Site icon Eminence Papers

Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation Simulation for Mercy Medical Center

Martin

Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation Simulation for Mercy Medical Center

The healthcare industry is depending more and more on data that is both comprehensive and up-to-date. This data is also set to meet the standards set by the government. Real-time data has become the norm in healthcare facilities in improving the services they deliver to patients. Many hospitals, surgical centres, and emergency services have distinctive needs in addition to the ever-complex organizational structures. Hence, these facilities require a concrete understanding of the data collected over a specific period. It is, therefore, essential that healthcare practitioners can offer information in real time on which actions can be taken. Dashboards provide accurate time information that practitioners can use in crafting prompt actions. By utilizing dashboards, service transparency becomes possible even as the KPIs are set and how the organization performs against these KPIs is easily understood and translated. This report will analyze the Dashboard at Mercy Medical Center and pinpoint a specific area the hospital needs to improve.

Summary Description of Mercy Medical Center

Mercy Medical Center (MMC) is among the top healthcare facilities in Shakopee, Minnesota. Several patient services are offered, including pediatric, labour and delivery, medical and surgery, and ER services. MMC is the recipient of many awards, including the Healthgrades Outstanding Patient Experience Award, Shakopee Ledger Top 20 Workplaces 2014 & 2015, Women’s Choice Award for the Best Hospital for Patient Experience in Emergency Care, as well as Highest Safe Surgery Rating awarded by a consumer advocacy magazine.

MMC Dashboard Metrics Against Benchmarks

Diabetes is a genetic condition and is also a metabolic disorder (Khetan et al., 2018). Several factors contribute to the development of the illness outside of genetics, including lifestyle factors such as a sedentary life that results in obesity and some types of cancer, such as breast cancer, which induces diabetes (Garcia et al., 2016). The National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report, published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, contains the benchmarks set against diabetes. The Diabetes Quality Measures contain information not presented in the Mercy Medical Clinic Dashboard. The National categories are derived from the top-ranking States, with the best performers acquiring a higher level; the reverse is true. The classes are as shown below:

Mercy Medical Center addresses two areas critical in the care of diabetic patients. The two areas are foot analysis and the HgbA1c test. However, the centre fails to examine all possible issues. The data in the previous pages indicates that Mercy Medical Clinic is falling short of meeting the benchmark parameters. The most critical issue regarding diabetes is kidney failure, an aspect that MMC has ignored in its dashboard. One in every four persons with diabetes suffers from kidney failure due to the disease. In the NHQR table, the 2378.1 estimates indicate kidney failure is a significant issue in diabetics.

Benchmark Challenges

Meeting the prescribed benchmarks can be challenging for MMC. This is because of kidney failure disease and its burden on the patient and the healthcare facility. Kidney failure worsens as diabetes progresses, even when a patient continues treatment. Every person who has diabetes is susceptible to kidney disease, although not all will go into kidney failure. The risk of developing diabetes nephropathy is treated to the length of time one has lived with the disease (Anders et al., 2019). When a patient deteriorates into kidney failure, dialysis is inevitable, and in some cases, a kidney transplant is necessitated in end-stage renal disease.

As mentioned earlier, diabetes is genetic, though in some cases, it develops because of other factors. The number of patients has increased over the years, with Whites and those aged between 20 and younger leading the patient demographics. At the same time, the number of eye exams has increased while the foot exams and HgbA1c tests have declined. It appears that MMC has become slack in testing for diabetes and is relying on the eye exam to diagnose diabetes. While not all patients with diabetes have visual impairments of whatever level, the best test to confirm high blood glucose levels alongside the eye and foot exams is the HgbA1c test. The young population that has increased their frequency at the hospital should be tested for genetic diabetes. Perhaps the reason for decreasing the efficiency in testing for diabetes can be explained by the disproportionate physician-to-patient ratio. The number of physicians is 433, while the ER visits 29,893, a rough balance of 1 physician to 69 patients. This indicates poor staffing and probable overworking, compromising the quality of care rendered to patients.

According to the NHRQ (2019), adults aged 40 years with diabetes and who received all the recommended services for diabetes between 2008 and 2018 that is, flu vaccination, foot examination, dilated eye exam, and two or more HgbA1c) were as follows:

MMC can improve community health by addressing all parameters of diabetes testing. When patients are informed of what signs and symptoms to look out for, they will likely visit the hospital for a checkup and determine if they are ill. For those who test positive for all or most of the parameters, the physician will start them on treatment. A recently diagnosed diabetic has a higher chance of survival than one unaware of their medical condition. MMC ought to test a large number of youths who come into the clinic for diabetes to ensure that they live lives with the knowledge of how to live with diabetes or how to avoid developing diabetes (Vajravelu & Lee, 2018).

Ethical Actions

Diabetes is a lifelong illness, and patients must be assisted in managing the same. Proper testing ought to be done because failure to diagnose the condition can result in kidney disease or even kidney failure (Riddle & Herman, 2018). The main stakeholders, physicians and nurses, can turn the situation around and include, as part of the mandatory patient care, the complete testing of diabetes. When the hospital policies are changed and mandate the thorough testing of diabetes for every one of the patients exhibiting symptoms of diabetes, then positive patient outcomes will be realized. The cost of caring for patients will decline because of early diagnosis that will curtail the deterioration of patient’s health, a situation that would increase the price. The ethical principle of justice calls for healthcare practitioners to be equitable in the resources they use in caring for patients. Hence, all patients will need to be tested for diabetes using the eye and foot exam as well as the HgbA1c test without discrimination,

Additionally, the patients must be educated and encouraged to participate in their health. Passiveness in patient care should be discouraged, and instead, treatment plans should involve the patient in decision-making and lifestyle modifications to ensure longevity.

