Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis Paper

Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis Paper

Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis Paper

Health care organizations adopt numerous strategies to achieve high-quality care and patient satisfaction. They include current technologies, continuous quality improvement, and promoting change to optimize patient outcomes. Despite these strategies, multidimensional risks occur in health care settings and profoundly hamper care quality and patient safety. An effective response to workplace risks in health care organizations prompts the management to invest in reliable and sustainable risk management programs. In health practice, risk management entails the continuous effort to detect, measure, and mitigate risks (NEJM Catalyst, 2018). Actions vary with the expected risks, organization’s vulnerability, and resources. The purpose of this paper is to describe how my organization’s quality and improvement processes contribute to its risk management program.

BUY A CUSTOM PAPER HERE ON; Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis Paper

Role of the MIPPA-Approved Accreditation Body

Health care organizations use internal and external measures to prevent risks. Their ability to prevent risks demonstrates their commitment to enhancing care quality and ensuring patient care is provided in safe environments. Accreditation is an official review of an organization’s capacity to meet the requirements of a Medicare Improvement for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA) approved body’s requirements and standards. Passing the accreditation tests confirms an organization’s commitment to high-level performance and continued focus on achieving high-quality care (The Joint Commission, 2022). The assumption is that the quality of care is inversely proportional to the volume of risks that an organization encounters. Different accreditation bodies evaluate health care organizations differently.

The Joint Commission (JC) accredits the current organization by assessing quality maintenance practices and various risk management components. Generally, passing the JC accreditation implies that a health care organization has established appropriate mechanisms for continuous improvement in patient care (The Joint Commission, 2022). Achieving the accreditation informs the patients that they will be receiving high-quality, safe care when needed. As Vaziri et al. (2021) conjectured, high-quality, safe care is characterized by low risks implying that issues that hamper health outcomes, such as medication administration errors and misdiagnosis, have a low probability of occurrence. To ascertain the organization’s ability to achieve a high quality and safety score, the JC conducts an on-site survey in the facility to assess its compliance with the commission’s standards (The Joint Commission, 2022). Relevant data is obtained from patients’ medical records and interviews with randomly selected patients on the care experience. JC’s surveyors also observe health care professionals and processes.

Patients’ records, interviews with patients and health care professionals, and observations provide adequate information about the institution’s quality improvement and risk management processes. For instance, the absence of hospital-acquired infection incidences in patient records confirms that the facility has employed robust measures to detect and mitigate such risks. Typical hospital-acquired conditions risking patient safety include falls, pressure ulcers, and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CMS.gov, 2022). Positive experiences with patient care and high satisfaction are reliable indicators of the facility’s commitment to improving care quality. Since JC’s visits are unannounced, risk control and mitigation are continuous processes.

Role of Administrative Personnel in Healthcare Ethics and Risk Management

Health care organizations’ administrative personnel play different roles in health care ethics and establishing organizational risk management strategies and operational policies. At the pinnacle of administration, the facility’s management support different risk management interventions including education and training, continuous risk assessment, and ensuring that the organization has adequate safeguards against technical and physical risks. Education and training health care professionals on risk identification and mitigation empower them to understand risks and follow the correct risk avoidance procedures. The knowledge from the training programs also allows health care professionals to assess potential risks and inform the management to facilitate timely intervention. Technical and physical safeguards protect computer systems and information from unauthorized access to patient data (Alexander et al., 2019). They help to prevent malicious use of patient data and possible data compromise that can cause medical errors.

Besides the organization’s management, the risk management unit also helps to establish risk management strategies and formulate operational policies. In most health care organizations, risk managers are responsible for communicating and documenting risks and creating robust policies for effectively responding to and managing risks (NEJM Catalyst, 2018). Similarly, the organization’s risk manager guides the organization in developing the appropriate risk management policies, formulating measures for preventing and managing adverse events, and establishing protocols for risk reporting. The risk management department is also responsible for risk assessment, measurement, and continuous updates to the management about organizational safety.

Role of Program in Supporting Ethical Standards, Patient Consent, and Patient Rights

Organizations’ risk management and compliance programs differ in design and core components. The organization’s risk management program is designed to help it detecting, assessing, and mitigating risks, while the compliance program outlines potential risks for non-compliance and remediation steps to promote compliance. By design, these programs support ethical standards since they prevent harm, as underlined under the non-maleficence ethical principle. Risk management measures further help the facility to secure patients’ private data, which is stressed under HIPAA’s privacy rule (Alexander et al., 2019). Securing protected health information also reduces the probability of breaching the principle of confidentiality. The programs also outline when and how to share patient data to reduce risks and promote compliance. Concerning patient consent, it is mandatory for patients to authorize data use before sharing. Patient rights and responsibilities are expressed through their recognition as partners in decision-making and respecting their autonomous decisions irrespective of the risks to patients’ health.

