Transforming Nursing

profileTinacherry100$
WK.6.PEERS.TRANSFORMINGNURSING.docx

TRANSFORMING NURSING

DIGITAL HEALTH: MOBILE DEVICES, WEARABLES, TELEHEALTH, TELEMEDICINE

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to two of your colleagues. Expand upon your colleague’s posting or offer an alternative perspective on the use of digital health

PEER # 1

Shinu Mary Rajan

                              The Use, Implementation and Barriers of Digital Health for Healthcare Organizations and Nursing Practice.

The delivery of patient care has changed in recent years due to the adoption of digital health technologies by nursing practices and healthcare organizations. These technologies include wearable technology, mobile health applications, telemedicine, electronic health records (EHRs), artificial intelligence (AI) systems, and wearable devices. Within healthcare settings, there are many opportunities to improve patient experiences, optimize resource utilization, and increase efficiency by adopting digital health solutions. Nevertheless, despite the possible advantages, nursing practice and healthcare institutions encounter several challenges and hurdles when implementing digital health technologies. These impediments may include budgetary and technological limitations and problems with data security, workflow integration, and regulatory compliance. Healthcare professionals may also resist change, and there may be differences in patient populations' access to technology and worries about the quality of care provided via digital platforms. The use of digital health technologies in healthcare settings and how they affect nursing practice will be discussed in this Discussion. The advantages of implementing digital health will be discussed, including better patient engagement, streamlined procedures, and increased communication. In addition, the impediments to the effective integration of digital health solutions will be recognized and examined, and solutions to these obstacles will be proposed. Nursing professionals and healthcare organizations can more effectively navigate the changing landscape of healthcare delivery in the digital age by gaining insight into the opportunities and challenges related to digital health.

                                                                                                   Digital innovation - Telehealth Telehealth, also called telemedicine, is a digital health innovation that has completely changed how healthcare is provided through telecommunications technology. A wide range of services are included in Telehealth, such as remote monitoring, telepsychiatry, tele pharmacy, and virtual consultations. This innovation connects patients and healthcare providers regardless of geographic distance using video conferencing, smartphone apps, and other digital communication tools. Enhancing access to healthcare services is one of the main benefits of Telehealth, particularly for those who reside in underserved or rural areas with limited healthcare facilities. Telehealth lowers barriers to care and improves convenience by removing the need for patients to travel great distances to see a healthcare provider. Furthermore, Telehealth can improve continuity of care by facilitating routine patient monitoring and follow-ups for individuals with chronic conditions, which can improve disease management and outcomes. Telehealth also benefits healthcare organizations by promoting the use of resources and strengthening operational efficiency. By seeing patients remotely, cutting down on wait times, and making the most of clinical space, Telehealth enables healthcare professionals to manage their time and resources effectively. Furthermore, without having to make significant investments in physical infrastructure, Telehealth can assist healthcare organizations in expanding their services and reaching a larger patient population. In addition, Telehealth has proven helpful in times of international health emergency, like the COVID-19 pandemic, by facilitating prompt and secure access to medical care while lowering the possibility of virus transmission. During the pandemic, telehealth utilization increased as medical professionals used virtual care solutions to keep patients' medical records up to date while following social distancing protocols. According to researchers, Telehealth (TH) was presented as a potentially helpful tool for assisting integrated care in treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Its two main objectives are enhancing self-management and offering remote assistance for ongoing illness management, Gaveikaite V. et al. (2020).

Telehealth has many advantages, but there are still several obstacles and difficulties in the way of its widespread use. One of these is the digital divide, which may restrict access to telehealth services for some populations, particularly those with limited internet connectivity or digital literacy skills. Other issues include regulatory and reimbursement concerns, data privacy and security concerns, and technological barriers for patients and healthcare providers. According to researchers, advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) are in a great position to lead the advancement of telehealth initiatives. From a King viewpoint, the article's authors shed light on the telehealth leadership opportunities available to APRNs in the present healthcare systems, Fronczek, A. E., & Cowen, N. (2019).

                                                          Challenges and Opportunities have arisen in your Healthcare Organization. The integration of Telehealth brought both opportunities and challenges to our healthcare organization. As we worked to modernize our infrastructure to facilitate smooth video consultations and ensure data security and privacy compliance, technical challenges first surfaced. Employee education was essential since nurses had to modify their clinical and communication abilities to interact with patients from a distance. Careful attention was required during implementation due to regulatory considerations, especially regarding patient confidentiality under HIPAA regulations. Even with these difficulties, there were plenty of benefits to Telehealth. It increased our reach, allowing us to provide care to patients in underserved or remote areas and allowing patients with mobility limitations to receive continuous care. Virtual consultations were convenient for patients, which increased their engagement and satisfaction. Additionally, Telehealth promoted teamwork among medical professionals, improving patient outcomes and care coordination. Through iterative improvements and ongoing feedback, we improved our telehealth practices over time, modifying our healthcare delivery model to more accurately reflect the requirements of our clients. The potential for Telehealth to significantly enhance patient outcomes, healthcare efficiency, and access makes it a transformative digital innovation. Healthcare organizations and policymakers can fully utilize Telehealth to establish a patient-centered and more accessible healthcare system by managing the obstacles and difficulties related to its implementation. According to researchers, numerous ways exist to increase the variety of telehealth services and the number of telehealth sessions conducted. These ways include introducing new technologies, expanding services into several new specialty areas, and modernizing telehealth equipment to improve uptake and streamline workflows, Seto E. et al. (2019).

