Plan Presentation: | Nursing

Clinical Requirement:

C4Assess3.docx For this assessment, you will develop an 8–14 slide PowerPoint presentation with thorough speaker's notes designed for a hypothetical in-service session related to the improvement plan you developed in Assessment 2. Scenario: For this assessment, build on the work that you have done in your first two assessments and create an agenda and PowerPoint of an educational in-service session that would help a specific staff audience learn, provide feedback, and understand their roles and practice new skills related to the safety improvement plan you created. Instructions: The final deliverable for this assessment will be a PowerPoint presentation with detailed presenter's notes representing the material you would deliver at an in-service session to raise awareness of your chosen safety improvement initiative focusing on a specific patient safety issue and to explain the need for such an initiative. Additionally, you must educate the audience as to their role and importance to the success of the initiative. This includes providing examples and practice opportunities to test out new ideas or practices related to the safety improvement initiative. Be sure that your presentation addresses the following, which corresponds to the grading criteria in the scoring guide. Please study the scoring guide carefully so you understand what is needed for a distinguished score. · Describe the purpose and goals of an in-service session focusing on a specific patient safety issue. · Explain the need for and process to improve safety outcomes related to a specific patient safety issue. · Explain to the audience their role and importance of making the improvement plan successful. · Create resources or activities to encourage skill development and process understanding related to a safety improvement initiative. · Communicate with nurses in a respectful and informative way that clearly presents expectations and solicits feedback on communication strategies for future improvement. There are various ways to structure an in-service session; below is just one example: · Part 1: Agenda and Outcomes. · Explain to your audience what they are going to learn or do, and what they are expected to take away. · Part 2: Safety Improvement Plan. · Give an overview of the current problem focusing on a specific patient safety issue, the proposed plan, and what the improvement plan is trying to address. · Explain why it is important for the organization to address the current situation. · Part 3: Audience's Role and Importance. · Discuss how the staff audience will be expected to help implement and drive the improvement plan. · Explain why they are critical to the success of the improvement plan focusing on a specific patient safety issue. · Describe how their work could benefit from embracing their role in the plan. · Part 4: New Process and Skills Practice. · Explain new processes or skills. · Develop an activity that allows the staff audience to practice and ask questions about these new processes and skills. · In the notes section of your PowerPoint, brainstorm potential responses to likely questions or concerns. · Part 5: Soliciting Feedback. · Describe how you would solicit feedback from the audience on the improvement plan and the in-service. · Explain how you might integrate this feedback for future improvements. Remember to account for activity and discussion time. Additional Requirements: · Presentation length: There is no required length; use just enough slides to address all the necessary elements. Remember to use short, concise bullet points on the slides and expand on your points in the presenter's notes. If you use 2 or 3 slides to address each of the parts in the above example, your presentation would be at least 10 slides and no more than 15 slides (not including the title, conclusion, or references slides). · Speaker notes: Speaker notes (located under each slide) should reflect what you would actually say if you were delivering the presentation to an audience. This presentation does NOT require audio or a transcript. Another presenter would be able to use the presentation by following the speaker's notes. · APA format: Use APA formatting for in-text citations. Include an APA-formatted reference slide at the end of your presentation. · Number of references: Cite a minimum of 3 sources of scholarly or professional evidence to support your assertions. Resources should be no more than 5 years old. PPTGuidelines.pptx Guidelines for Effective PowerPoint Presentations Introduction One concern about visual presentations is that the technology used to create them can be used in such a way that it actually detracts from the message rather than enhances it. To help you consider carefully how your message is presented so that it reflects care, quality, and professionalism, consider the information provided in the remaining slides. NOTE: This presentation serves as an example in itself, by utilizing all of the guidelines mentioned. Outline Writing Organization Audience Design Images Bullets Tables Font Speaker Notes The following topics will be covered: Writing Present ideas succinctly with lean prose. Use short sentences. Use active, rather than passive voice. Avoid negative statements, if possible. Avoid double negative entirely. Check spelling and grammar. Use consistent capitalization rules. Organization Develop a clear, strategic introduction to provide context for the presentation. Develop an agenda or outline slide to provide a roadmap for the presentation. Group relevant pieces of information together. Integrate legends and keys with charts and tables. Organize slides in logical order. Present one concept or idea per slide. Use only one conclusion slide to recap main ideas. Audience Present information at language level of intended audience. Do not use jargon or field-specific language. Follow the 70% rule—If it does not apply to 70% of your audience, present it to individuals at a different time. Design Use a consistent design throughout the presentation. Keep layout and other features consistent. Use the master slide design feature to ensure consistency. Use consistent horizontal and vertical alignment of slide elements throughout the presentation. Leave ample space around images and text. Images When applicable, enhance text-only slide content by developing relevant images for your presentation. Do not