NURS FPX 6085 Assessment 5 Evaluation Plan Design

Student name

NURS-FPX6085

Capella University

Professor Name

Submission Date 

Evaluation Plan Design

The improvement of patient safety and proper, prompt documentation are the key points in the current healthcare quality improvement efforts (Mistri et al., 2023). The assessment study is the first attempt to examine a formal audit and feedback plan to improve compliance with pressure injury risk documentation in the first 24 hours of adult medical-surgery patient admission. It integrates leadership strategies, interprofessional work, technology, and policy congruence in order to bridge practice gaps. The plan will have an implementation schedule, methods of evaluation, and improvement opportunities that aim at reducing hospital-acquired pressure injuries, enhancing compliance, and promoting a culture of quality care.

Evaluation of Plan

Outcomes that are the Goal of an Intervention Plan

The key results of the proposed intervention plan are the improvements in timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of pressure injury risk documentation of adult patients in the first 24 hours of admission. The selected results will be evaluated based on the increased compliance rates with the standardized documentation protocols, relying on the evidence-based instruments such as the Braden Scale (Huang et al., 2021). The secondary outcomes include reduced hospital-acquired pressure injury, improved interprofessional cooperation regarding patient risk status, and increased continuity of care. Another aim of the intervention is to strengthen compliance with assessment rules by the staff, supported by regular audits and feedback. It is expected that integration of technology, such as electronic health records (EHR) alerts and computerized reminders, will automate documentation (Tsai et al., 2020). The success will be reported by the quantitative improvement of the documentation measures, as well as the qualitative ones, such as the satisfaction of staff members and perceived usability.

Evaluation Plan to Determine the Impact of the Intervention

The evaluation plan of the structured audit and feedback intervention will be based on a mixed-methods design to evaluate its effectiveness in relation to improving compliance with pressure injury risk documentation within 24 hours of admission. The pre- and post-intervention compliance rates will be monitored using EHR reports, and the secondary outcomes include the hospital-acquired pressure injuries prevalence, audit accuracy scores, and the time spent working on the documentation (Bunting and Klerk, 2022). The data will be collected weekly during the 12 weeks of the implementation process, with comparison to baseline measures made in the last quarter. Qualitative measures will involve staff feedback obtained through post implementation survey and focus groups on perceptions of usability, effect on workload, and effectiveness of feedback.

Process evaluation will monitor the compliance with intervention elements such as taking part in the education sessions, the frequency of EHR timely use, and the punctuality of feedback delivery. The outcome measurement will determine both the statistical and clinical significance of the improvement. It will also measure economic factors like reduced treatment expenses of pressure injuries and resources. Frequent rollout scrutiny will make it possible to modify it promptly using the plan-do-study act (PDSA) cycle (Abuzied et al., 2023). The final report will inform the decision of whether to scale up, to revise, or to integrate the intervention into a long-term sustainable routine policy.

Discussion

Advocacy

Nurse’s Role in Leading Change and Driving Improvements

Nurses play a central role in facilitating change and quality and experience of care improvement, particularly in interventions like organized audit and feedback of pressure injury risk documentation. Being direct caregivers, these people have the closest understanding of the areas that require improvement, the power to raise their voice in favor of evidence-based practice, and the capacity to demonstrate adherence to documentation guidelines (Flaubert et al., 2021). Transformational leadership strategies can be applied by nurse leaders to influence and engage teams in order to establish a shared promise of patient safety and quality outcomes.

Nurses also facilitate the dialogue between bedside teams, quality improvement professionals, and information technology (IT) specialists in an effort to make the most of the workflow integration (Baloyi, 2022). Nurses can ensure engagement and reduce opposition by embracing accountability coupled with the creation of a psychologically safe environment. The process changes eventually result in outcomes of visible quality of care, patient outcomes, and patient experience improvements through the efforts of their leadership.

Effect of Intervention Plan on Nursing and Interprofessional Collaboration

The pressure injury risk documentation is reinforced through the structured audit and feedback intervention, which builds the mutual accountability of the timely and accurate assessment of both the nursing and interprofessional practice. As the main users, nurses closely collaborate with wound care professionals, quality improvement teams, and IT support to support the efficient workflow, EHR prompts functionality, and feedback response (Baloyi, 2022). It is supported by interdisciplinary champions, such as nurse educators and unit managers, to facilitate the process of communication, as the expectations of the entire team are common and can help with problem-solving.

