IHP 604 Module Six Memo Guidelines and Rubric

Overview

Throughout this module, you have been learning about evaluation methods. In this assignment, you will describe different evaluation methods for a healthcare quality improvement initiative,

justify this method after its initial launch date, and discuss how evaluation methods for this initiative should change over time. By successfully completing this assignment, you will gain the

knowledge and skills required to complete a portion of your project due later in this course.

For the purposes of this assignment, imagine that you are employed in the quality department of a hospital. Your hospital recently implemented an ongoing professional practice evaluation

(OPPE) using criteria speci�c to The Joint Commission medical staff standard. The Joint Commission (E-dition) standard that is applied during the OPPE is:

Introduction to Standard MS.08.01.03 Ongoing Professional Practice Evaluation

The ongoing professional practice evaluation allows the organization to identify professional practice trends that impact on quality of care and patient safety. Such identi�cation may

require intervention by the organized medical staff. The criteria used in the ongoing professional practice evaluation may include the following:

Review of operative and other clinical procedure(s) performed and their outcomes

Pattern of blood and pharmaceutical usage (obtain from laboratory and pharmacy directors, respectively)

Requests for tests and procedures

Length of stay patterns

Morbidity and mortality data

Practitioner’s use of consultants

Other relevant criteria as determined by the organized medical staff

The information used in the ongoing professional practice evaluation may be acquired through the following:

Periodic chart review

Direct observation

Monitoring of diagnostic and treatment techniques

Discussion with other individuals involved in the care of each patient. including consulting physicians, assistants at surgery, and nursing and administrative personnel

As a result of the OPPE process, it was found that two credentialed providers, two urology surgeons speci�cally, have been found to be de�cient on the OPPE in the area of infections: both

surgeons’ post-operative urosurgery patients have been experiencing antibiotic-resistant urinary tract infections. Not only does this impact the quality of the care per the standards, but it can

also impact the social marketing of the hospital, increase the costs of care, increase patient length of stay, and decrease reimbursement.



Therefore, your task is to recommend an evaluation method for 3, 6, and 12 months intended to evaluate the reduction in infection rates as part of a quality improvement initiative. Then, you

will need to justify your evaluation method and why the method(s) should be employed after the initiative launch. Lastly, you will discuss how this evaluation method should change over time

to accurately assess the initiative over time. As you complete this assignment, re�ect on the following: How do you address the urinary tract infection rates in periods of 3, 6, and 12 months,

and how will you lay out a plan for these urology surgeons? After all, the medical executive committee (MEC) of your hospital is held accountable to ful�ll the OPPE requirements. If these two

surgeons continue to have post-operative patients with infections, the MEC will determine what happens next. The MEC is committed to reducing patient harm and, speci�cally, they are

committed to having an active OPPE process to drive quality improvements.

Prompt

Write a memo that is to be shared with the MEC. This memo will discuss the evaluation methods that could be employed to address the situation described in the scenario. Use at least two

scholarly sources to support your claims.

Speci�cally, you must address the following rubric criteria:

Evaluation methods at 3, 6, and 12 months: Recommend evaluation methods for reducing infection rates as a quality improvement initiative at 3, 6, and 12 months.

Justify an evaluation method: Justify an evaluation method for healthcare quality improvement initiative at 3, 6, and 12 months after initiative launch.

Why evaluation methods change: Discusses how evaluation methods for healthcare quality improvement initiatives should change over time, depending on the change of infection rates

over time.

What to Submit

Submit this assignment as a 3-to 4-page, double-spaced memo. You should cite at least two sources. Sources should be cited according to APA style. If you need writing support, you can access

the Online Writing Center through the Academic Support module of your course.

Module Six Memo Rubric

Criteria Exemplary (100%) Pro�cient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Evaluation Methods at 3, 6,

and 12 Months

Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Recommends evaluation

methods for quality

improvement initiative at 3, 6,

and 12 months

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 35

Justi�cation of an Evaluation

Method

Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Justi�es evaluation method for

healthcare quality

improvement initiative at 3, 6,

and 12 months after initiative

launch

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 20

Criteria Exemplary (100%) Pro�cient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Why Evaluation Methods

Change

Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Discusses how evaluation

methods for healthcare quality

improvement initiatives should

change over time

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 20

Articulation of Response Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner

Clearly conveys meaning with

correct grammar, sentence

structure, and spelling,

demonstrating an

understanding of audience and

purpose

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors in

grammar, sentence structure,

and spelling, negatively

impacting readability

Submission has critical errors in

grammar, sentence structure,

and spelling, preventing

understanding of ideas

15

Scholarly Sources Incorporates more than two

scholarly, current (within the

last �ve years) sources, or use

of sources is exceptionally

insightful

Incorporates two scholarly,

current (within the last �ve

years) sources that support

claims

Incorporates fewer than two

scholarly, current (within the

last �ve years) sources, or not

all sources support claims

Does not incorporate sources 5

APA Style Formats in-text citations and

reference list according to APA

style with no errors

Formats in-text citations and

reference list according to APA

style with fewer than �ve

errors

Formats in-text citations and

reference list according to APA

style with �ve or more errors

Does not format in-text

citations and reference list

according to APA style

5

Total: 100%