use gratuitous graphics on each slide. Use animations only when needed to enhance meaning. If selected, use them sparingly and consistently. Bullets Use bullets unless showing rank or sequence of items. If possible, use no more than five bullet points and eight lines of text total per slide. Tables Use simple tables to show numbers, with no more than 4 rows x 4 columns. Reserve more detailed tables for a written summary. Font Keep font size at 24 point or above for slide titles. Keep font size at 18 or above for headings and explanatory text. Use sans serif fonts such as Arial or Verdana. Use ample contrast between backgrounds and text. Speaker Notes Summarize key information. Provide explanation. Discuss application and implication to the field, discipline or work setting. Document the narration you would use with each slide. image1.gif image2.gif image3.gif C4Assessment2.docx 9 Root-Cause Analysis and Safety Improvement Plan Root-Cause Analysis and Safety Improvement Plan Delay in response to deteriorating patient condition is a significant problem in healthcare that threatens patient safety and outcome. Prevention of complications, reducing mortality rate, and improving the recovery outcomes are most important if interventions are done at the prompt time during the critical window of care (Peden et al., 2021). However, system issues such as understaffing, poor communication, and protocols that are not working impede timely response. The analysis of root causes of delayed responses is restricted to organizational, technological, and human factors of the problem. This will provide evidence based strategies and an improvement plan that is structured enough to act as a guide to action on how to fix these. An all-encompassing approach to improving patient safety and outcomes will be guaranteed through timeline and metrics for success. Analysis of the Root Cause Delayed response to early signs of patient deterioration has been recognized as a major problem with serious consequences for patients, families, and health care providers (Muralitharan et al., 2021). The Root cause analysis (RCA) discussed here is a sentinel event in which a patient’s condition was not immediately recognized, and adverse outcomes occurred that could have been avoided had the patient’s condition been promptly recognized. A patient in a high-acuity inpatient unit had labored breathing and abnormal vital signs, which were documented but not escalated to the medical team. The warning signs were ignored; with the delay in activating the Rapid Response Team (RRT), the patient’s condition started to deteriorate, becoming respiratory failure, which resulted in ICU admission. The delay to react was due to systemic inefficiencies and communication protocol gaps. The incident was first observed by the nursing staff during their routine monitoring. Unclear escalation protocols and not having all the teams communicating properly prevented from doing what was needed. The patient was more affected by this event, having to deal with complications and a longer stay in the hospital. The family of the patient also underwent emotional distress, frustration, and mistrust towards the health care system. The incident proved to be a learning experience for the staff involved, as it revealed inadequacies in training and systemic inefficiencies, which in turn caused stress and lowered morale for the staff. In an ideal situation, the nursing staff should have identified the seriousness of the patient’s condition and escalated care quickly using protocols in place. However, there was no standardized communication tool, such as SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation), imposed to share information clearly and timely. Patient-to-nurse ratios were also high, making it difficult for the staff to monitor patients regularly. Another weak point was in shift handovers, as critical information was miscommunicated or left out. Using RCA, the RCA identified several root causes for the delayed response. A major contributing factor was inadequate staffing levels, which limited the number of patients nurses could keep an eye on due to high patient workloads. Fear of reprisal or a lack of confidence may have prevented staff from escalating concerns; as may understaffing, insufficient training or the fact that staff were ill trained to recognize early warning signs and act on them. The patient monitoring was inhibited by technological gaps such as the lack of integrated (EWSS) in electronic health records (EHR). Additionally, environmental factors including limited access to monitoring equipment and poor unit layout added to delays on these units. Improvements to these root causes (inadequate staffing, insufficient training, communication barriers, and technological limitations) will be needed to improve response times and prevent future events like this. Application of Evidence-Based Strategies Several evidence based strategies to address delayed response to patient deterioration have been identified by the literature. One very effective method to do this is via the use of Rapid Response Teams (RRTs). RRTs, as shown by Zhang et al. (2024) reduce adverse events by facilitating immediate intervention for deteriorating patients. Zhang et al. (2024) have found that RRTs are an important component in decreasing hospital mortality and timely delivery of care. Because with RRTs trained and available on the frontline the staff can escalate to an available resource, which fosters a safe and collaborative culture. Another important tool would be Early Warning Scoring Systems (EWSS), which includes the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). By using vital signs, they can identify patients at risk of deterioration and alert early for intervention. According to Alhmoud et al. (2023), EWSS should also be integrated into an electronic health record to minimize response time and manual error. Healthcare teams catch early and intervene before a patient’s condition becomes critical, through proactive efforts. SBAR type communication tools standardize the transfer of critical information and prevent delays from miscommunication. In high pressure, Sampson et al. (2024) found that SBAR could improve clarity and efficiency of handovers. Standardized communication protocol but also a tool to facilitate the exchange of information in a standardized and efficient way and to set on the same page