Title
Running Head: SAFER GUIDES 1
SAFER GUIDES 5
Safer guides
Student name
Institution affiliation
Professor
Course
Date
Safer guides
Domain one- safe health information technology
The electronic health record system uses and supports quality protocols for data exchange with other systems.
Implemented and updated versions of malware, operating system, virus, and, interface protocols, and application software are utilized.
Interfaces connected to the system to system enhances the standardized clinical vocabularies connected to applications.
There should be software and hardware that is completely separate from the live environment used for interface testing.
Policies and procedures are required to illustrate how to stop and start exchanging data across the interface in a well-organized manner.
Security strategies that include role-based access need to e developed and implemented to monitor and manage crucial designated elements of data exchange and interface
Domain one
Values, interpretation, and test names for the library results are in the electronic health record as structured information facilitated with standardized nomenclature.
Functionality for tests and reporting ordering results is tested before and after go-live.
After there are changes in applications and components associated with the CPOE and diagnostic services, the information and data presentation is reviewed to enhance completeness and accuracy.
Domain two utilizing the health IT safely
The electronic health record system can track the wellbeing of all orders and related strategies that include the collected, received specimen: test acknowledged, and reported.
Partially (if the nurses add tests after one has pulled the orders out of the standing orders implying that they were ordered through the EPIC), event in the range of a minute between each other; we do not always receive lab orders were meant to be completed. After the dr. Decides to view the results; they will then detect where something was not completed and consult.
The clinician in the ordering duty is identifiable on every test ordered and test reports. If the additional clinician is answerable for follow-up, that clinician will also be identified according to the electronic health record.
After the test amendment, the change is vivid in the electronic health system and printed reports.
When there is an amendment in the test, the ordering clinician and other clinicians are responsible for any follow up and are alerted electronically. For significant changes clinically, the clinicians are alerted through contact directly from the system.
Workflows are specifically vulnerable to mishandling of test results, particularly the crucial ones are detected, and backup approaches are implemented to ensure that the test results fall into the hands of a responsible individual for the affected patient care.
Results that have been identified to be either outside the usual reference ranges or determined to be abnormal are flagged.
Display of results that may be text, numeric, image, and graphical should be easily accessible.
Automated and non-interruptive results notifications referred to as basket alerts are restricted to clinically relevant individuals to minimize alert fatigue.
The results notifications are maintained to be clinically inboxes until a clinician acts to address them.
There is an electronic health record-based strategy where clinicians must either enable surrogates to access the principal clinicians inboxes or assign surrogates who will review notifications.
There are implemented approaches for forwarding results and result from notifications among clinicians.
Summarization mechanisms to graph and trend laboratory data are available in the electronic health system.
Third domain-safety monitoring
As a quality assurance branch, the healthcare institution addresses and monitors test results sent to the wrong healthcare professional or never transmitted to any clinician. The organization also addresses practices related t results reporting and quality follow-up. Several monitored practices include the utilization of the electronic health records results and the follow up from clinicians on the abnormal test results.
Organizational procedures and policies enhance timely notification of both the abnormal and normal test results, and the timelines of notification are monitored.
The assessment team leader; peter Clattenburg
Assessment date of completion 9-5-2020
Assigned assessment team members; peter Clattenburg, angelica Donald, Fenty Jonathan, Valery Ian
Assessment notes: one of the major problems experienced in the lab is that we’re no longer have complete access to the newly established EPIC system utilized. Clinicians in the lab are unable to notify dr. Offices that they are about to go in and change test codes in case they are ordered incorrectly. One is forced to wait for the office to do so for themselves, and the process can take up to hours since not all the offices will fix issues right then after we call.
Recommended practice
The rationale for risk assessment and practice
Structured laboratory results facilitate electronic health records tracking and reporting functions. Structured information creates a platform for clinical decision support that can eliminate or avoid errors and optimize patients’ safety.
Suggested input sources
Electronic health record developers, health information technology support, and diagnostic services
Assessment notes
Inclusion of pop-up boxes that are seen by nurses while entering the labs, particularly when there are duplicates form other offices that are being ordered
The nurses and other clinicians should have some basics of how to read test results versus having a call lab.
Follow-up practices
Nurses should have some prior skills to order tests versus just guessing and picking the one they come across.
References
Whitt, K. J., Eden, L., Merrill, K. C., & Hughes, M. (2017). Nursing student experiences regarding the safe use of electronic health records: a pilot study of the Safety and Assurance Factors for EHR Resilience guides. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing,35(1), 45-53.
Sittig, D. F., Ash, J. S., Wright, A., Chase, D., Gebhardt, E., Russo, E. M., … & Singh, H. (2020). How can we partner with electronic health record vendors on the complex journey to safer health care?.Journal of Healthcare Risk Management,40(2), 34-43.
Makar, E. V., McBride, S., & Roberts, D. W. (2017). Using Delphi to Develop a High Value Survey: Determining Awareness of The SAFER Guides among Nurse Informaticists.Journal of Informatics Nursing,2(3), 6-13. Safe
by Sign Safe
Submission date: 18-Dec-2020 02:43PM (UTC-0500)
Submission ID: 1478842971
File name: Safer_guides.docx (28.25K)
Word count: 1025
Character count: 5742
12%
SIMILARITY INDEX
0%
INTERNET SOURCES
0%
PUBLICATIONS
12%
STUDENT PAPERS
1 12%
Exclude quotes Off
Exclude bibliography On
Exclude matches < 7% Safe ORIGINALITY REPORT PRIMARY SOURCES Submitted to Southern New Hampshire University - Continuing Education Student Paper Safe by Sign Safe Safe ORIGINALITY REPORT PRIMARY SOURCES
