Healthcare Informatics: Improving Efficiency and Productivity

Question 1 

The statement seeks to expose a situation where the implementation process of computerized systems does not reflect on the needs of the people working within the departments. Instead, the implementation process focuses explicitly on ensuring that the people working within the departments use the systems to deliver on their respective objectives. Broadly, it can be argued that the statement is accurate taking into account that one of the critical areas to consider when implementing such systems is promoting participation among all employees working within the department. Lack of participation creates a situation where the implementation process only reflects on the possibility of meeting the set goals associated with the computerized systems (Ramírez et al., 2015). On the other hand, the process ignores the expected outcomes in the implementation process as part of building a possibility for success concerning usage of the systems.

Based on the accuracy of the statement, it is important to consider specific actions that would be of great value towards ensuring that the systems function effectively. Firstly, it is essential to promote participation in all areas of the computerized systems implementation process. Assistance should not only come about at the last stage of the implementation process. Instead, participation ought to be considered as a continuous process from the development of the design to the actual implementation of the systems. Secondly, it is essential to outline the roles of each employee that will be affected by the computerized systems. Outline differentiated roles will help reduce the possibility of roles overlap, which occurs in cases where there is no definite role for individual employees. By defining own roles, each employee will have a clear understanding of the expected impacts associated with the implementation of the computerized systems.

Question 2 

In my experience, the implementation of computerized systems in healthcare environments may have positive impacts concerning the delivery of quality health care services matching patients' needs and demands. However, I must take note of the fact that the implementation of these systems creates some form of conflict for nurses. The conflict arises from the fact that nurses are expected to change their pattern of behavior towards the adoption of the computerized systems. In most cases, the implementation experiences increased resistance considering that nurses do not have a clear understanding of how the systems function or their effectiveness in the delivery of patient care. Alternatively, I have come across a situation where the implementation of the computerized systems creates the need for nurses to shift their current practices. The most likely outcome from this is that nurses tend to show notable resistance due to the expected changes.

In my view, before embarking on the implementation of computerized systems within a healthcare environment, one of the critical actions that must take place is the training and development of the nurses. The training and development process is essential, as it would seek to create some form of right approach towards the implementation of a change in current patient care. The possible outcome is that nurses would appreciate the need for change in their bid to improving their abilities to deliver quality health care services. The second step to take would be an inclusion of the nursing in the pilot phase of the implementation process. The pilot phase helps in the orientation of the nurses to the new systems, which create some form of standardized approach from which to deliver quality outcomes.

Question 3 

The first critical, critical concern that I have with the material in the chapter is that it fails to provide a clear distinction in the steps involved in the implementation of the Clinical Information Systems. Kudyba (2016) provides readers with an overview of the phases of implementation with the specific focus being on highlighting the particular phases to consider when implementing the Clinical Information Systems. However, in my analysis of the phases, I take note of an apparent lack of clear distinction of the steps, which may translate to a high possibility of failure in the implementation process. The second critical concern that I must consider is that the material fails to highlight the role of all stakeholders, who include Registered Nurses (RNs), who will be expected to use the systems. When implementing computerized systems, one of the critical areas to consider is ensuring that each stakeholder understands his or her role in the system as a way of building a high possibility of success (Holdsworth et al., 2017).

From my understanding, I would advocate for several key improvements to be made with the aim of improving the likelihood of success for the system. The crucial first improvement that I would advocate for is providing a detailed overview of the roles for each of the stakeholders that will be expected to use the systems as part of health care delivery. By failing to highlight the role of a single stakeholder means that the entire implementation process is bound to fail at one point. The second improvement is in leadership where I would expect that leaders would seek to create that conducive environment for the implementation of these systems, which tend to occur as critical changes to the healthcare environments.

Question 4 

Kudyba (2016) highlights the critical role associated with the adoption of Electronic Medical Records in ensuring that physicians improve their capacities to achieve essential milestones when dealing with their patients. In my understanding of these computerized systems, based on the information in Chapter 6, I tend to believe that although physicians may have a negative perception towards these computerized systems, they will embrace the same due to the expected benefits. One key benefit that I must highlight is the fact that Electronic Medical Records are essential for physicians in reducing medical errors in their delivery of quality health services. In my experience, I have come across instances where physicians face significant challenges in dealing with increased cases of medical error attributed to lack of a practical approach from which to access patient information. Thus, I tend to believe that physicians would appreciate the critical role associated with the new system in reducing such instances.

From my analysis of the chapter, I tend to believe that indeed the author has done an excellent job in addressing critical issues and concerns that may revolve around the adoption of Electronic Medical Records as part of healthcare environments. Kudyba (2016) provides readers with an analytical approach to the approval of Electronic Medical Records by highlighting possibilities of resistance in the implementation process. Primarily, this leads to the conclusion that indeed what the author advocates in this chapter may work within my healthcare environment. In other words, I believe that the adoption of the information advocated in the chapter would mean that the healthcare facility would find itself in a favorable position from which to achieve high possibilities of success.

References

Holdsworth, C., Kukluk, J., Molodowitch, C., Czerminska, M., Hancox, C., Cormack, R. A., ... & Killoran, J. H. (2017). Computerized system for safety verification of external beam radiation therapy planning.  International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics ,  98 (3), 691-698.

Kudyba, S. P. (2016).  Healthcare informatics: Improving efficiency and productivity . Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Ramírez, E., Martín, A., Lorente, M., Vara, C., Ojeda, J., Moro, M., ... & Frías, J. (2015). A Computerized System for Reporting and Analysis of Incidents, Errors or Adverse Events: Results Of 2014.  Clinical Therapeutics ,  37 (8), e136-e137.