DNP 805 Week 7 Assignment Case Report Health Care Informatics GCU

DNP 805 Week 7 Assignment Case Report Health Care Informatics GCU

Evaluation of Healthcare Technology

Nursing practice has been an important aspect of patient care in recent years and continues to do so by adapting to the ever-changing patient care landscape. The rising need for better and enhanced patient care has prompted stakeholders to investigate approaches that can result in better outcomes. Technology and technical applications are one such technique that has received attention and traction (Wu & Luo, 2019). In the health care sector, technology has mostly been employed to improve disease diagnosis, prevention, treatment, and management. The implication is that patient care, therapy, and illness management have all improved significantly over time, resulting in the avoidance of several deaths. As innovation and invention continue to improve the processes, more and better technological applications are expected to make inroads into the patient care environment. As such, the goal of this paper is to investigate a technology studied in this course, as well as to measure and evaluate its aspects and to evaluate user interfaces. This article will also look into the technology’s functionality and any potential improvements.

Assessment Description

In this assignment, learners are required to write a case report addressing the personal knowledge and skills gained in the current course and potentially solving an identified practice problem.

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.
• Your case report should be no more than 10 double-spaced pages, including references.
• You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
• Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the learning management system. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.

Read Also:

Directions:

Choose a specific focus of patient practice (e.g., acute care hospital, clinic, primary care, long-term care, home health). Select a particular disease process (congestive heart failure, fall, diabetes, etc.). Identify and fully describe a technology element that could be involved in providing care to a patient with your selected disease process and the patient practice. Define how this technology will integrate treatment, monitoring or communication from the identified care setting to the home and then to ongoing care through the clinic.

Your case report must include the following:

1. Introduction with a t and your disease process described from the focus of patient practice.
2. Synthesized literature review.
3. Description of the case/situation/conditions. Use a real life patient situation or condition to describe your case, including the problems the patient encounters and the barriers to care.
4. Describe at least one technology that may be used as a solution to the patient situation or condition described in your case.
5. Describe how the technology can be used specifically in the case you have proposed.
6. Summary of the case integrating proposed solutions(s).
7. Keep in mind and integrate a Christian worldview when summarizing proposed solutions.
8. Conclusion.

Case Report: Health Care Informatics – Rubric

Collapse All Case Report: Health Care Informatics – RubricCollapse All

Identification and Description of Applicable Care-Based Technologies

16.5 points

Criteria Description

Identification and Description of Applicable Care-Based Technologies

5. Excellent

16.5 points

Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are clearly presented and in full. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

15.18 points

Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are clearly presented and in full. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

14.52 points

Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are present but done at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

13.2 points

Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are present but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are not present.

Discussion of the Integration of Technologies and Treatment/Monitoring in Applicable Care Settings

16.5 points

Criteria Description

Discussion of the Integration of Technologies and Treatment/Monitoring in Applicable Care Settings

5. Excellent

16.5 points

Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

15.18 points

Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

14.52 points

Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is present but done at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

13.2 points

Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is present but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is not present.

Introduction and Problem Statement

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Introduction and Problem Statement

5. Excellent

5.5 points

An introduction with problem statement is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

5.06 points

An introduction with problem statement is present, clear, and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

An introduction with problem statement is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

An introduction with problem statement is present but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An introduction with problem statement is not present.

Brief Literature Review

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Brief Literature Review

5. Excellent

5.5 points

A brief literature review is clearly present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

5.06 points

A brief literature review is clearly present in full. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

A brief literature review is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

A brief literature review is present but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A brief literature review is not present.

Description of the Case, Situation, or Conditions

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Description of the Case, Situation, or Conditions

5. Excellent

5.5 points

A description of the case, situation, or conditions is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

5.06 points

A description of the case, situation, or conditions is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

A description of the case, situation, or conditions is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

A description of the case, situation, or conditions is present but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the case, situation, or conditions is not present.

Detailed Explanation of the Synthesized Literature Findings

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Detailed Explanation of the Synthesized Literature Findings

5. Excellent

5.5 points

A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

5.06 points

A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is not present.

Case Summary

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Case Summary

5. Excellent

5.5 points

A case summary is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

5.06 points

A case summary is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

A case summary is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

A case summary is present but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A case summary is not present.

Proposed Solutions to Remedy Identified Technology Gaps, Inefficiencies, or Other Issues

11 points

Criteria Description

Proposed Solutions to Remedy Identified Technology Gaps, Inefficiencies, or Other Issues

5. Excellent

11 points

Proposed solutions are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

10.12 points

Proposed solutions are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

9.68 points

Proposed solutions are presented but are rendered at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

8.8 points

Proposed solutions are presented but are incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Proposed solutions are not presented.

Conclusion

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Conclusion

5. Excellent

5.5 points

A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

4. Good

5.06 points

A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

A conclusion is presented but is rendered at a perfunctory level.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

A conclusion is presented but is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A conclusion is not presented.

Thesis Development and Purpose

7.7 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. Excellent

7.7 points

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

4. Good

7.08 points

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

3. Satisfactory

6.78 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6.16 points

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

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

8.8 points

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. Excellent

8.8 points

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

4. Good

8.1 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.

3. Satisfactory

7.74 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.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

7.04 points

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

1. Unsatisfactory

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.

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

5.5 points

Criteria Description

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

5. Excellent

5.5 points

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

4. Good

5.06 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

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

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 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.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

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

5.5 points

Criteria Description

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

5. Excellent

5.5 points

All format elements are correct.

4. Good

5.06 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Documentation of Sources

5.5 points

Criteria Description

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

5. Excellent

5.5 points

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

4. Good

5.06 points

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

3. Satisfactory

4.84 points

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

2. Less Than Satisfactory

4.4 points

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

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 110 points