NURS FPX 8008  Assessment 3 Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care Intervention Forward

Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care Intervention Forward

Need Help Writing an Essay?

Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper

Write My Essay For Me

Jean  

Capella University

NURS FPX 8008  Assessment 3

Professor 

5th May, 2025

Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care Forward

In NURS FPX 8008  Assessment 3 Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care Intervention successful implementation of the impacted individual-person-centered scientific environment (PCMH) relies on better-practicing nurses (APRNs) to lead management and scientific expertise. In spite of issues that involve issuer resistance, inept behavior protocols, and espresso-impacted character involvement, this tool employs a grounded trade model for easy integration (Kloos et al., 2020). Through virtual evidence-based practice and continuous evaluation, APRNs serve a vital purpose in optimizing impacted man or woman outcomes, facilitating interprofessional collaboration, and creating values-based care that is sustainable.

Strategic Outline for Person-Centered Care Intervention

In order to enhance healthcare transport and affect man or woman outcomes, the affected person-centered medical domestic (PCMH) intervention can be achieved with the positive, useful tool of implementing person-directed care (percentage) strategy within six months. Five levels were considered to effectively implement the Intervention. In week 1–four-segment (segment 1), baseline gift behaviors of care can be finished through the APRNs, who are identified by the application of the technique of stakeholder identification and acquisition of a body of persons and manage informed on PCMH addition to Watson’s human stressful concept (Leidner et al., 2021). Phase 2 (Weeks five–eight) will include extensive training for multidisciplinary team members with the invaluable resource of scientific instructors and department managers, in addition to modules in empathy, verbal communication, cultural competency, and ethical decision-making. Workflow changes and standard care protocols can be built in Segment 2 (Samardzic et al., 2020). Section three (Weeks 9–16) shall include a pilot implementation internally of a selected device through unit managers, with businesses training collaborative care plans and, the far as patients are involved, in joint preference-making and cause locating. Segment four (Weeks 17–20) shall have a data series and analysis conducted through the evaluation workforce, using a complete zenith approach to measure the effect of the Intervention through both quantitative and qualitative methods.

Outcomes such as increased individual satisfaction, care coordination, and fitness popularity are likely to be measured against corporate feedback (Handley et al., 2020). The final phase (Weeks 21–24) can be rolled out under senior management and will include model improvement, primarily driven by the effects of the evaluation, versioning the model agency-wide, and sustainability in the long term by utilizing superior monitoring systems.

Specific Components of the Intervention and Outcomes

The real component additives of the Intervention are interdisciplinary care companies, affected men or women, and their own family involvement procedures, augmented verbal exchange gadgets, scientific selection support safeguarded in digital health info, and continuous quality improvement through the use of design-do-examine-act (PDSA) loops.

NURS FPX 8008  Assessment 3 Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care Intervention Forward

The PCMH implementation plan harmonizes with the PDSA model by using the utilization approach of ranges one and two for planning through stakeholder participation, employee training, and protocol reputation quo. Throughout section three, the team pilots the implementation of the Intervention, which is the implementation of a software application program for collaborative and individual-targeted care. Phase 4 is the study phase, during which period results and responses are tracked in order to assess the effectiveness of the Intervention. Finally, segment 5 closes the loop with the act and effectuation of findings of the assessment to enhance, boost, and sustain the Intervention of the employer. (Manandi et al., 2023). Rapid-time frame expected outcomes are the education of 80 5% of the PCMH staff members and % needs and attaining seventy-five affected character-said participation in care decisions. Medium-time frame effects generate a 20% boost in affected individual pride, a ten% % decline in emergency room use, and a 15% increase in preventive care compliance. Long-term objectives are improved management, long-term scenarios, readmissions of less than 10%, and sophisticated business family love with hundreds of crowds and much less employer burnout.

Comparing Current Data Metrics with Targeted Improvements

Embracing the PCMH model is a contemporary means of improving healthcare provision that is entirely founded on individual-centered care. Identifying major measurements, alongside preventive care adherence, emergency room (ED) use, impacted person satisfaction, and 30-day readmissions, is conducted in the measurement of medical outcomes and person activation. Preventive care adherence is one of the largest areas where PCMHs are looking to make some significant headway. Jackson et al. (2024) have already theorized that existing compliance expenses for preventive care remain insufficient. The PCMH type, with accessible care coordination and electronic fitness report utilization in tracking and reminding, is expected to appreciably boost compliance expenses. The Intervention is targeted to achieve a minimum of 70% compliance within half a year to enhance early detection, reduce infection formation, and retain long-term health benefits. Overuse of ED is one of the focal areas of the project.

The majority of patients, particularly those who have chronic illnesses, are prone to using the emergency department for non-emergency illnesses due to a lack of access to primary care. Saynisch et al. (2021) also proved that PCMH adoption had a coefficient of 1.nine% % ED use reduction in the US. With mostly reliance on observation, the current Intervention aims to reduce non-emergent ED usage by 5 to 10% within the next six months. The aim can be realized through the greater right of entry to care, lengthy hours, impacted character coaching, and frequent sickness management integrated into the PCMH version. Affected person satisfaction is also a key performance indicator, which assesses the quality of the affected woman or man’s enjoyment and provision of care performance.