The process fosters respect for each other since every practice will help to reach compliance and provide better patient safety. Regular audit review and huddles offer the chance to discuss in real-time, which allows the team to modify practices immediately and solve obstacles without blame (Sarkies et al., 2023). To the health care community at large, the plan is associated with practical benefits: reduction of hospital-acquired pressure injuries, reduction of treatment expenses, enhanced compliance with regulatory standards, and improved data to report on quality. Another culture that is planned is that of the culture of continuous improvement, which demonstrates the use of disciplined processes, technology, and collaboration to drive ongoing enhancements in the quality and safety of patient care.

Future Steps

To make the current project more effective in its impact on the target population, the scope of the project can be extended to include not only documentation compliance but also proactive risk prevention and continuous monitoring of high-risk patients. Predictive analytics within the EHR would alert at-risk persons sooner by cross-walking the Braden scores with other clinical factors, such as mobility, nutrition status, and comorbidities (Moorman, 2021). This would allow the nurses and interdisciplinary teams to start preventative practices before the risk of injuries escalates. To add more accuracy to the assessment and introduce the possibility of intervening sooner, the use of new devices, e.g., wearable pressure sensors or sub-epidermal moisture (SEM) scanning units, could be utilized to provide real-time skin integrity data (Ousey et al., 2022). Constant staff engagement can be supported through bedside reminders, monitoring of compliance, and readily available educational packets through mobile health applications.

The application of new care models, such as team rounds that include wound care professionals and team leaders of quality improvement (QI), would ensure that the risk prevention strategies become part of daily operations. Moreover, by extending the feedback process to include the involvement of patients and their families, via repositioning education and skin checks, one would create an atmosphere where both the patient and the family have a responsibility towards the prevention process. The intervention would help to improve patient outcomes, although the implementation of technology-supported early detection and interdisciplinary care models would help to improve them significantly (Gala et al., 2024). The practice will reduce hospital-acquired injuries and further improve the culture of safety.

Reflection on Leading Change and Improvement

Impact of Project on My Ability to Lead Change

This project helped me become a lot more competent in change leadership as it broadened my understanding of how evidence-based, structured interventions can be used to initiate measurable changes in quality of care and patient safety. Getting ready to guide the design of an audit and feedback process on pressure injury risk documentation reinstated that data-driven decision-making combined with a supportive and collaborative leadership style was a necessary trait (Foy et al., 2020). 

Being a future leader, I will be better placed to drive quality improvement initiatives that require clinical acumen and interprofessional relationships. The project also helped me see that long-term change is not a mandate thing, but creating a certain culture where every team member will have an opportunity to feel empowered, informed, and engaged in the provision of safer, higher-quality care.

Ways to Transfer Completed Intervention, Implementation, and Evaluation into my Personal Practice

The ultimate intervention, implementation, and assessment plans provide a generalizable format that can be adjusted to multiple quality improvement initiatives in my practice. The stepwise audit-and-feedback model and specific education and integration into EHRs offer a replicable system to increase compliance, regardless of whether pressure injury prevention, medication safety, infection prevention, or discharge planning is the focal point.

Among the implementation plan, I can gain insights on how to engage the stakeholders, a gradual implementation, and how to incorporate interventions into the work routines to facilitate uptake and sustainability. Other projects can emulate the use of real-time monitoring of information and recurrent refinement using the PDSA cycle to remain responsive to the issues of the front line. The combination of both the quantitative and qualitative evaluation in the evaluation plan also serves as a model of not only the quantifiable results but also the opinions of the staff, which leads to the possibility of the changes in question being meaningful and practical. By applying such strategies, I will be able to deliver patient-focused interventions that are not only consistent with the regulatory and organizational standards but also most efficient in terms of patient outcomes and employee satisfaction in various care environments. The process ensures that any improvement activities in the future are evidence-based, collaborative, and responsive.

Conclusion

The documentation of the pressure injury risk with the help of the formal audit and feedback process is an evidence-based, practical solution to the improvement of compliance, patient safety, and quality care. It involves balanced leadership, interprofessional communication, and the use of technology to fill the gaps there and facilitate lasting change. Periodic evaluation and improvement will also be vital to guarantee further improvement and maximize long-term performance.