SAFER Guide on Organization Responsibility 

SAFER Guide on Organization Responsibility 

Instructions

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

SAFER Guide on Organization Responsibility 

Learning Activity Exercise Week 2

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Learning Activity Content

1.

Top of Form

Refer to Chapter 7.

The  SAFER guide is designed for self-assessment in nine areas to support organizations in the safer use of EHRs.

Review the SAFER guide on the HealthIT.gov website and use the resources and tools to  do a self-assessment of your place of work and share your results by answering the following questions: 

1- any surprises in the results, 

2- what areas of opportunities or improvements did the self-assessment produce, 

3- name three things you would include in an improvement plan.

( www.healthit.gov/buzz-blog/electronic-health-and-medical-records/safer-guides-optimize-safety )

SAFER Guides will help optimize safety

Jacob Reider | JANUARY 15, 2014

After a lot of hard work, we have combined evidence-based guidelines with practical advice to help you use your health information technology more safely. We’ve been working to post the Safety Assurance Factors for  EHR Resilience (SAFER ) Guides  since we highlighted them in our  Health IT Patient Safety Action and Surveillance Plan  last July.

There are nine SAFER Guides and each is designed to help care delivery organizations of all shapes and sizes conduct self-assessments of recommended practices in those areas we know are important to the safety and safe use of health information technology. The nine guides are:

• High Priority Practices
• Organizational Responsibilities
• Patient Identification
• CPOE with Decision Support
• Test Results Review and Follow-up
• Clinician Communication
• Contingency Planning
• System Interfaces
• System Configuration

As a family physician who has worked for years on making sure that health information technology is leveraged to improve the safety and quality of health care, I’m thrilled to see the SAFER Guides fill a void: We’ve never before had a set of tools that care delivery organizations can use to perform self-assessments and developer customized improvement plans.

There is  good evidence  that health information technology improves the safety of care, especially when implemented using best practices. We’ve learned that there is a great deal of variability in how information technology is implemented and optimized in care delivery organizations, and this variability may account for some of the problems with the safety and reliability of health IT. These guides help enhance the likelihood that health information technology is implemented in a manner that aligns with best practices. For example, the  SAFER Guide on Organization Responsibility  should help the leadership of health IT-enabled organizations monitor critical components of the safety and safe use of health IT and make sure that a team of people – including clinicians and safety staff within the organization, as well as health information technology developers – is continuously engaged and focused on safety.  The  SAFER Guide on High Priority Practices  is designed to help organizations explore where they can start to integrate health IT safety into their patient safety programs by identifying high-priority, high-risk practices associated with health IT use, and then suggesting which other SAFER Guides might help.

The SAFER Guides on  Contingency Planning  (which focuses on avoiding and recovering from downtimes),  System Interfaces , and  System Configuration  should help organizations ensure that the health IT is safely designed, maintained, and configured, is reliably available and that the information therein is accurate and current within established expectations when each clinician uses it to care for patients.

The SAFER Guides on  Patient Identification ,  CPOE with Decision Support ,  Test Results Review and Follow-up , and  Clinician Communication  will help practices establish systems that will allow them to be more confident that vital clinical information on the right patient will successfully reach clinicians who need it.

ONC and AHRQ, our partners in developing health IT safety tools, research, and education, will reach out to organizations and associations to encourage wider use of the SAFER Guides. We hope every sector of the healthcare industry will consider how they can make the SAFER Guides their own, including tailoring the content to their particular setting, specialty, and priorities. We look forward to feedback and hope everyone involved with health IT will consider how they can use the SAFER Guides to work on what must be a fundamental commitment and priority – using health IT to make patient care safer.

 

Please refer to the grading rubric. Submissions should be maximum 2 pages.

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow

 

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!