Legal and Ethical Responsibilities of Health Care Professionals

Health care professionals have numerous responsibilities in upholding risk management policies and administering safe health care in organizations. One of their key responsibilities is timely reporting of adverse incidents to facilitate timely responses. The reporting mandate is a core component of a just culture that encourages incident reporting to promote workplace safety (Paradiso & Sweeney, 2019). Timely response to risks helps to reduce their destructive potential. The organization also obliges health care professionals to practice safety measures when engaging in patient care. Recommended measures include confirming medication, using appropriate technologies that the organization authorizes, and treating patients when mentally and physically ready. The readiness factor is established on the principle that mental and physical exhaustion impairs judgment and increases the probability of erring in decision-making. Since medical errors hamper patient safety, preventing them is instrumental in administering safe patient care in the organization.

Quality Improvement Processes and Contribution to Excellence

Health care organizations should be continually committed to improving quality to achieve excellence. Quality improvement in health care entails the continuous monitoring, assessment, and improvement of health care standards. Improving performance is characterized by low safety risks and high patient satisfaction. Among many quality improvement processes in the current organization, embracing evidence-based practice is critical to the organization’s journey toward excellence. As Dryden-Palmer et al. (2020) conjectured, evidence-based practice thrives in organizations that embrace change and innovation as a foundation of quality improvement. Since the management realizes the benefits of evidence-based practice, it supports projects seeking to improve care quality, optimize patient safety, and prevent workplace problems. Achieving these goals has been instrumental in the organization’s compliance with accreditation standards, besides a high reputation and healthy relationships with patients and the community.

The other vital process in quality improvement efforts is continuous risk assessment. Pascarella et al. (2021) stressed the importance of constant risk scrutiny in health care since it helps in identifying hazards to avert occurrence or control their magnitude. Generally, risk assessment is a central component of risk management that helps the organization to gather information about risk potential to establish proactive measures to prevent occurrence. Such a response ensures that care quality and patient safety are not risked. Focus areas during risk assessment include cybersecurity, privacy, patients’ rights, and medical records.

The organization also encourages the use of appropriate technologies to enhance security and achieve better care quality. Such technologies include telehealth and barcode scanning. As Mantena and Keshavjee (2021) noted, the importance of telehealth and similar digital health programs cannot be overlooked in the current health practice due to the increased need for remote patient care. Besides facilitating patient monitoring, telehealth has been instrumental in reducing contaminations in the organization by minimizing patient visits. Barcode scanning improves medication administration and prevents medication errors (Lachman & van der Wilden, 2021). Such proactive measures enhance care quality and promote excellence by preventing health complications, readmissions, and increased hospitalization stemming from medication errors.

Conclusion

The provision of quality and safe patient care is a universal responsibility among health care organizations. Accordingly, health care organizations committed to achieving quality care prioritize risk management for detecting, measuring, and mitigating risks. As discussed in this paper, risk management is broad, and passing the accreditation test is among the identifiers of an organization’s ability to manage patient care-related risks. Other practices recommended in the current workplace include incident reporting, engaging in safe practices, and engaging in care when able to make sound decisions. The organization also performs a continuous risk assessment to ensure potential dangers are identified and addressed appropriately.

References

Alexander, S., Frith, K. H., & Hoy, H. (Eds.). (2019). Applied clinical informatics for nurses (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

CMS.gov. (2022). Hospital-acquired conditions. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/HospitalAcqCond/Hospital-Acquired_Conditions

Dryden-Palmer, K. D., Parshuram, C. S., & Berta, W. B. (2020). Context, complexity and process in the implementation of evidence-based innovation: A realist informed review. BMC Health Services Research, 20(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-4935-y

Jones, B., Vaux, E., & Olsson-Brown, A. (2019). How to get started in quality improvement. Bmj, 364. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k5437

Lachman, P., & van der Wilden, E. (2021). Use of barcode technology can make a difference to patient safety in the post-COVID era. IJQHC Communications, 1(1), lyab014. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijcoms/lyab014

Mantena, S., & Keshavjee, S. (2021). Strengthening healthcare delivery with remote patient monitoring in the time of COVID-19. BMJ Health & Care Informatics, 28(1), e100302. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2020-100302

NEJM Catalyst. (2018). What is risk management in healthcare? https://catalyst.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/CAT.18.0197

Pascarella, G., Rossi, M., Montella, E., Capasso, A., De Feo, G., Gerardo Botti, S., … & Morabito, A. (2021). Risk analysis in healthcare organizations: Methodological framework and critical variables. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 14, 2897-2911. https://doi.org/10.2147%2FRMHP.S309098

