MHA 560 TUI Application of Health Care Information Systems Essay
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Brionne Harris Trident University International MHA560 Health Information Systems 8/18/22 Overview of the CDC The CDC is a health care organization responsible for conducting and enhancing health promotion, and facilitating preparedness and prevention operations in the U.S. The organization was formed in 1946 and is managed by the U.S Health and Human Services department (CDC, 2018). The CDC works in conjunction with other healthcare organizations at all levels to observe, manage, and prevent outbreaks of diseases. Its other responsibilities include initiating disease prevention plans and maintaining national health statistics. Overview of the CDC Cont’d The CDC is also responsible for leading public efforts regarding controlling and preventing chronic and infectious illnesses and environmental health threats, among other things (CDC, 2022). The healthcare organization focuses on several strategic areas including: Advancing global health. Reforming and enacting health policies. Enhancing support to all health departments in the U.S. Reducing leading death causes. Improving epidemiology and surveillance. The CDC and Health Information Systems The CDC has significantly invested in health information systems. The organization offers oversight and governance of its health information systems. Some of these health information systems include: Electronic health records (EHRs) ((Smith et al., 2016). Health information exchange. Syndromic surveillance systems. Vital statistics system. Immunization information systems (IIS). Electronic Health Records (EHRs) EHRs entail the use of an electronic system to access and distribute the medical information of a patient or particular population (Ehrenstein et al., 2019). The CDC uses EHRs to: Determine the most suitable healthcare for various populations and patients. Identify patient groups that may be vulnerable to health problems. Identify opportunities for health promotion and disease prevention. Immunization Information Systems (IISs) Healthcare organizations used IISs to consolidate immunization information into one credible source to help care providers and professionals (Pabst & Williams, 2015). The CDC uses IISs to: Assist immunization programs to identify high-risk populations for vaccine-manageable diseases. Appropriate resources accordingly and target interventions. Remind individuals about immunization schedules. Exchange data with other systems to enhance records consolidation and facilitate timely immunizations. Health Information Exchange (HIE) The HIE used by the CDC is known as Epidemic Information Exchange (Epi-X). The CDC uses its Epi-X to: Connect public professionals across the nation enhancing information sharing (CDC, 2018). Spot, respond to, and investigate public health issues. Provide public health professionals with rapid reporting and editorial support during health investigations. Submit reports on disease outbreaks. Syndromic Surveillance Systems (SSSs) SSSs provide health officials with a prompt system to detect and monitor health events. The CDC uses SSSs to: Detect various health threats across the nation. Provide communities with real-time health information regarding diseases. Determine the spread and time of an outbreak after its detection (Hughes et al., 2020). Provide assurance that an outbreak is not occurring. Determine disease trends across the nation. Vital Statistics System Vital statistics system is used by healthcare organizations to gain insights into vital health trends. The CDC uses the vital statistics system to: Collect data on the number of births and deaths across the nation (ACOG, 2018). Determine the progress on death reductions in various events. Monitor substance abuse among all populations. Track the nation’s progress towards achieving its health goals. The Impact of these Systems These systems influence patient outcomes, safety, and quality in various ways, including: They promote patient safety by reducing treatment errors (Alotaibi & Federico, 2017). They promote health status of individuals by decreasing adverse drug reactions and mitigating disease outbreaks. They improve the capacity to communicate patient information rapidly in a legible format. They enhance patient safety through improved disease tracking, reporting, and clinical decision support. References ACOG. (2018). The importance of vital records and statistics for the Obstetrician-Gynecologist: ACOG Committee opinion no. 748. Obstet Gynecol, 132, e78-e81. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committeeopinion/articles/2018/08/the-importance-of-vital-records-and-statistics-for-the-obstetriciangynecologist Alotaibi, Y. K., & Federico, F. (2017). The impact of health information technology on patient safety. Saudi medical journal, 38(12), 1173. https://doi.org/10.15537%2Fsmj.2017.12.20631 CDC. (2018, April 4). Epi-X. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://emergency.cdc.gov/epix/index.asp CDC. (2018, December 4). Our history – our story. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/about/history/index.html CDC. (2022, April 29). Mission, role and pledge. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/mission.htm Ehrenstein, V., Kharrazi, H., Lehmann, H., & Taylor, C. O. (2019). Obtaining data from electronic health records. In Tools and technologies for registry interoperability, registries for evaluating patient outcomes: A user’s guide, 3rd edition, Addendum 2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551878/ Hughes, H. E., Edeghere, O., O’Brien, S. J., Vivancos, R., & Elliot, A. J. (2020). Emergency department syndromic surveillance systems: a systematic review. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09949-y Pabst, L. J., & Williams, W. (2015). Immunization information systems. Journal of public health management and practice: JPHMP, 21(3), 225-226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000000202 Smith, E. A., Lapinski, J., Lichty-Hess, J., & Pier, K. (2016). Using health information technology and data to improve chronic disease outcomes in federally qualified health centers in Maryland. Preventing Chronic Disease, 13. http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd13.160445
Grid View
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Main Posting
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors.
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Second Response
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
