NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

Chamberlain University NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks– Step-By-Step Guide

 

This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Chamberlain University   NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.

 

How to Research and Prepare for  NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks                                   

 

Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Chamberlain University   NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.

 

After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.

 

How to Write the Introduction for  NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks                                   

 

The introduction for the Chamberlain University   NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.

 

How to Write the Body for  NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks                                   

 

After the introduction, move into the main part of the  NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.

 

Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.

 

How to Write the Conclusion for  NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks                                   

 

After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.

 

How to Format the References List for  NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks                                   

 

The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.

Stuck? Let Us Help You

 

Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease. 

 

Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the  NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW. 

 

NR 599 Week 3 Discussion EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

Purpose

The ideas and beliefs underpinning the discussions guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.

Part of the stage one requirements for meaningful use criteria is increasing compliance with medication reconciliation (Resnick, et al., 2016). Medication reconciliation can be such an important part of our care as an APRN. Until I worked in home health and sat down with each patient to not only go over each and every medication they are taking including vitamins and supplement but also have them show me how they were taking them each day, I found that almost none of the patients were doing so correctly. Since this experience I make sure to do a full medication reconciliation with each patient and make sure they known the importance of telling their providers of all vitamins and supplement as well. With a proper medication reconciliation we can help to avoid those drug-to-drug interactions.

Resnick, C. M., Meara, J. G., Peltzman, M., & Gilley, M. (2016). Meaningful use: A program in transition.Links to an external site.Links to an external site. Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons, 101(3), 10-16.

The use of CPOE has truly reduced the risk of cross prescribing, medication errors and poly pharmacy in most cases. To combat the risk of drug to drug interaction in patients taking medicines that were not prescribed by the health provider like natural remedies or over the counter meds, the NP needs to be thorough in getting clear and precise information from the patient prior to prescribing the meds. Also patients with access to their EHR are  involved in their positive health outcome and are more likely to verbalize to their health care provider any medicine or natural products they may be on or even ask the provider what they think about the natural remedies before deciding to take such products. Patients are also encouraged to bring their current medications and natural remedies to their healthcare provider visit as well. A strong positive interpersonal relationship between the healthcare provider and the patient is also encouraged. Patients are most likely to open up about remedies and practices they have tried to a provider that they are comfortable with.  Thank you.

Carrera-Hueso, Merino-Plaza, M. J., Ramón-Barrios, M. A., Lopez-Merino, E. I., Vazquez-Ferreiro, P., & Poquet-Jornet, J. (2019). Proposed model to determine satisfaction with computerised provider order entry systems in a long-stay hospital. European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. Science and Practice, 26(2), 73–78. https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2017-001345Links to an external site.

 

This is an excellent topic, as the consumption of vitamins, supplements, and herbs has increased. Approximately 76% of adults in the U.S. consumed herbal supplements in 2017, compared to 2012 when it was about 64% (Choi & Song, 2021). It is essential to know interactions, as patient safety is a priority. To tackle this issue, I would ask if the patient is taking anything not prescribed by a physician. There could be leading questions asked to help remind or guide the patient. Asking the patient to bring in the bottles of the supplements or photos would help. Educate the patient on the importance of disclosing everything they are taking. As a provider, I can educate myself on the interactions of vitamins/ all-natural items and the interactions with pharmaceuticals as well as food. Books and databases are available that can be utilized on the spot or to gain more knowledge in general. It is impossible to know every single interaction as not all interactions are reported or traced back to the culprit. However, it is essential to educate ourselves as much as possible on interactions and alternatives outside of pharmaceutical medications.

 

Choi, M.-K., & Song, I.-S. (2021). Pharmacokinetic Drug–drug interactions and herb–drug interactions. Pharmaceutics, 13(5), 610. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13050610

Pros and Cons of Electronic Health Records (EHR)
Pros	Cons
Reminders and alerts– there are many reminders and alerts that pop up in the EHR, such as when medications are due, allergies, drug interactions, high risk alerts, physician orders and more.	Lack of standardization– Different departments utilizing different systems. For example, the ED in my facility uses a different system so I am unable to review a patient being admitted to my floor until they are actually admitted, or I have to wait for the ED to send up information which may take a while.
Real-time information– access to real-time information such as test results or updates from other members of the care team.	Overreliance on technology– reduces critical thinking skills, unable to perform when technology is down.
Patient history and trends– patient history readily available and easy to read as well as health trends over time.	Insufficient training- not utilizing the EHR properly or to its full potential due to lack of training or even ongoing training.
Continuation of care- Continued care between providers who chare the same systems, which allows for medication updates, diagnosis from other providers and so forth.	Inaccurate information-for many varied reasons, such as errors due to a high workload to the redundancy of some charting, or maybe even negligence, there could be an input of inaccurate information.

