Discussion: Review of Current Healthcare Issues NURS 6053

Discussion: Review of Current Healthcare Issues NURS 6053

RE: Discussion – Week 1

      Health care organizations today are faced with many stressors. One of the stressors that my health care organization is faced with is burnout in health care workers. Burnout is a syndrome conceptualized as resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed. (“Burn-out an occupational phenomenon: International Classification of Disease,” 2019).  Health care systems are making changes in how care is being delivered. It may be good for patients, but heath care workers are burning out at alarming rates (Krisberg, 2018). This is a public health problem because it affects the functioning of all health systems. Burnout affects quality of care and results in high turnover, reduces productivity and destroys people personal life. Many health care workers are experiencing emotional exhaustion, which makes it harder to connect with patients in meaningful ways (Krisberg, 2018). High burnout rates show links between burnout and the risk of medical errors and healthcare associated infections as well as patient access, with burnout being tied to higher turnover and higher odds of leaving the medical field altogether. Burnout is one of the biggest occupational health risks that health providers face, and goals can be accomplished is something is done about the wellness of the people who care for patients.

Burnout in health care have a big impact on the way I perform on my job daily. Working as a Registered Nurse on an Orthopedic Surgery floor is challenging and yet rewarding. Some of the stressors my job is impacted by is being short staffed and taken on high patient loads. On my floor we are constantly admitting and discharging patients, which can be stressful when you have a certain time to discharge patients and get ready for the next surgery patient.  There have been times where I have taken 8 patients and had a hard time tasking. When the patient load is high, the nurse cannot properly give patients the required service needed because of juggling between 8 patients. Over the last few month there have been wound care that may not get done, some orders may not be acknowledged and carried out. There may be unpreventable falls and sometimes medication errors may happen from being so exhausted. Work related stress can lead to burnout for anyone. The burnout epidemic is detrimental to patient care and may exacerbate the impending physician shortage. Burnout is a combination of exhaustion, cynicism and perceived inefficacy resulting from long term job stress (Reith, 2018).

My health care organization has implemented changes affecting burnout amongst employees by hiring more staff and implementing more time in orientation. They are working to identify early signs of stress and expand opportunities for early intervention. Nursing Residency programs are being offered to new graduates to solve the issue with shortage relating to burnout.

References

Burn-out an occupational phenomenon: International Classification of Disease. (2019, May 28). Retrieved February 25, 2021, from http://www.who.int

Krisberg, K. (2018, October). Concerns grow about burnout, stress in health care workers: New demands adding to burden. Retrieved February 26, 2021, from www.thenationshealth.org website: http://thenationshealth.org

Reith, T. P. (2018). Burnout in United States Healthcare Professionals: A Narrative Review. Cureus, 10(12). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3681

Discussion: Review of Current Healthcare Issues NURS 6053

If you were to ask 10 people what they believe to be the most significant issue facing healthcare today, you might get 10 different answers. Escalating costs? Regulation? Technology disruption?

These and many other topics are worthy of discussion. Not surprisingly, much has been said in the research, within the profession, and in the news about these topics. Whether they are issues of finance, quality, workload, or outcomes, there is no shortage of changes to be addressed.

In this Discussion, you examine a national healthcare issue and consider how that issue may impact your work setting. You also analyze how your organization has responded to this issue.

To Prepare:

  • Review the Resources and select one current national healthcare issue/stressor to focus on.
  • Reflect on the current national healthcare issue/stressor you selected and think about how this issue/stressor may be addressed in your work setting.

By Day 3 of Week 1

Post a description of the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected for analysis, and explain how the healthcare issue/stressor may impact your work setting. Then, describe how your health system work setting has responded to the healthcare issue/stressor, including a description of what changes may have been implemented. Be specific and provide examples.

By Day 6 of Week 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days who chose a different national healthcare issue/stressor than you selected. Explain how their chosen national healthcare issue/stressor may also impact your work setting and what (if anything) is being done to address the national healthcare issue/stressor.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 1 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 1

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 1 Discussion

ORDER NOW FOR AN EXCELLENT PAPER FROM HEALTH CARE PAPER GURUS: Discussion: Review of Current Healthcare Issues NURS 6053

Learning Resources
Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course
Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
Marshall, E., & Broome, M. (2017). Transformational leadership in nursing: From expert
clinician to influential leader (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

 Chapter 2, “Understanding Contexts for Transformational Leadership:
Complexity, Change, and Strategic Planning” (pp. 37–62)

 Chapter 3, “Current Challenges in Complex Health Care Organizations: The
Triple Aim” (pp. 63–86)

