NURS 6051 Discussion electronic health records, telemedicine/telehealth, self-service kiosks, wearable technology, and health tracking devices

NURS 6051 Discussion electronic health records, telemedicine/telehealth, self-service kiosks, wearable technology, and health tracking devices

NURS 6051 Discussion electronic health records, telemedicine/telehealth, self-service kiosks, wearable technology, and health tracking devices

There is absolutely no disagreement that technology has had an array of advancements over the past years. Within the past decade there has been advancement throughout electronic health records, telemedicine/telehealth, self-service kiosks, wearable technology, and health tracking devices (Becker’s Healthcare, 2015).

The biggest change and trend that I most recently experienced is the constant use of telehealth/e-visits, Skype, Zoom, and Microsoft Teams due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth is the use of technology to deliver health care, health information, or health education at a distance (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2018). A few ways telehealth is used in the clinical setting are sharing images amongst disciplines for assessment and diagnosis, transmit data, provide disease prevention information and promote good health while using real time video and phone services (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2018).

The use of all of these new trends have definitely become the “new normal”. Meetings are now virtual to permit social distancing and many visits and consultations are through the telephone. A challenge of the virtual meetings could be employee engagement and employees actually paying attention to all being said throughout the meetings. As for telehealth services and e-visits, I worry of the challenge that patients can be wrongly diagnosed and improperly assessed during their verbal only visits. As professionals we rely on our assessment skills to care for patients. Although our care has a great amount to do with what the patients tell us, we also use our skills of visually examining and touching patients to make the most accurate diagnosis and provide the best care for symptoms. Patient bills are also the same as an in-person visit, for a phone call that is sometimes only five minutes.

The biggest benefit of this virtual trend is safety amongst health care professionals and patients. Also, it could benefit providers to limit non-emergent in person visits to avoid possible exposures. As far as possible risks, patient information can possibly be compromised, and higher security must be used so information remains protected. Since private in-person rooms are not available it is still recommended by the Department of Health and Human Services to use private locations and patient should not receive services in public or semi-public settings (Jacobson, 2020). Throughout the pandemic there were also many cases of hacking into Zoom and Skype meetings. Providers must do all they can to avoid these data breeches to protect patient information.

Telehealth and e-visits do show advancements for nursing practice as it opens more career opportunity. “Telehealth eases the impact of the nursing shortage because it provides easier access to professionals for patients” (Teladoc Health, n.d. para # 5.) According to the American Telemedicine Association, within five years, 50% of healthcare services might be provided by telehealth services (Teladoc Health, n.d.). Along with career advancements, this will allow nurses to increase their assessment skills and critical thinking with the need of accurately finding treatment for patients.  With time and growth in this particular area, I think there will be growth in this area and providers will accurately provide care for patients. With continued time, I also think there will be improvements to data management and protecting patient information.

References

Becker’s Healthcare. (2015). 10 biggest technological advancements for healthcare in the last decade. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/healthcare-information-technology/10-biggest-technological-advancements-for-healthcare-in-the-last-decade.html

Jacabson, A. (2020). The benefits and risks of telehealth services. Risk Management Magazine. http://www.rmmagazine.com/

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Teladoc Health. (n.d.). How telehealth can ease the nationwide nursing shortage. https://intouchhealth.com/nationwide-nursing-shortage-eased-with-telehealth-services/#:~:text=Telehealth%20eases%20the%20impact%20of,so%20efficiency%20is%20markedly%20improved.

NURS 6051 Discussion Healthcare Information Technology Trends

Throughout history, technological advancements have appeared for one purpose before finding applications elsewhere that lead to spikes in its usage and development. The internet, for example, was originally developed to share research before becoming a staple of work and entertainment. But technology—new and repurposed—will undoubtedly continue to be a driver of healthcare information. Informaticists often stay tuned to trends to monitor what the next new technology will be or how the next new idea for applying existing technology can benefit outcomes.

In this Discussion, you will reflect on your healthcare organization’s use of technology and offer a technology trend you observe in your environment.

To Prepare:

  • Reflect on the Resources related to digital information tools and technologies.
  • Consider your healthcare organization’s use of healthcare technologies to manage and distribute information.
  • Reflect on current and potential future trends, such as use of social media and mobile applications/telehealth, Internet of Things (IoT)-enabled asset tracking, or expert systems/artificial intelligence, and how they may impact nursing practice and healthcare delivery.

By Day 3 of Week 6

Post a brief description of general healthcare technology trends, particularly related to data/information you have observed in use in your healthcare organization or nursing practice. Describe any potential ch

allenges or risks that may be inherent in the technologies associated with these trends you described. Then, describe at least one potential benefit and one potential risk associated with data safety, legislation, and patient care for the technologies you described. Next, explain which healthcare technology trends you believe are most promising for impacting healthcare technology in nursing practice and explain why. Describe whether this promise will contribute to improvements in patient care outcomes, efficiencies, or data management. Be specific and provide examples.

By Day 6 of Week 6

Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days, offering additional/alternative ideas regarding opportunities and risks related to the observations shared.