NURS FPX 8008  Assessment 3 Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care Intervention Forward

Based on Platonova et al. (2020), pleasure charges are presently at about 26%, i.e., an area for growth. The quality must be enhanced to as much as forty or even more through integrating collective decision-making, empathic communication, and culturally competent care. Higher patient satisfaction is linked with increased compliance with care plans, increased confidence in healthcare professionals, and many fewer cases of care fragmentation. Accordingly, 30-day hospital readmission costs provide insight into the overall average performance of transitional care and follow-up care.

On the nationwide diploma, readmission costs are roughly 14.7% and are a colossal issue (Khau et al., 2020). Through the PCMH’s insured care companies, and designed to provide post-discharge care, the program aims to pay a fee of less than 10% of the overall readmissions.
The $64000 problem-solving approach methods include well-timed follow-ups, drug reconciliation, and patient education, all of which may be the norm with ethical and patient-focused practices (Pugh et al., 2021). The improvements lead to not only complex outcomes but also reduced healthcare costs and improved utilization of property.

Connecting the Intervention to Organizational Strategic Goals

The PCMH model technology is currently mainstream to the high-level strategic desires of healthcare organizations, such as care coordination and other applicable pertinent affected man or woman health outcomes.
With the advancement of blanket, business-based full care, the variant guarantees synchronized effort among initial care physicians, specialists, and the aid structure of persons, ultimately enhancing the transport of unbroken care and gaps in end-of-life care (Kloos et al., 2020). Furthermore, standardized discussion and common digital fitness data enhance workflow performance, which enables the business enterprise to achieve the goal of shipping unbroken, individual-focused services. PCMH structure also stimulates affected person participation and satisfaction through shared decision-making, culture-fitted care, and prolonged inspection durations (Handley et al., 2020). The activity not only enriches impacted individual-organization relationships but also reduces sanatorium readmissions and crisis department abuse, ultimately benefiting the business enterprise’s role to enhance health outcomes while at the same time improving the impacted individual experience. 

Conclusion

NURS FPX 8008  Assessment 3 Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care evaluation focuses on the greatest mission of implementing the PCMH version as a strategic effort to steer person-centered care. In bringing together organizational aspirations of more appropriate care coordination and similarly impacted character engagement, PCMH fosters cooperation, ethical care, and evidence-based care. The mission gains no longer in reality through interdisciplinary collaboration and informed decision-making, but also achieves quantifiable aspects of gain on impacted person outcomes, satisfaction, and healthcare excellence overall.

References

Handley, S. C., Bell, S., & Nembhard, I. M. (2020). A systematic review of surveys for measuring patient-centered care in the hospital setting. Medical Care, Publish Ahead of Print  59(3):p 228-237. https://doi.org/10.1097/mlr.0000000000001474 

Jackson, S. L., Lekiachvili, A., Block, J. P., Richards, T. B., Nagavedu, K., Draper, C. C., Koyama, A. K., Womack, L. S., Carton, T. W., Mayer, K. H., Rasmussen, S. A., Trick, W. E., Chrischilles, E. A., Weiner, M. G., Podila, P. S. B., Boehmer, T. K., & Wiltz, J. L. (2024). Preventive service usage and new chronic disease diagnoses: Using PCORnet data to identify emerging trends, United States, 2018–2022. Preventing Chronic Disease, 21. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd21.230415 

Khau, M., Maksut, J., Mills, C., Gaiser, M., Saunders, R., & Scholle, S. (2020). Impact of hospital readmissions reduction initiatives on vulnerable populations. https://www.cms.gov/files/document/impact-readmissions-reduction-initiatives-report.pdf 

Kloos, N., Drossaert, C. H. C., Trompetter, H. R., Bohlmeijer, E. T., & Westerhof, G. J. (2020). Exploring facilitators and barriers to using a person-centered care intervention in a nursing home setting. Geriatric Nursing, 41(6), 730-739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2020.04.018 

Pugh, J., Penney, L. S., Noël, P. H., Neller, S., Mader, M., Finley, E. P., Lanham, H. J., & Leykum, L. (2021). Evidence-based processes to prevent readmissions: More is better, a ten-site observational study. BioMed Central Health Services Research, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06193-x 

Samardzic, M. B., Doekhie, K. D., & Wijngaarden, J. D. H. (2020). Interventions to improve team effectiveness within health care: A systematic review of the past decade. Human Resources for Health, 18(2), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0411-3 

Saynisch, P. A., David, G., Ukert, B., Agiro, A., Scholle, S. H., & Oberlander, T. (2021). Model homes: Evaluating approaches to patient-centered medical home implementation. Medical Care, 59(3), 206–212. https://doi.org/10.1097/mlr.00000000000014971 

The post NURS FPX 8008  Assessment 3 Taking the Person-Centered Collaborative Care Intervention Forward appeared first on Online Class Services.