Further investigation into the implementation of Telehealth revealed more obstacles to patient acceptance and access. Exacerbating already existing healthcare disparities, not all patients had access to the technology or internet connectivity needed to participate in virtual consultations. To overcome these obstacles, innovative ideas were required, like lending out devices or collaborating with neighborhood organizations to install internet access in underprivileged areas; according to researchers, Telehealth—or healthcare provided via computers, the internet, and other communication devices—is increasing in tandem with the advancement of technology and changing social and cultural norms. Professionals must possess the necessary skills to provide these services to ensure their quality and security. Still, one of the obstacles to adopting Telehealth has been noted as the lack of professional training, onasdottir, S.K., Thordardottir, I. and Jonsdottir, T. (2022).

Furthermore, vital patient education and outreach initiatives were needed to win patients' trust and convince them that Telehealth is a practical way to deliver healthcare. Patient confidence in the new modality required a clear explanation of the advantages and restrictions of Telehealth as well as assurances regarding data security and privacy protections. Notwithstanding these obstacles, the telehealth revolution offered a game-changing chance to reconsider conventional healthcare delivery and adopt a patient-centered strategy. We were able to move toward a model of care that put accessibility, convenience, and individualized patient experiences first by utilizing telehealth technologies. This change was primarily the work of nurses, who acted as front-line proponents of patient-centered care and telehealth adoption. We gained critical insight into the significance of flexibility, teamwork, and ongoing development in embracing digital innovations to improve the caliber and accessibility of healthcare services as we successfully navigated the challenges of telehealth implementation. In summary, there were opportunities and challenges when Telehealth was implemented in our healthcare organization. Implementation was initially hampered by access, technical, and regulatory issues, but these problems were overcome with creative thinking, proactive staff development, and patient-centered strategies. After overcoming these challenges, Telehealth became a revolutionary tool that increased our influence, enhanced patient accessibility, and promoted teamwork in delivering patient-centered care. 

 

Fronczek, A. E., & Cowen, N. (2019). Leadership Opportunities for Nurses in Telehealth: A King Perspective.  Nursing Science Quarterly, 32(4), 327–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894318419864347

Gaveikaite, V., Grundstrom, C., Winter, S., Schonenberg, H., Isomursu, M., Chouvarda, I., & Maglaveras, N. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for Telehealth in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management: a qualitative case study in Greece.  BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 20(1), 216. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01221-y

Jonasdottir, S. K., Thordardottir, I., & Jonsdottir, T. (2022). Health professionals' perspective towards challenges and opportunities of telehealth service provision: A scoping review.  International Journal of Medical Informatics, 167, N.PAG. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104862

Seto, E., Smith, D., Jacques, M., & Morita, P. P. (2019). Opportunities and Challenges of Telehealth in Remote Communities:  the Yukon Telehealth System Case Study. JMIR Medical Informatics, 7(4), e11353. https://doi.org/10.2196/11353

 ReplyReply to Comment

·

PEER #2

Karen Royal

Digital Infusion Pumps

Benefits

Adopting digital innovations in healthcare and nursing practice, presents several challenges and opportunities. Among the many different technology that exists at my current institution, smart infusion pump technology has provided numerous benefits and some challenges. Smart pump infusion technology can potentially reduce/prevent errors like incorrect dose, rate, and pump failure and demonstrated an 80% reduction in infusion-related drug errors (Alamer & Alanazi, 2023). In fact, the smart pump contains dose error reduction software (DERS) that help to prevent deviations in programming by users to prevent errors (Alamer & Alanazi, 2023).

Challenges

Despite the benefits of smart infusion pump technology, an absence of integration with hospital systems may decrease the support for these pumps. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a class 1 recall of the Alaris pump BD Alaris Syringe Module that could lead to inaccurate fluid delivery (Park, 2023).

The smart infusion Nimbus pump had a recent voluntary recall at my institution for the following reasons identified by the manufacturer. The battery power can potentially affect the performance of the pump by causing an immediate power off event, systems error, flow rate errors, and pump housing design which result in damage over time causing false occlusions and flow rate inaccuracies (Martinez, 2024). To correct the issue for the Nimbus pumps, the battery for the infusion pump will brown out (fail-safe), auditory and visual system error alarm will alert the user and the design will be updated (Marinez, 2024).

Conclusion

There are currently constant software updates to the Alaris pumps and removal of defective ones. The nimbus pumps will be replaced with CADD pumps until the necessary recommendations and corrections are made for usage. Despite the failures of the pumps, opportunities for future improvement are broad and the benefits of having them outweigh the costs. Ultimately, integrating a smart pump infusion with the hospital system and implementing better systems update and design will eliminate the challenges that exists with smart pump devices.

References

Alamer, F., & Alanazi, A. T. (2023). The impact of Smart Pump Technology in the healthcare system: A scope review.  Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36007

Martinez, S. (2024, March 29).  INFUTRONIX issues voluntary recall of Nimbus Infusion Pumps. 24x7. https://24x7mag.com/medical-equipment/patient-care-equipment/infusion-therapy/infutronix-issues-voluntary-recall-of-nimbus-infusion-pumps/#:~:text=InfuTronix%2C%20LLC%20announced%20a%20voluntary,EpiD%2C%20and%20Nimbus%20II%20EMS.

Park, B. (2023, December 6).  Compatibility issues prompt recall of alaris infusion pumps. MPR. https://www.empr.com/home/news/safety-alerts-and-recalls/compatibility-issues-prompt-recall-of-alaris-infusion-pumps/#:~:text=The%20Food%20and%20Drug%20Administration,2004%20and%20September%2022%2C%202023.

. Assignment Rubric Details Close

Rubric

NURS_8210_Week6_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8210_Week6_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 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 library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)

30 to >29.0 pts

Excellent

Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

29 to >23.0 pts

Good

Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

23 to >18.0 pts

Fair

Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.

18 to >0 pts

Poor

Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)

10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

9 to >8.0 pts

Good

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

8 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

10 pts

Total Points: 100