Paradiso, L., & Sweeney, N. (2019). Just culture: It’s more than policy. Nursing Management, 50(6), 38-45. doi: 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000558482.07815.ae

The Joint Commission. (2022). The accreditation process. https://www.jointcommission.org/what-we-offer/accreditation/become-accredited/what-is-accreditation/#4c1f2a11abbc4874b44277816be430c8

Vaziri, S., Fakouri, F., Mirzaei, M., Afsharian, M., Azizi, M., & Arab-Zozani, M. (2019). Prevalence of medical errors in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4464-8

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE ON; Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis Paper

Requires Lopeswrite
Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to analyze how an organization’s quality and improvement processes contribute to its risk management program.

This assignment builds on the Risk Management Program Analysis – Part One assignment you completed in Topic 1 of this course. TOPIC ASSIGNMENT-PART ONE ASSIGNMENT IS ORDER #238994 . IT IS ATTACHED IN THE ORDER FILES

Assume that the sample risk management program you analyzed in Topic 1 was implemented and is now currently in use by your health care employer/organization. Further assume that your supervisor has asked you to create a high‐level summary brief of this new risk management program to share with a group of administrative personnel from a newly created community health organization in your state who has enlisted your organization’s assistance in developing their own risk management policies and procedures.

Compose a 1,450‐1,500 word summary brief that expands upon the elements you first addressed in the Topic 1 assignment. In this summary brief, address the following points regarding your healthcare organization and its risk management program:

1) Explain the role of your organization’s MIPPA-approved accreditation body (e.g., JC, ACR, IAC) in the evaluation of your institution’s quality improvement and risk management processes.

2) Describe the roles that different levels of administrative personnel play in healthcare ethics and establishing or sustaining employer/employee-focused organizational risk management strategies and operational policies.

3) Illustrate how your organization’s risk management and compliance programs support ethical standards, patient consent, and patient rights and responsibilities.

4) Explain the legal and ethical responsibilities health care professionals face in upholding risk management policies and administering safe health care at your organization.

5) Relate how your organization’s quality improvement processes support and contribute to its overall journey to excellence.

In addition to your textbook, you are required to support your analysis with a minimum of three peer‐reviewed references.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:

BS Health Sciences

3.3 Explain the ethical and legal responsibilities of health care professionals related to risk management assessment and policies.

Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis – Part Two – Rubric

LISTGRID

PRINT TO PDF

Rubric Criteria

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Role of the MIPPA

22.5 points

Criteria Description

Role of the MIPPA-Approved Accreditation Body in Evaluation of the Quality Improvement and Risk Management Processes of an Organization

5. 5: Excellent

22.5 points

An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is comprehensive. The submission further incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.

4. 4: Good

19.13 points

An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is present and incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

16.88 points

An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

14.63 points

An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is not included.

Administrative Roles

22.5 points

Criteria Description

Administrative Roles Relevant to Employer-Employee-Focused Risk Management Strategies and Operational Policies

5. 5: Excellent

22.5 points

A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is comprehensive. The submission incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.

4. 4: Good

19.13 points

A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

16.88 points

A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

14.63 points

A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is partially incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is not included.

Support of Patient Rights and Responsibilities

22.5 points

Criteria Description

Support of Patient Rights and Responsibilities by Risk Management Programs and Quality Improvement Processes

5. 5: Excellent

22.5 points

An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is comprehensive. The submission incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.

4. 4: Good

19.13 points

An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

16.88 points

An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

14.63 points

An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is partially incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is not included.

Legal and Ethical Responsibilities of Health Care Professionals (B)

22.5 points

Criteria Description

Legal and Ethical Responsibilities of Health Care Professionals to Uphold Risk Management Policies and Administer Safe Health Care (C3.3)

5. 5: Excellent

22.5 points

An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is comprehensive. The submission incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.

4. 4: Good

19.13 points

An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

16.88 points

An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

14.63 points

An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is partially incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is not included.

How Quality Improvement Processes in a Health Care Organization Support Its Journey to Excellence

22.5 points

Criteria Description

How Quality Improvement Processes in a Health Care Organization Support Its Journey to Excellence

5. 5: Excellent

22.5 points

Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is comprehensive. The submission further incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.

4. 4: Good

19.13 points

Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

16.88 points

Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

14.63 points

Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its journey to excellence is not included.

Thesis Development and Purpose

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. 4: Good

6.38 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.63 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.88 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. 4: Good

6.38 points

Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.63 points

Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.88 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. 4: Good

6.38 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.63 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.88 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

All format elements are correct.

4. 4: Good

6.38 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.63 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.88 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style

5. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. 4: Good

6.38 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.63 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.88 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total150 points