*Note: Throughout this program, your fellow students are referred to as colleagues.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 6 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 6NURS 6051 Discussion electronic health records, telemedicine telehealth, self-service kiosks, wearable technology, and health tracking devices

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 6 Discussion

 Module 4: Technologies Supporting Applied Practice and Optimal Patient Outcomes (Weeks 6-8)

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Informatics Tools and Technologies [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 6051 Discussion electronic health records, telemedicine/telehealth, self-service kiosks, wearable technology, and health tracking devices

Learning Objectives

Students will:

  • Evaluate healthcare technology trends for data and information in nursing practice and healthcare delivery
  • Analyze challenges and risks inherent in healthcare technology
  • Analyze healthcare technology benefits and risks for data safety, legislation, and patient care
  • Evaluate healthcare technology impact on patient outcomes, efficiencies, and data management
  • Analyze research on the application of clinical systems to improve outcomes and efficiencies
Due By Assignment
Week 6, Days 1–2 Read/Watch/Listen to the Learning Resources.
Compose your initial Discussion post.
Week 6, Day 3 Post your initial Discussion post.
Begin to compose your Assignment.
Week 6, Days 4-5 Review peer Discussion posts.
Compose your peer Discussion responses.
Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 6, Day 6 Post at least two peer Discussion responses on two different days (and not the same day as the initial post).
Week 6, Day 7 Wrap up Discussion.
Week 7, Days 1-7 Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 8, Days 1-6 Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 8, Day 7 Deadline to submit your Assignment.

Learning Resources

Required Readings

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

  • Chapter 14, “The Electronic Health Record and Clinical Informatics” (pp. 267–287)
  • Chapter 15, “Informatics Tools to Promote Patient Safety and Quality Outcomes” (pp. 293–317)
  • Chapter 16, “Patient Engagement and Connected Health” (pp. 323–338)
  • Chapter 17, “Using Informatics to Promote Community/Population Health” (pp. 341–355)
  • Chapter 18, “Telenursing and Remote Access Telehealth” (pp. 359–388)

 Dykes, P. C., Rozenblum, R., Dalal, A., Massaro, A., Chang, F., Clements, M., Collins, S. …Bates, D. W. (2017). Prospective evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to improve outcomes in intensive care: The Promoting Respect and Ongoing Safety Through Patient Engagement Communication and Technology Study. Critical Care Medicine, 45(8), e806–e813. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002449

HealthIT.gov. (2018c). What is an electronic health record (EHR)? Retrieved from 

https://www.healthit.gov/faq/what-electronic-health-record-ehr

Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D. Leak, L. D., Tieman, L. A., & Manworren, R. C. B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to Improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221. 

Skiba, D. (2017). Evaluation tools to appraise social media and mobile applications. Informatics, 4(3), 32–40. 

Required Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Public Health Informatics [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Electronic Records and Managing IT Change [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Discussion

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_5051_Module04_Week06_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View
List View

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Post is cited with two credible sources.

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible sources.

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100

Wearable technology is one of the health information technology trends in our organization. It allows healthcare professionals to remotely monitor a patient’s status during the day and for a person to monitor their health status (Iqbal et al., 2021). The wearable devices are usually non-invasive and are developed by integrating a number of sensors with wearable accessories such as wristbands and smartwatches. The devices are connected with smartphones having health applications, which help monitor the person’s health status (Iqbal et al., 2021). Sensors are attached to the devices and are used to collect information about the patient’s health and environment, then uploaded to a hospital’s server or databases.

Potential challenges associated with wearable technology include servicing and maintenance costs. Wearable devices use technologies that require continuous upgrading. High-cost maintenance, servicing, and upgrading costs create a financial challenge for healthcare organizations and the end-users (Pradhan et al., 2021). Wearable technology can improve the quality of healthcare as it allows health providers to monitor a patient’s vital signs remotely. This can lead to an improved quality of life and reduce healthcare costs. Nevertheless, wearable technology has the potential risk of data privacy and security breach. Real-time monitoring of patients’ health information using devices makes it vulnerable to cyber-attacks (Pradhan et al., 2021). Health IT legislation mandates the maintenance of privacy and security of patients’ information. There is an associated risk of mishandling patients’ crucial information, which may negatively affect the treatment process and patient outcomes.

The Cloud storage system is a technology trend that seems promising in impacting technology in nursing practice. It supports the storage of large files and sharing them via various cloud-based platforms (Gao et al., 2018). The cloud system can help health providers efficiently access crucial clinical and patient data. Fast information access can improve the quality of consultations among providers, thus improving the quality of care and health outcomes.

References

Gao, F., Thiebes, S., & Sunyaev, A. (2018). Rethinking the Meaning of Cloud Computing for Health Care: A Taxonomic Perspective and Future Research Directions. Journal of medical Internet research20(7), e10041. https://doi.org/10.2196/10041

Pradhan, B., Bhattacharyya, S., & Pal, K. (2021). IoT-Based Applications in Healthcare Devices. Journal of healthcare engineering2021, 6632599. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6632599

Iqbal, S. M., Mahgoub, I., Du, E., Leavitt, M. A., & Asghar, W. (2021). Advances in healthcare wearable devices. npj Flexible Electronics5(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41528-021-00107-x

Name: NURS_5051_Module04_Week06_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Post is cited with two credible sources.

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

(0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible sources.

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
(0%) – 0 (0%)
(0%) – 0 (0%)
(0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

(0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

(0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Participation
(5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
(0%) – 0 (0%)
(0%) – 0 (0%)
(0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100