and get confidence and trust to escalate properly. These strategies address the main causes of staffing inefficiencies, training gaps and communication barriers. In this paper we discuss how by integrating RRTs, EWSS, and SBAR protocols we can get to the point of early recognition and escalation processes that can lead to better patients’ outcomes and safety. Improvement Plan with Evidence-Based and Best-Practice Strategies Complete safety improvement plan is needed to deal with delayed responses, where actionable strategies and evidence-based practices are required. The first step is to initiate setting up and training of Rapid Response Teams (RRTs). The teams will also comprise skilled clinicians who will be able to recognize early warning signs and act quickly when things go wrong. We will enforce training sessions to build a confident and team culture to ensure we practice our escalation protocols and teamwork. Moreover, the existing electronic health record (EHR) system should be complemented with Early Warning Scoring Systems (EWSS) that will provide real time alert to patients who are deteriorating so that their monitoring is more efficient and timely interventions are made (Mann et al., 2021). By standardizing communication protocols, such as SBAR, emergency and shift handovers will increase accuracy and efficiency of information transfer. All clinical staff are trained on SBAR to make sure that all clinical staff practice communication across the board to minimize errors (Sampson et al., 2024). Another important thing is recruiting more staff to deal with high patient to nurse ratios. That will result in higher staff levels, and therefore closer monitoring of patients, quicker responses to warning signs, and perhaps, tentatively, higher quality care. The objective of this plan is to reduce response times by 30% in 6 months, adverse events by 20% in one year, and increase confidence in escalation protocols for staff. A rough timeline includes: i. Months 1-2: Train on RRT activation, EWSS, SBAR protocols. ii. Months 3-4: Integrate pilot EWSS into selected units and assess outcomes. iii. Months 5-6: Implement EWSS system wide, hire more staff and monitor progress. Existing Organizational Resources This improvement plan will depend largely on the use of existing organizational resources. Implementation and support of the plan will rely heavily on personnel such as advanced practice nurses, clinical educators, and IT specialists. Early Warning Scoring Systems (EWSS) can be integrated into clinical workflows by advanced practice nurses, and clinical educators will lead training sessions on Rapid Response Team (RRT) protocols and communication tools such as SBAR (Mann et al., 2021). EWSS will be seamlessly integrated into electronic health records (EHR) by IT specialists. Staff can use existing resources such as hospital simulation labs for hands on training where staff can practice and refine their skills in realistic scenarios. In addition, current monitoring equipment, which is limited, can be deployed strategically such that it is in high-risk areas. They might also need to fund the hiring of more nursing staff, the buying of advanced monitoring tools and the up taking of technology to support real time alerts. The securing of these resources will be critical in achieving the desired outcomes and long term sustainability of the improvement plan. The organization can use existing assets and acquire the needed resources to create a safer and more responsive care environment. Conclusion The delayed response to deteriorating patient conditions calls for a multi-faceted approach comprising root cause analysis, evidence-based strategies and a comprehensive improvement plan. Healthcare organizations can greatly enhance patient safety by implementing interventions like Rapid Response Teams, Early Warning Scoring Systems, and standardized communication protocols. Delayed responses have a direct impact on patient outcomes, but also family trust, team dynamics, and organizational performance metrics. Supporting these efforts will also include leveraging existing resources and a culture of safety. The plan will be continuously evaluated and refined to ensure its success and ultimately creates safer healthcare environments and better outcomes for patients. References Alhmoud, B., Bonicci, T., Patel, R., Melley, D., Hicks, L., & Banerjee, A. (2023). Implementation of a digital early warning score (NEWS2) in a cardiac specialist and general hospital settings in the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.  BMJ Open Quality,  12(1), e001986. https://bmjopenquality.bmj.com/content/12/1/e001986 Mann, K. D., Good, N. M., Fatehi, F., Khanna, S., Campbell, V., Conway, R., ... & Cook, D. (2021). Predicting patient deterioration: a review of tools in the digital hospital setting.  Journal of medical Internet research,  23(9), e28209. https://www.jmir.org/2021/9/e28209/ Muralitharan, S., Nelson, W., Di, S., McGillion, M., Devereaux, P. J., Barr, N. G., & Petch, J. (2021). Machine learning–based early warning systems for clinical deterioration: systematic scoping review.  Journal of medical Internet research,  23(2), e25187. https://www.jmir.org/2021/2/e25187/ Peden, C. J., Aggarwal, G., Aitken, R. J., Anderson, I. D., Bang Foss, N., Cooper, Z., ... & Scott, M. (2021). Guidelines for perioperative care for emergency laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations: part 1—preoperative: diagnosis, rapid assessment and optimization.  World journal of surgery,  45(5), 1272-1290. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00268-021-05994-9?wt_mc=Internal.Event.1.SEM.ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst&utm_source=ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst&utm_medium=email&utm_content=AA_en_06082018&ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst_20210307 Sampson, F. C., O'Hara, R., Long, J., & Coster, J. E. (2024). Understanding good communication in ambulance pre-alerts to Emergency Department. Findings from a qualitative study of UK emergency services.  medRxiv, 2024-09. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.09.25.24314364v1 Zhang, Q., Lee, K., Mansor, Z., Ismail, I., Guo, Y., Xiao, Q., & Lim, P. Y. (2024). Effects of rapid response team on patient outcomes: A systematic review.  Heart & Lung,  63, 51-64. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147956323002388