WK10DISCUSSION

INSTRUCTIONS:

· Review the resources provided in the Nursing Informatics Competencies. 

· Consider all that you already knew and what you have learned in this class. What are the key informatics competencies that you feel every nurse should possess? How can those competencies impact improvements in healthcare outcomes in your organization?

· Read a selection of your classmates’ responses and respond to at least two of your classmates on two different days by expanding upon their responses or sharing additional or alternative perspectives. 

· Note: Your responses to classmates should be substantial (250 words minimum), supported with scholarly evidence from your research and/or the Learning Resources, and properly cited using APA Style. Personal anecdotes are acceptable as part of a meaningful response, but cannot stand alone as a response. Your responses should enrich the initial post by supporting and/or offering a fresh viewpoint, and be constructive, thereby enhancing the learning experience for all students.

REQUIRED RESOURCES:

· American Nurses Association. (2022).  Nursing informatics: Scope and standards of practiceLinks to an external site.  (3rd ed.).

· “Preparation and Certification for Nursing Informatics Specialty Practice” (pp. 52–55)

· “Standard 1-6” (pp. 80-90)

· “Standard 11” (pp. 97-98)

· Bivona-Tellez, C. M., Hebda, T., Newbold, S. K., VanderKooi, M., Tietze, M., Rivard, M., Clarke, M., & Pordeli, L. (2024).  Informatics competency assessment of nursing faculty: Progress and plansLinks to an external site.. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 42(8), 555–556. https://doi.org/10.1097/cin.0000000000001184

· Farzandipour, M., Mohamadian, H., Akbari, H., Safari, S., & Sharif, R. (2021).  Designing a national model for assessment of nursing informatics competencyLinks to an external site..  BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making ,  21 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01405-0

· Reid, L., Button, D., Breaden, K., & Brommeyer, M. (2024).  Nursing informatics: Competency challenges for nursing facultyLinks to an external site.. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 310, 1196–1200. https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI231154

POST 1;

Informatics Competencies

Before taking this course, I understood nursing informatics mainly as the technology nurses use every day, such as electronic health records (EHRs) and electronic health systems. I knew they were essential for documenting patient care and communicating with other healthcare providers, but I viewed informatics primarily as a documentation tool. As I progressed through this course, I realized informatics is much broader. It is the foundation for using data to improve decision-making, evaluate outcomes, guide quality improvement initiatives, and even shape public health practice. Looking back, I can see that informatics has been part of my current role all along and I did not recognize how much of my work depends on it. Working in a state public health department program has given me a completely different appreciation for informatics. Every day, our program relies on surveillance data, epidemiologic trends, and publicly reported data to identify children at risk, monitor testing rates, and determine where public health interventions are most needed. Throughout this course, I found myself connecting many of the concepts we discussed to projects I have already been involved with at my work.

One experience that stands out occurred before this course began, when I was asked to help build a new statewide electronic case management system for our program. At the time, my role focused primarily on converting our existing paper forms into electronic versions because our current surveillance system functions mainly as a repository for blood lead results with a free-text documentation section. I approached the project from the perspective of making sure the forms matched our existing workflow. After completing this course, I realized there is much more to consider when developing an electronic health system. Learning about workflow analysis, standardized documentation, interoperability, usability, clinical decision support, and nursing informatics competencies has changed the way I think about system design. When work on our electronic health system resumes, I feel much more prepared to contribute meaningful input from a nursing perspective rather than simply converting forms into an electronic format. I also have a greater appreciation for interoperability because a statewide system must allow public health nurses, epidemiologists, laboratories, healthcare providers, and local health departments to exchange standardized information efficiently while maintaining data integrity, patient privacy, and continuity of care. Building a system that supports collaboration across disciplines is just as important as building one that stores information (American Nurses Association [ANA], 2022).

For example, I now recognize the importance of embedding standardized nursing documentation rather than relying on free-text notes. Standardized documentation will improve consistency across California, make data easier to analyze, and allow nurses to evaluate outcomes more effectively. I also believe the system should capture meaningful patient outcome measures rather than focusing only on process measures, such as whether required paperwork was completed. Measures such as follow-up blood lead testing rates, successful communication with primary care providers, timely public health interventions, completion of case management activities, and reductions in the number of children lost to follow-up would provide a much clearer picture of how nursing care is improving children's health. Instead of tracking whether nurses completed required tasks, the system could demonstrate whether those interventions actually improved outcomes for children and families.

I have also worked closely with their epidemiologist and data unit to monitor program performance using Excel tracking systems. Before this course, I viewed those reports primarily as administrative requirements. Now I recognize they represent opportunities to evaluate population health outcomes, identify disparities, and guide evidence-based interventions. A more robust informatics system could identify geographic hotspots with elevated blood levels, monitor community trends in real time, evaluate disparities in follow-up testing, and help direct education and outreach efforts to neighborhoods with the greatest need. Rather than simply collecting surveillance data, the system could become a proactive tool that supports nursing practice, epidemiology, quality improvement, and population health across California.

This course also reinforced several informatics competencies that I believe every nurse should possess. Accurate documentation, data literacy, ethical management of health information, effective communication, and the ability to analyze data for quality improvement are essential regardless of practice setting. The Nursing Informatics: Scope and Standards of Practice  emphasizes that nurses have a professional responsibility to assess, collect, manage, communicate, and evaluate health information to support safe, evidence-based care (ANA, 2022). Nurses should not only know how to document patient care but also understand how that information can be transformed into knowledge that improves decision-making and healthcare outcomes. Research continues to emphasize that informatics competency requires ongoing development as technology evolves, making lifelong learning an essential part of nursing practice (Bivona-Tellez Et al., 2024; Farzandipour et al., 2021; Reid et al., 2024).

