
Maxson, E., Jain, S., McKethan, A., Brammer, C., Buntin, M., Cronin, K., … Blumenthal, D. (2010). Beacon communities aim to use health information technology to transform the delivery of care. Health Affairs, 29(9), 1671–1677. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0577
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Monheit, A., Cantor, J., DeLia, D., & Belloff, D. (2011). How have state policies to expand dependent coverage affected the health insurance status of young adults? Health Services Research, 46(1), 251- 267.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
NURS 8100 Discussion: Technology and Cost Containment
Young adults (19-29 years of age) are one of the highest uninsured segments of U.S. population. Some states have mandated extended dependent coverage; however, the study presented in this article depicts little effect on uninsured rates. The authors suggest that the PPACA 2010 provision mandating expanded dependent coverage will have better success because more health plans will be involved in the mandate.
Rosenthal, M., Beckman, H., Forrest, D., Huang, E., Landon, B., & Lewis, S. (2010). Will the patient-centered medical home improve efficiency and reduce costs for care? A measurement and research agenda. Medical Care Research & Review, 67(4), 476–484.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
This article discusses the use of Patient-Centered Medical Homes (PCMHs) as a cost containment strategy. The authors maintain that credible research needs to be conducted to evaluate the actual results.
Steuerle, C. E., & Bovbjerg, R. R. (2008). Health and budget reform as handmaidens. Health Affairs, 27(3), 633–644.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Wilensky, G. (2010). Health economics. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 8, 179–193.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Required Media
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2011). Healthcare policy and advocacy: Cost containment. Baltimore: Author.
Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 13 minutes.
In this media presentation, Dr. Gerald Kominski and Dr. Walter Zelman discuss the challenges policy makers face in containing health care expenditures and costs.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NURS_8100_Week5_Discussion_Rubric
Excellent Good Fair Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION
Discussion post minimum requirements:
*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
QUALITY OF WRITING
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.
4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
0 (0%) – 3 (10%)
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Total Points: 30