Using CPOE and CDSS GCU

DNP 805 Topic 3 Using CPOE and CDSS GCU

Using CPOE and CDSS

The current health care industry is dynamic and characterized by significant expansion. As a result, the cases of medication errors are increasingly being reported as key issue that reduces the quality of healthcare delivery. In the US, hundreds of thousands of people die annually due to medical errors, which is now considered among the leading causes of mortality. Consequently, the introduction of electronic health records (EHR) signify one of the best strategies to mitigate the incidences of medical mistakes since it enables the clinicians to review the condition of the patient before diagnosis and ordering of prescription drugs (Tannenbaum et al., 2015). At the moment, the EHR works alongside the clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and the commercial computerized provider order entry (CPOE) to tackle the concerns of medication mistakes and ultimately minimize the mortality rates emanating from the erroneous prescription of utilization of drugs.

Conversely, sometimes it is common to have patients that present conditions with distinctive intricacies in certain critical care settings, which expose them to the risk of medication error. To date, there are no clear findings on the manner in which the adoption of CPOE entrenched on a CDSS can be implemented to deal with medication errors in critical care settings. Furthermore, there is no evidence regarding the kind of errors that emanates when the EHR is incorporated with CPOE and CDSS in a bid to offer more efficiency on health care delivery. Therefore, in an effort to tackle patient safety in health care delivery, this paper will explore EHR in the perspectives of CPOE and CDSS. Specifically, the paper will address the utilization of these electronic systems in pain management through ketorolac analgesic. Moreover, A CDSS will be created including a succinct overview of the clinicians can utilize the model to minimize medication errors for patients that have undergone operation. Besides, the study will highlight issues associated with CDSS and potential recommendations for optimizing patient care.

Details:

For this assignment, select one clinical practice issue that involves a specific medication. Using a Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) system, design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) that would be embedded in the EHR at your site of practice. Your CDSS must connect with CPOE to include a medication. You must link these two applications within the design.

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
Use primary sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

Directions:

Write a 1,000-1,250 word paper that provides the following:

Specific details of the clinical issue involving a specific medication
The rationale behind your design development.
A description of how this CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians.
An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario (e.g., information loss, communication breakdown).

Portfolio Practice Hours:

It may be possible to earn portfolio practice hours for this case report. Enter the following after the references section of your paper:

Practice Hours Completion Statement DNP-805

I, (INSERT NAME), verify that I have completed (NUMBER OF) clock hours in association with the goals and objectives for this assignment. I have also tracked said practice hours in the Typhon Student Tracking System for verification purposes and will be sure that all approvals are in place from my faculty and practice mentor

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.

Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.

APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.

Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.

LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.

Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.

Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
- Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
- Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

Rubric Criteria

Total100 points

Criterion	1. Unsatisfactory	2. Less Than Satisfactory	3. Satisfactory	4. Good	5. Excellent
Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions Which Might Apply to Scenario Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions Which Might Apply to Scenario	0 points An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is not provided.	8 points An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but elements are missing or incomplete.	8.8 points An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but the assessment is rendered at a perfunctory level.	9.2 points An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	10 points An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Thesis Development and Purpose Thesis Development and Purpose	0 points Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	5.6 points Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	6.16 points Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	6.44 points Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	7 points Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction Argument Logic and Construction	0 points Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	6.4 points Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	7.04 points Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	7.36 points Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	8 points Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Explanation of How Patient Outcomes Will Be Measured Explanation of How Patient Outcomes Will Be Measured	0 points An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is not provided.	4 points An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided but explanation is incomplete.	4.4 points An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided at a perfunctory level.	4.6 points An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	5 points An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Proposed CDSS Embedded in the EHR Proposed CDSS Embedded in the EHR	0 points Proposed CDSS is not embedded in the EHR.	12 points Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but use is marginal or incomplete.	13.2 points Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but at a perfunctory level.	13.8 points Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	15 points Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	0 points Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	4 points Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.	4.4 points Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	4.6 points Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	5 points All format elements are correct.
Proposed CDSS Design Links a Specific Medication Through the CPOE Proposed CDSS Design Links a Specific Medication Through the CPOE	0 points Proposed CDSS design does not link a specific medication through the CPOE.	4 points Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but effort is marginal or incomplete.	4.4 points Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but at a perfunctory level.	4.6 points Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	5 points Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	0 points Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	4 points Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	4.4 points Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	4.6 points Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	5 points Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Discussion of the Rationale Behind the Design Development Discussion of the Rationale Behind the Design Development	0 points A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is not present.	4 points A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but incomplete.	4.4 points A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.	4.6 points A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	5 points A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)Com Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)	0 points CPOE is not used to design a CDSS.	12 points CPOE is used to design a CDSS but use is marginal or incomplete.	13.2 points CPOE is used to design a CDSS but used at a perfunctory level.	13.8 points CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	15 points CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Documentation of Sources Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	0 points Sources are not documented.	4 points Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	4.4 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	4.6 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	5 points Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Discussion of Specific Details of Clinical Issue Involving the Selected Medication Discussion of Specific Details of Clinical Issue Involving the Selected Medication	0 points Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is not present.	4 points Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but incomplete.	4.4 points Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.	4.6 points Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	5 points Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Description of How Proposed CDSS Will Be Implemented and Adopted by Fellow Clinicians Description of How Proposed CDSS Will Be Implemented and Adopted by Fellow Clinicians	0 points A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is not provided.	8 points A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but incomplete.	8.8 points A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.	9.2 points A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	10 points A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions Which Might Apply to Scenario

0 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is not provided.

8 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but elements are missing or incomplete.

8.8 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is provided, but the assessment is rendered at a perfunctory level.

9.2 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

An assessment of challenges and proposed solutions which might apply to this scenario is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

5.6 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

6.16 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

6.44 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

6.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

7.04 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

7.36 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Explanation of How Patient Outcomes Will Be Measured

0 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is not provided.

4 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided but explanation is incomplete.

4.4 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

An explanation of how patient outcomes will be measured is provided in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Proposed CDSS Embedded in the EHR

0 points

Proposed CDSS is not embedded in the EHR.

12 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but use is marginal or incomplete.

13.2 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR but at a perfunctory level.

13.8 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

15 points

Proposed CDSS is embedded in the EHR in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

4.4 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

4.6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

5 points

All format elements are correct.

Proposed CDSS Design Links a Specific Medication Through the CPOE

0 points

Proposed CDSS design does not link a specific medication through the CPOE.

4 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but effort is marginal or incomplete.

4.4 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE but at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

Proposed CDSS design links a specific medication through the CPOE in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

4.4 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

4.6 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Discussion of the Rationale Behind the Design Development

0 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is not present.

4 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but incomplete.

4.4 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)Com

Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Used to Design a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)

0 points

CPOE is not used to design a CDSS.

12 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS but use is marginal or incomplete.

13.2 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS but used at a perfunctory level.

13.8 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

15 points

CPOE is used to design a CDSS in full. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

4.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

4.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Discussion of Specific Details of Clinical Issue Involving the Selected Medication

0 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is not present.

4 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but incomplete.

4.4 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

4.6 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

5 points

Discussion of specific details of the clinical issue involving the selected medication is convincing and thorough. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Description of How Proposed CDSS Will Be Implemented and Adopted by Fellow Clinicians

0 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is not provided.

8 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but incomplete.

8.8 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

9.2 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

A description of how the proposed CDSS will be implemented and adopted by fellow clinicians is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

DNP 805 Topic 3 Using CPOE and CDSS GCU

Rubric Criteria

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

About Us

Quick links

We Accept

Contact Info