Read any TWO of the following (plus TWO additional readings on your selected issue):
Auerbach, D. I., Staiger, D. O., & Buerhaus, P. I. (2018). Growing ranks of advanced practice
clinicians—Implications for the physician workforce. New England Journal of Medicine,
378(25), 2358–2360. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1801869
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Gerardi, T., Farmer, P., & Hoffman, B. (2018). Moving closer to the 2020 BSN-prepared
workforce goal. American Journal of Nursing, 118(2), 43–45.
doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000530244.15217.aa
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Jacobs, B., McGovern, J., Heinmiller, J., & Drenkard, K. (2018). Engaging employees in well-
being: Moving from the Triple Aim to the Quadruple Aim. Nursing Administration Quarterly,
42(3), 231–245. doi:10.1097/NAQ.0000000000000303
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Norful, A. A., de Jacq, K., Carlino, R., & Poghosyan, L. (2018). Nurse practitioner–physician
comanagement: A theoretical model to alleviate primary care strain. Annals of Family Medicine,
16(3), 250–256. doi:10.1370/afm.2230
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Palumbo, M., Rambur, B., & Hart, V. (2017). Is health care payment reform impacting nurses'
work settings, roles, and education preparation? Journal of Professional Nursing, 33(6),
400–404. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.11.005
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Park, B., Gold, S. B., Bazemore, A., & Liaw, W. (2018). How evolving United States payment
models influence primary care and its impact on the Quadruple Aim. Journal of the American
Board of Family Medicine, 31(4), 588–604. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2018.04.170388
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Pittman, P., & Scully-Russ, E. (2016). Workforce planning and development in times of delivery
system transformation. Human Resources for Health, 14(56), 1–15. doi:10.1186/s12960-016-

0154-3. Retrieved from https://human-resources-
health.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12960-016-0154-3

Poghosyan, L., Norful, A., & Laugesen, M. (2018). Removing restrictions on nurse practitioners'
scope of practice in New York state: Physicians' and nurse practitioners' perspectives. Journal of
the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 30(6), 354–360.
doi:10.1097/JXX.0000000000000040
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Ricketts, T., & Fraher, E. (2013). Reconfiguring health workforce policy so that education,
training, and actual delivery of care are closely connected. Health Affairs, 32(11), 1874–1880.
doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0531
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2015). Leading in Healthcare Organizations of the Future
[Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

NURS 6053N-Module 1

Main discussion

Hello Dr. O’R and peers,

With the coronavirus pandemic and other variables, I chose to discuss the national health issue of burnout among healthcare workers. Sultana, Sharma, Hossain, Bhattaharya, & Purohit (2020) wrote that several suspected cases arriving in hospitals, where there are not enough beds for treating patients.  Result in additional workplace-related stress on healthcare providers, which in terms may increase the risks of developing burnout. In 2014, Thomas Bodenheimer, MD, and Christine Sinsky, MD, reported that staff burnout and disengagement were leading factors for the reduction in health outcomes, patient discontent and potentially increase the cost. These factors resulted in organizations incorporating the quadruple aim; the fourth aim focusing on improving the work-life of healthcare clinicians and staff.

(Jacobs, McGovern, Heinmiller, & Drenkard, 2018).

Impact of burnout

The impact of burnout, the healthcare organizations I have observed is a staff shortage, with excessive call-offs and turn-over, and medication errors.   Dr. Bryan Bohman, a senior advisor at Stanford Medicine, states, “A problem that results in high turn-over affects the quality of care, reduces productivity, increases the risk of suicide, and destroys people’s lives is what burnout is. However, it tends to work undercover”.  (Krisberg, 2018).

How has your organization responded to this issue?

At the health care organization, the facility utilizes the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) to assist employees when confronted with stressful or overwhelming situations. Mental health screening initiated to recognize any potential stressors or suicidal ideation. With the staffing shortages in the health care profession, nurse practitioners can help fill in the gap with the increasing number of patients seeking primary care providers and the increasing patient loads (Norful, de Jacq, Carlino, Poghosyan, 2018).  One study suggests that by sharing the workload, nurse practitioner-physicians comanagement can lead to more one-on-one time attending to the patient’s needs (Norful, de Jacq, Carlino, Poghosyan, 2018).

References

Jacobs, B., McGovern, J., Heinmiller, J., & Drenkard, K. (2018). Engaging employees in well-being: Moving from the Triple Aim to the Quadruple Aim. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 42(3), 231-245.

Krisberg, K. (2018). Concerns grow about burnout, stress in health care workers: New demands adding to burden. The Nation’s Health, 48(8), 1-15. Retrieved from https://thenationshealth.apapublications.org/content/48/8/1.3

Norful, A. A., de Jacq, K., Carlino, R., & Poghosyan, L. (2018). Nurse practitioner-physician comanagement: A theoretical model to alleviate primary care strain. Annals of Family Medicine, 16(3), 250-256.

Sultana, A., Sharma, R., Hossain, M., Bhattacharya, S., & Purohit, N. (2020). Burnout among healthcare providers during COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and evidence-based interventions. Retrieved from https://doi.og/10.31235/osf.io/4hxga

NURS_6053_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources. 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. 

Supported by at least three credible sources. 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s). 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 

Post is cited with two credible sources. 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 

Contains only one or no credible sources. 

Not written clearly or concisely. 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. 

Responses to faculty questions are missing. 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. 

Responses to faculty questions are missing. 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100