(Rathert et al., 2019)

 

EHR Incentive Programs were introduced in 2011 and are regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and these programs encourage eligible professionals (EPs) and hospitals to demonstrate meaningful use of certified electronic health record technology (CEHRT; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2021). There are eight objectives in Stage 3 to which all providers must attest. Two of the Stage 3 objectives for Meaningful Use include computerized provider order entry (CPOE) and providing patients with electronic access to their health information and patient-specific education. CPOE is required for medication, laboratory, and diagnostic imaging orders. To meet this objective, providers must record more than 60% of medication, laboratory, and diagnostic imaging orders by CPOE during the EHR reporting period. Exclusions to this are any EPs who write fewer than 100 medication, laboratory, or diagnostic imaging orders during the EHR reporting period (American College of Cardiology, n.d.). The next objective, providing patients with electronic access to their health information and patient-specific education, requires EPs to provide patients, or patient-authorized representatives, timely electronic access to their health information. This objective requires that more than 80% of patients seen by EPs or discharged from an eligible hospital or ED, must be provided timely access to view online, download or transmit health information and ensures the health information is available through an approved application that meets certain specifications. Providers must also identify and provide electronic access to patient-specific educational resources to more than 35% of patients seen. These measures may be excluded of the EP does not have any office visits during the reporting period or is located in a county that does not have 50% or more of its housing units with 4Mbps broadband availability (ACC, n.d.)

I have been a nurse for 8 years, and almost everything has been done electronically in my experience thus far, which I feel is a great change when imagining having to do everything on paper or manually.  I believe these objectives are very helpful in providing quality care and communication and will be very beneficial for providing high quality care for patients in my future NP role. Orders can be entered, received and carried much more quickly and information can be provided to patients without having to make an appointment or wait for a call. Information is available for patients when it is available to providers. I will be able to add important patient-specific resources into the patient’s chart that they can refer back to when they at home. Sometimes providers can get busy and patients may not be as receptive to information when they are being seen. These objectives help to ensure that providers are working diligently and providing patients with high quality care and communicating effectively.

 

References

American College of Cardiology. (n.d.). Stage 3 meaningful use – finalized objectives and measures. https://www.acc.org/~/media/Non-Clinical/Files-PDFs-Excel-MS-Word-etc/Latest%20in%20Cardiology/Advocacy%20and%20Policy/advocacy_pdf_20151203_Stage3MeaningfulUse.pdf?la=enLinks to an external site.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. (2021). Stage 3 program requirements for providers attesting to their state’s Medicaid promoting interoperability (PI) programs. CMS.gov. https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/EHRIncentivePrograms/Stage3Medicaid_RequireLinks to an external site.

Rathert, C., Porter, T. H., Mittler, J. N., & Fleig-Palmer, M. (2019). Seven years after Meaningful Use: Physicians’ and nurses’ experiences with electronic health records. Health Care Management Review, 44(1), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000168Links to an external site.

Activity Learning Outcomes

Through this discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:

Contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a discussion environment that models professional and social interaction (CO4)

Actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty (CO5)

Requirements:

Post a written response in the discussion forum to EACH threaded discussion topic:

As discussed in the lesson and assigned reading for this week, EHRs provide both benefits and drawbacks. Create a “Pros” versus “Cons” table and include at least 3 items for each list. Next to each item, provide a brief rationale as to why you selected to include it on the respective list.

Refer to the Stage 3 objectives for Meaningful Use located in this week’s lesson under the heading Meaningful Use and the HITECH Act. Select two objectives to research further. In your own words, provide a brief discussion as to how the objective may impact your role as an APN in clinical practice.

Adhere to the following guidelines regarding quality for the threaded discussions in Canvas:

Application of Course Knowledge: Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings.

Scholarliness and Scholarly Sources: Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions using valid, relevant, and reliable outside scholarly source to contribute to the discussion thread.

Writing Mechanics: Grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation are accurate. In-text and reference citations should be formatted using correct APA guidelines.

Direct Quotes: Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the grammar, syntax, APA category.

For each threaded discussion per week, the student will select no less than TWO scholarly sources to support the initial discussion post.

Scholarly Sources: Only scholarly sources are acceptable for citation and reference in this course. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. The textbooks and lessons are NOT considered to be outside scholarly sources. For the threaded discussions and reflection posts, reputable internet sources such as websites by government agencies (URL ends in .gov) and respected organizations (often ends in .org) can be counted as scholarly sources. The best outside scholarly source to use is a peer-reviewed nursing journal.  You are encouraged to use the Chamberlain library and search one of the available databases for a peer-reviewed journal article.  The following sources should not be used: Wikipedia, Wikis, or blogs.  These websites are not considered scholarly as anyone can add to these. Please be aware that .com websites can vary in scholarship and quality.  For example, the American Heart Association is a .com site with scholarship and quality.  It is the responsibility of the student to determine the scholarship and quality of any .com site.  Ask your instructor before using any site if you are unsure. Points will be deducted from the rubric if the site does not demonstrate scholarship or quality. Current outside scholarly sources must be published with the last 5 years.  Instructor permission must be obtained BEFORE the assignment is due if using a source that is older than 5 years.