Looking back over this course, I realize nursing informatics is not only about technology. It is about giving nurses the ability to influence healthcare beyond individual patient encounters. This course has given me the confidence to contribute differently when our electronic health system development resumes because I now understand how thoughtful system design can improve documentation, strengthen public health surveillance, support evidence-based nursing practice, and ultimately improve outcomes for children and families across California. As I continue my DNP journey, I know these informatics competencies will help me advocate for systems that not only support nursing workflow but also improve population health and create meaningful and lasting change.

References

American Nurses Association. (2022). Nursing informatics: Scope and standards of practice. (3rd ed.).

Bivona-Tellez, C. M., Hebda, T., Newbold, S. K., VanderKooi, M., Tietze, M., Rivard, M., Clarke, M., & Pordeli, L.

(2024). Informatics competency assessment of nursing faculty: Progress and plans. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 42(8), 555–556.  https://doi.org/10.1097/cin.0000000000001184 Links to an external site.

Farzandipour, M., Mohamadian, H., Akbari, H., Safari, S., & Sharif, R. (2021). Designing a national model for

assessment of nursing informatics competency. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 21(1), 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01405-0 Links to an external site.

Reid, L., Button, D., Breaden, K., & Brommeyer, M. (2024). Nursing informatics: Competency challenges for

nursing faculty. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 310, 1196–1200.  https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI231154 Links to an external site.

POST 2:

Nursing informatics is often associated with large hospital systems, but its relevance extends across all practice settings. As a solo FNP and owner/operator of a med spa, informatics competency directly affects patient safety, regulatory compliance, and overall quality of care. In an independent practice, there is no informatics department or compliance team — accountability for safe and effective system use rests entirely with me.

One essential competency every nurse should possess is foundational informatics knowledge, not just basic computer proficiency. Farzandipour et al. (2021) found that informatics knowledge has the strongest influence on overall informatics competency compared to basic computer skills. That distinction is significant in advanced practice. Electronic systems used for documentation, e-prescribing, image storage, and consent management do more than store information; they generate data that influence clinical decisions, reporting, and risk exposure. Understanding how these systems function supports safer practice.

Data literacy is another critical competency. Even in a small outpatient setting, clinical data are constantly being generated through complication tracking, follow-up outcomes, product utilization patterns, and patient satisfaction metrics. The American Nurses Association (ANA, 2022) Standards 1–6 emphasize assessment, outcomes identification, implementation, and evaluation — responsibilities that now rely heavily on accurate digital documentation and interpretation of data. Without data literacy, quality improvement efforts are limited.

Clinical decision support awareness is also relevant outside of acute care. Electronic prescribing systems provide drug interaction alerts and allergy warnings, and documentation templates promote standardized care. Appropriate use of these tools enhances patient safety, while overreliance or dismissal of alerts can create risk. Standard 11 of the ANA (2022) standards underscores the importance of communication, which includes secure digital communication and responsible management of patient information.

The literature further highlights that informatics competency must be intentionally developed. Reid et al. (2024) identify barriers to faculty engagement with digital health technologies, and Bivona-Tellez et al. (2024) emphasize the importance of competency assessment. As an independent practitioner, continuous self-evaluation and professional development are necessary to maintain informatics proficiency.

In a solo practice environment, informatics competency supports safe prescribing, accurate documentation, data security, and regulatory compliance. Regardless of practice size, healthcare outcomes are influenced by how effectively information systems are used. Informatics is not an adjunct skill — it is integral to safe and effective advanced nursing practice.

References (APA 7)

American Nurses Association. (2022). Nursing informatics: Scope and standards of practice (3rd ed.). American Nurses Association.

Bivona-Tellez, C. M., Hebda, T., Newbold, S. K., VanderKooi, M., Tietze, M., Rivard, M., Clarke, M., & Pordeli, L. (2024). Informatics competency assessment of nursing faculty: Progress and plans. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 42(8), 555–556.  https://doi.org/10.1097/CIN.0000000000001184 Links to an external site.

Farzandipour, M., Mohamadian, H., Akbari, H., Safari, S., & Sharif, R. (2021). Designing a national model for assessment of nursing informatics competency. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 21(1), Article 35.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01405-0 Links to an external site.

Reid, L., Button, D., Breaden, K., & Brommeyer, M. (2024). Nursing informatics: Competency challenges for nursing faculty. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 310, 1196–1200.  https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI231154 Links to an external site.

RUBRIC:

NURS_8210_Week10_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8210_Week10_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points): Discussion posts minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 11:59pm ET. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 11:59pm ET. 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 ptsExcellent• 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.) • Detailed response to faculty. 19 to >15.0 ptsGood• 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.) • Appropriate reply to faculty. 15 to >12.0 ptsFair• 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.) • Brief response to faculty with minimal effort. 12 to >0 ptsPoor• 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.) • Fails to respond to faculty inquiries.	20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)	30 to >29.0 ptsExcellentInitial 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 ptsGoodInitial 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 ptsFairInitial 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 ptsPoorInitial 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 ptsExcellentDiscussion 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. • Posts on separate day. 19 to >15.0 ptsGoodDiscussion 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. • Posts on separate day. 15 to >12.0 ptsFairDiscussion 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. • Posts on separate day. 12 to >0 ptsPoorDiscussion 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. • Posts on same day.	20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)	20 to >19.0 ptsExcellentDiscussion 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. • Posts on separate day. 19 to >15.0 ptsGoodDiscussion 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. • Posts on separate day. 15 to >12.0 ptsFairDiscussion 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. • Posts on separate day. 12 to >0 ptsPoorDiscussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Posts on same day.	20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)	10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentDiscussion 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 ptsGoodDiscussion 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 ptsFairDiscussion 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 ptsPoorDiscussion 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