Conclusion

MMC is a healthcare facility that has received awards for its stellar services. However, the facility’s services are wanting regarding diabetes patient care. The number of tests performed on patients has declined, with physicians appearing to favour only one test, the eye test, to make a diagnosis. This move is dangerous as it predisposes patients to deteriorated health from poor diagnosis and can lead to kidney disease or kidney failure. As part of its policies, MMC needs to mandate compulsory testing using all tests for better diagnostic results.

References

Anders, H. J., Huber, T. B., Isermann, B., & Schiffer, M. (2018). CKD in diabetes: diabetic kidney disease versus nondiabetic kidney disease. Nature Reviews Nephrology, 14(6), 361-377.

García-Jiménez, C., Gutiérrez-Salmerón, M., Chocarro-Calvo, A., García-Martinez, J. M., Castaño, A., & De la Vieja, A. (2016). From obesity to diabetes and cancer: epidemiological links and role of therapies. British journal of cancer, 114(7), 716-722.

Khetan, S., Kursawe, R., Youn, A., Lawlor, N., Jillette, A., Marquez, E. J., … & Stitzel, M. L. (2018). Type 2 diabetes–associated genetic variants regulate chromatin accessibility in human islets. Diabetes, 67(11), 2466-2477.

NHQRNET (2019). Diabetes Quality Measures Compared to Achievable Benchmarks. Retrieved May 10th 2021. https://nhqrnet.ahrq.gov/inhqrdr/National/benchmark/summary/Diseases_and_Conditions/Diabetes#:~:text=NationalDiabetes%20Quality%20Measures%20Compared,depending%20on%20the%20desired%20outcome.

Riddle, M. C., & Herman, W. H. (2018). The cost of diabetes care—an elephant in the room. Diabetes Care, 41(5), 929-932.

Vajravelu, M. E., & Lee, J. M. (2018). Identifying prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in asymptomatic youth: should HbA1c be used as a diagnostic approach? Current diabetes reports, 18(7), 1-10.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Question 

Write a 4–6-page report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance concerning prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, it advocates for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explains the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.

Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation Simulation for Mercy Medical Center

Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation Simulation for Mercy Medical Center

In the era of health care reform, many of the laws and policies set forth by the government at the local, state, and federal levels have specific performance benchmarks related to care delivery outcomes that organizations must achieve. For organizational success, the interprofessional care team must understand reports and dashboards that display the metrics related to performance and compliance benchmarks.

Maintaining standards and promoting quality in modern healthcare is crucial, not only for the care of patients but also for the continuing success and financial viability of healthcare organizations. In the era of healthcare reform, healthcare leaders must understand what quality care entails and how quality in health care connects to the standards set forth by relevant federal, state, and local laws and policies. It is also important to understand pertinent benchmarks resulting from these laws and procedures and how they relate to quality care and regulatory standards.

Health care is a dynamic, complex, and heavily regulated industry. For this reason, you will be expected to constantly scan the external environment for emerging laws, new regulations, and changing industry standards. You may discover that as new policies are enacted into law, ambiguity in interpreting various facets of the law may occur. Sometimes, new rules conflict with preexisting statutes and regulations, or unexpected implementation issues may warrant further clarification from lawmakers. Adding partisan politics and social media to the mix can further complicate understanding of the process and buy-in from stakeholders.

Note: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent estimates are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.

Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance concerning prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, it advocates for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explains the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.

Review the performance dashboard metrics and relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need. Be sure to cite the relevant healthcare policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.

Note: Remember that you can submit all or a portion of your draft report to Smarthinking for feedback before you offer the final version for this assessment. If you plan on using this free service, be mindful of the 24–48 hours turnaround time for receiving feedback.

Preparation

Choose one of the following three options for a performance dashboard to use as the basis for your evaluation:

Option 1: Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Simulation

Use the data presented in the Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation multimedia activity as the basis for your evaluation.

Note: The writing that you do as part of the simulation could serve as a starting point to build upon for this assessment.

Option 2: Actual Dashboard

Use an actual dashboard from a professional practice setting for your evaluation. If you decide to use accurate dashboard metrics, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

Note: Ensure your data complies with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

Option 3: Hypothetical Dashboard

If you have a sophisticated understanding of dashboards relevant to your practice, you may also construct a hypothetical dashboard for your evaluation. Your hypothetical dashboard must present at least four different metrics, at least two of which must be underperforming the prescribed benchmark set forth by federal, state, or local laws or policies. In addition, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

Note: Ensure your data are HIPAA compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

Requirements

The report requirements below correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each bar to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, be sure to note the requirements for document format, length, and supporting evidence.

Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal healthcare laws or policies.

Which metrics are not meeting the benchmark for the organization?

What are the local, state, or federal health care policies or laws that establish these benchmarks?

What conclusions can you draw from your evaluation?

Are there any unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty where additional information could improve your evaluation?

Analyze one challenge meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a healthcare organization or interprofessional team.

Consider the following examples:

Support services (any ancillary department that supports a specific care unit in the organization, such as pharmacy, cleaning services, dietary, et cetera).

Cultural diversity in the organization and community.

Procedures and processes.

Address the following:

Advocate for ethical action directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders to address a benchmark underperformance.

Who would be an appropriate group of stakeholders to act on improving your identified benchmark metric?

Why should the stakeholder group take action?

What ethical actions could the stakeholder group take to support improved benchmark performance?

Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.

Proofread your report before you submit it to minimize errors that could distract readers and make it more difficult for them to focus on the substance of your evaluation and analysis.

Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.

Be sure to apply correct APA formatting to source citations and references.

Exit mobile version