Assignent Solutionnurs

Assignment: Literature Review: The Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies
New technology—and the application of existing technology—only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research. The stakes are high, and new clinical systems need to offer evidence of positive impact on outcomes or efficiencies.
Nurse informaticists and healthcare leaders formulate clinical system strategies. As these strategies are often based on technology trends, informaticists and others have then benefited from consulting existing research to inform their thinking.
In this Assignment, you will review existing research focused on the application of clinical systems. After reviewing, you will summarize your findings.
To Prepare:
Review the Resources and reflect on the impact of clinical systems on outcomes and efficiencies within the context of nursing practice and healthcare delivery.
Conduct a search for recent (within the last 5 years) research focused on the application of clinical systems. The research should provide evidence to support the use of one type of clinical system to improve outcomes and/or efficiencies, such as “the use of personal health records or portals to support patients newly diagnosed with diabetes.”
Identify and select 4 peer-reviewed research articles from your research.
For information about annotated bibliographies, visit https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/annotatedbibliographies
The Assignment: (4-5 pages not including the title and reference page)
In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:
Identify the 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed, citing each in APA format.
Include an introduction explaining the purpose of the paper.
Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.
Use APA format and include a title page.
Use the Safe Assign publishs to check your match percentage before submitting your work.
***RUBRIC***MUST***USE***
In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:
· Properly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed.–
Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response identifies 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.
Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response identifies 3 peer-reviewed research articles and one peer-reviewed article for the Assignment.
Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response identifies 4 or less peer-reviewed articles
Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response identifies less than 4 peer-reviewed articles or peer-reviewed articles are missing
· Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.–
Excellent 36 (36%) – 40 (40%)
The response accurately and thoroughly summarizes in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.
Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which fully support the response.
Good 32 (32%) – 35 (35%)
The response summarizes each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.
Accurate examples are provided which support the response provided.
Fair 28 (28%) – 31 (31%)
The response is missing one or two of the required elements or summaries are superficially addressed.
Poor 0 (0%) – 27 (27%)
The response is missing three or more required elements or the summaries are superficially addressed.
· Synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles in a cohesive conclusion.–
Excellent 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)
Response includes a synthesis of the findings in an exceptionally well-written conclusion.
Good 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)
Response includes a synthesis of the findings in a well-written conclusion.
Fair 18 (18%) – 19 (19%)
The response is missing a synthesis of the findings or the conclusion is superficial.
Poor 0 (0%) – 17 (17%)
The response is missing a synthesis of the findings and the conclusion is not accurate or is missing.
Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.–
Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Fair 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.
Poor 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation-- Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Fair 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Written Expression and Formatting – APA: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.-- Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Fair 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Total Points: 100 **REFERENCES MUST USE 4. HERE IS WHAT WAS GIVEN TO US*** Required Readings McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2022). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (5th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. Chapter 14, “The Electronic Health Record and Clinical Informatics” (pp. 293–316) Chapter 15, “Informatics Tools to Promote Patient Safety, Quality Outcomes, and Interdisciplinary Collaboration” (pp. 323–349) Chapter 16, “Patient Engagement and Connected Health” (pp. 357–378) Chapter 17, “Using Informatics to Promote Community/Population Health” (pp. 383–397) Chapter 18, “Telenursing and Remote Access Telehealth” (pp. 403–432) Dykes, P. C., Rozenblum, R., Dalal, A., Massaro, A., Chang, F., Clements, M., Collins, S. …Bates, D. W. (2017). Prospective evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to improve outcomes in intensive care: The Promoting Respect and Ongoing Safety Through Patient Engagement Communication and Technology Study. Critical Care Medicine, 45(8), e806–e813. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002449 HealthIT.gov. (2018c). What is an electronic health record (EHR)? Retrieved from https://www.healthit.gov/faq/what-electronic-health-record-ehr Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D. Leak, L. D., Tieman, L. A., & Manworren, R. C. B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to Improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221. Skiba, D. (2017). Evaluation tools to appraise social media and mobile applications. Informatics, 4(3), 32–40.