NR-599 Week 3 Discussion: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks
Hello! Thank you for this great post. Indeed, you have provided in-depth and compelling points on the benefits and drawbacks of EHR and the two objectives for Meaningful Use and their impact on your role as an APN in clinical practice. EHR systems have played a great role in changing the health care system from paper-based records to the use of clinical and other forms of information technology to help health care professionals deliver superior quality of care to patients (Kruse et al., 2018). As you have stated, EHR adoption is associated with many benefits and drawbacks. Many of the benefits positively impact the patients and society at large. For these benefits to be achieved, it is imperative for the health care system and the government to put more focus on the EHR Meaningful Use (MU). MU is the use of a certified EHR system to achieve a range of desirable outcomes such as improving efficiency, quality, safety, coordination of care, and public and population health. MU also reduces health disparities and supports the ongoing development of consistent data exchanges (Rathert et al., 2019). Regarding the identified objectives of MU as captured in stage 3 of the week’s lesson, medication reconciliation and secure messaging are well described. I agree with you. However, one issue I have realized with medication reconciliation is that it is challenging to be realized despite its immense benefits in the health care system. Serious medical errors entail miscommunication among clinicians (Lind et al., 2020). However, instead of dealing with the issue of miscommunication, which is the primary cause of medical errors, players have made medical reconciliation an EHR-directed process. Making medical reconciliation an EHR-directed process and failure to prioritize addressing poor communication is likely to derail the achievement of medication reconciliation in the health care system. References
Kruse, C. S., Stein, A., Thomas, H., & Kaur, H. (2018). The use of electronic health records to support population health: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of medical systems, 42(11), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-018-1075-6
Lind, D. P., Andresen, D. R., & Williams, A. (2020). Medical errors in IOWA: prevalence and patients’ perspectives. Journal of patient safety, 16(3), e199. Doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000523
Rathert, C., Porter, T. H., Mittler, J. N., & Fleig-Palmer, M. (2019). Seven years after Meaningful Use: Physicians’ and nurses’ experiences with electronic health records. Health care management review, 44(1), 30-40. Doi: 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000168
Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks
No unread replies.No replies.
The ideas and beliefs underpinning the discussions guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.
Activity Learning Outcomes
Through this discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:
Contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a discussion environment that models professional and social interaction (CO4)
Actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty (CO5)
Students must post a minimum of 3 times in each graded discussion. The 3 posts in each individual discussion must be on separate days. Posting 3 times on 3 different days meets the minimum requirement for full credit; each post must be substantive. The student must provide an initial post to each graded discussion topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 3. Subsequent posts, including essential responses to peers, must occur no later than the Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 3. Students are expected to submit assignments by the time they are due. Threaded discussions are not considered assignments and are not part of the late assignment policy.
A 10% late penalty will be imposed for discussions posted after the deadline on Wednesday regardless of the number of days late. NOTHING will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Sunday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0).
Total Points Possible: 150 Points
Post a written response in the discussion forum to EACH threaded discussion topic:
As discussed in the lesson and assigned reading for this week, EHRs provide both benefits and drawbacks. Create a “Pros” versus “Cons” table and include at least 3 items for each list. Next to each item, provide a brief rationale as to why you selected to include it on the respective list.
Refer to the Stage 3 objectives for Meaningful Use located in this week’s lesson under the heading Meaningful Use and the HITECH Act. Select two objectives to research further. In your own words, provide a brief discussion as to how the objective may impact your role as an APN in clinical practice.
Adhere to the following guidelines regarding quality for the threaded discussions in Canvas:
Application of Course Knowledge: Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings.
Scholarliness and Scholarly Sources: Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions using valid, relevant, and reliable outside scholarly source to contribute to the discussion thread.
Writing Mechanics: Grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation are accurate. In-text and reference citations should be formatted using correct APA guidelines.
Direct Quotes: Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the grammar, syntax, APA category.
For each threaded discussion per week, the student will select no less than TWO scholarly sources to support the initial discussion post.
Scholarly Sources: Only scholarly sources are acceptable for citation and reference in this course. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. The textbooks and lessons are NOT considered to be outside scholarly sources. For the threaded discussions and reflection posts, reputable internet sources such as websites by government agencies (URL ends in .gov) and respected organizations (often ends in .org) can be counted as scholarly sources. The best outside scholarly source to use is a peer-reviewed nursing journal. You are encouraged to use the Chamberlain library and search one of the available databases for a peer-reviewed journal article. The following sources should not be used: Wikipedia, Wikis, or blogs. These websites are not considered scholarly as anyone can add to these. Please be aware that .com websites can vary in scholarship and quality. For example, the American Heart Association is a .com site with scholarship and quality. It is the responsibility of the student to determine the scholarship and quality of any .com site. Ask your instructor before using any site if you are unsure. Points will be deducted from the rubric if the site does not demonstrate scholarship or quality. Current outside scholarly sources must be published with the last 5 years. Instructor permission must be obtained BEFORE the assignment is due if using a source that is older than 5 years