NURS FPX 6426 Assessment 1:This assessment focuses on conducting a structured needs assessment and developing a procurement and implementation plan for a Medication Reconciliation Module (MRM) aimed at reducing medication discrepancies at discharge. Students are expected to demonstrate nursing informatics competencies in assessing clinical needs, engaging stakeholders, defining functional and nonfunctional requirements, evaluating vendors, and planning pilot implementation.
Purpose of the Assessment
Students are required to:
Provide references in APA 7th edition.
• Introduce the clinical issue or topic • Explain its relevance to nursing practice • State the purpose of the assessment
• Describe databases and search strategies used • Explain criteria for selecting credible sources • Discuss evaluation of source quality and relevance
• Summarize key findings from research sources • Compare and contrast different perspectives • Identify patterns and themes in the evidence
• Explain how research informs clinical decisions • Provide specific examples of practice applications • Discuss implications for patient outcomes
• Summarize key points and findings • Reinforce the importance of evidence-based practice • Suggest areas for future research or practice improvement
Changes in care can lead to medicine crimes that beget adverse drug events and gratuitous readmissions. This assessment does a structured conditions assessment and makes a plan for buying and setting up a medicine conciliation module (MRM) that works with the sanatorium’s EHR. The thing is to cut down on medicine crimes at discharge by making sure that nurses are more accurate, their work is more effective, and they communicate better with ambulatory providers.
A 30-bed medical-surgical unit reported a 6-month normal of 14 discharge encounters with at least one medicine distinction linked to the post-discharge medicine review, contributing to patient detriment and a phone-heavy workload for case directors. A root cause review set up that there were problems with fractured documentation across flowsheets, a lack of a structured medicine concession workflow, and limited interoperability with inpatient EHRs. A targeted MRM that supports structured medicine lists, concession workflows, and morals-predicated exchange was chosen as the Swiss way to help.
Key stakeholders include bedside nurses, nurse directors, apothecaries, discharge planners, the IT/EHR team, representatives from primary care conventions, and people in charge of quality and safety, legal, and insulation. We used the following styles: process mapping of the current discharge workflow, a chart examination (for three months), staff focus groups, and a review of guard events related to medicine crimes. Findings: Nurses take an average of 22 beats to attune specifics for each discharge using different notes. Apothecaries observe that 1 in 8 discharges has a deficient medicine history.
Functional (must-have):
Nonfunctional (should-have):
A broad request scan set up three types of merchandisers: a native EHR dealer module, a third-party integrated MRM with FHIR support, and a homegrown EHR configuration. The criteria for selection were interoperability (25), usability (20), cost of power (15), dealer support and upgrade path (15), security and compliance (10), and substantiation of clinical effectiveness (15). We decided to use a Request for Offer (RFP) system to compare the total cost, rally workflows, integration trouble, and references.
The cost of a software license or module, the hours demanded for integration and configuration, training and go-live support, and ongoing conservation (annually). Benefits include an anticipated drop in medicine crimes from 14 to 5 in 6 months, fewer readmissions, less work for apothecaries, and fewer calls to cases. A conservative 12-month ROI model indicates a revenge period of 18–24 months predicated on fundamental hypotheticals (perceptivity analysis recorded).
The swish way to acquire an MRM that cuts down on medicine crimes at discharge is to use a structured procurement process that puts frontline stoners first, prioritizes interoperability and usability, and stages deployment through fliers. Governance, ongoing monitoring, and normalizing concessions in the discharge process each play an important role in sustainability.
| Criteria | Distinguished (4) | Proficient (3) | Basic (2) | Non-Performance (1) |
| Needs Assessment & Problem Analysis | Comprehensive analysis with workflow mapping, data review, and root cause identification | Solid analysis with workflow overview and key findings | Partial analysis; some gaps in workflow or root cause | Minimal or unclear analysis |
| Stakeholder Engagement | All relevant stakeholders identified and actively involved in assessment | Most key stakeholders included with some engagement | Limited stakeholder involvement | No stakeholder analysis |
| Functional & Nonfunctional Requirements | Clear, detailed, and well-justified functional and nonfunctional requirements | Requirements defined with minor gaps | Requirements vague or incomplete | Requirements missing or unclear |
| Market Scan & Vendor Selection | Thorough market analysis with selection criteria, scoring, and justification | Market scan with criteria and basic justification | Partial analysis; few criteria or limited justification | Not addressed |
| Procurement & Pilot Plan | Detailed RFI/RFP/pilot plan with timelines, training, and evaluation steps | Plan outlined with basic details | Plan mentioned superficially | Not addressed |
| Business Case & Budget | Clear ROI, cost estimates, and benefits with perceptivity analysis | Budget and ROI described with some detail | Limited budget or ROI discussion | Not addressed |
| Risk Analysis & Mitigation | Comprehensive identification of risks with mitigation strategies | Some risks identified with basic mitigation | Risks mentioned superficially | Not addressed |
| Evaluation Metrics | Clear outcome, process, and balancing metrics with definitions and data sources | Metrics defined but with limited detail | Some metrics included but unclear | Metrics missing |
| Scholarly Writing & References | Organized, clear writing; APA 7th references accurate and current | Writing generally clear; minor APA errors | Writing unclear or references incomplete | Disorganized; missing references |
No, really, de-identified data makes the analysis stronger. Still, use fluently labeled, realistic academic numbers and explain your hypotheticals if you cannot gain real data.
Three finalists is a favorable number because it gives you a chance to compare them without putting too much important stress on your team.
Functional = what the system does (its features and how it works). Operative means how well the system works (speed, responsibility, security, and ease of use).
Yes, conducting an offered birdman (silent → active → scale) is the swish way to ensure that integration, usability, and clinical impact are all performing properly before a full rollout.
Generally, you need 3 to 6 up-to-date, secure sources analogous to peer-reviewed papers, HealthIT/HIMSS guidance, and nursing informatics books.
Use conservative ranges for your estimates, make clear your hypotheticals, and do a perceptivity analysis (swish/base/worst scripts).
Add one clear outgrowth metric (like the medicine distinction rate), two or three process criteria (like the time it takes to reconcile or the chance of transferred conceded), and at least one balancing metric (like the nurse time burden).
Instant access • No credit card
Fill out the form below.