MSN Writing Services

NHS FPX 6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

New Samples

Struggling With Your Assessments? Get Help From Our Tutors

    NHS FPX 6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

    Student Name

    Capella University

    NHS-FPX 6004 Health Care Law and Policy

    Prof. Name

    Date

    Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

    This report focuses on evaluating dashboard metrics based on national or state benchmarks. Various national, state, and local laws or policies provide healthcare systems with criteria to assess their healthcare performance by comparing the organization’s dashboard metrics and data. By assessing the dashboard metrics data with benchmark data, one can improve care treatment quality, enhance patient safety, and estimate the healthcare professionals’ performance in a particular clinical setup. For this purpose, this report compares the dashboard metrics data of Mercy Medical Center (MMC) with benchmarks set forth by the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report (NHQDR) to identify the shortcomings of MMC in providing care treatment to diabetics.

    Comparison and Contrast of Dashboard Metrics with NHQDR Benchmarks

    Mercy Medical Center is known for its high-quality care treatment in Shakopee City, as it has achieved various awards for providing the highest safe surgery and outstanding patient experience. The total population of Shakopee City comprises 36,192 individuals, out of which 18,235 are females and 17,957 include males. The age group primarily found in this population is 21-44, making up 14,732. In Public Health Dashboard on Diabetes provided by MMC, eye exams, foot exam, and HgbA1c test data is available, ranging from the first quartile of 2019 to the fourth quartile of 2020. Furthermore, the data measured also depicted the new patients admitted or visited MMC based on race, gender, and age. The total number of patients admitted to MMC in the last quarter of 2020 was 563.

    To evaluate the efficacy of care treatment for diabetics in MMC, comparing the dashboard metrics data with national benchmarks AHRQ sets is essential. The AHRQ has established a standard for eye exams to be 75.2 %, feet exams to be 84%, and HbA1C to be 79.5% (AHRQ, n.d.). Considering the last quarter of 2020, the patient admissions in MMC and the tests conducted in the last quarter are compared accordingly to examine underperformance.

    All of these tests fell short (11% each) of a benchmark set by AHRQ, which means that the organization needs to work strikingly to achieve the benchmark point set forth by the national bodies. The dashboard metrics data provided by MMC has several knowledge gaps and uncertainties. For example, uncertainty on the credibility of the data sources and limited knowledge of how the data were collected remains uncertain. Besides the lack of knowledge on the underlying factors that contributed to the performance gaps of these tests is another knowledge gap that requires further information to improve evaluation.   

    Consequences Not Meeting Prescribed Benchmarks

    There are several health implications and consequences when healthcare organizations fail to meet the prescribed benchmarks for diabetes care that, include regular checkups of HbA1c tests and eye and foot exams. Failure to meet the HbA1C benchmark can lead to poor glycemic control as patients and care providers will be unaware of the glycemic levels of diabetes patients. The uncontrolled glycemic levels may lead to the onset of diabetes-associated diseases, including heart diseases, neuropathy, kidney damage, and retinopathy.

    This will ultimately reduce patient safety and quality of care (Zaharia et al., 2019). Furthermore, failure to provide adequate education on diabetes care and treatment will lead to decreased patient satisfaction. Patients must be properly educated on performing eye and foot exams to meet the prescribed benchmarks at national and state levels. Non-compliance with the testing will erode trust in healthcare providers and the organization’s ability to provide the best treatments. The inability of healthcare organizations to meet established standards profoundly impacts healthcare organizations and teams. For instance, the financial implications may also occur due to higher hospital readmission rates, chronic care treatment, and increased length of hospital stays. 

    NHS FPX 6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

    Furthermore, failing to meet bars set by national health organizations and policies also impacts the healthcare organization’s reputation and may result in loss of accreditations or relevant sanctions. Healthcare professionals may face increased patient load due to poor diabetes control leading to work burnout and increased turnover rates (Kontoangelos et al., 2022). The assumptions on which this analysis is based include that prescribed benchmarks on diabetes have a great clinical impact on diabetes patients as their implementation improves the glycemic level and reduces diabetes-associated diseases. Furthermore, the analysis assumes that healthcare organizations must have adequate access to resources, including staff, protocols and guidelines, and technology to meet the prescribed standards of diabetes care.

    The Underperformance of the Benchmark

    Several diabetes benchmarks estimate diabetes care, including HgbA1c being the most crucial as this test measures the patient’s blood glycemic levels. The HgbA1c benchmark acts as a diagnostic guideline for healthcare professionals to identify and diagnose diabetes in patients to plan further care treatment for them. Unmonitored HgbA1c levels in diabetes patients lead to various health implications, such as neuropathy, kidney failure, retinopathy, and cardiovascular diseases. According to WHO, diabetes caused 1.5 million deaths, out of which 48% occurred before patients reached the age of 70 years (World Health Organization, 2023).

    A study describes that stringent adherence to the HgbA1c benchmark can reduce retinopathy by 67%, diabetic nephropathy by 54%, cardiovascular disease risk by 35%, and peripheral neuropathy by 60% (Kaiafa et al., 2020). Most of the patients are affected by the poor performance of this benchmark as timely diagnosis of diabetes is prevented, leading to uncontrolled glycemic levels. This ultimately results in poor health outcomes such as diabetes-associated diseases. Patients may need to amputate their lower extremities and administer insulin frequently, reducing their quality of life and safety (Déruaz‐Luyet et al., 2020).

    This brings a compelling opportunity for healthcare organizations to improve in meeting this benchmark as it impacts their performance. The underperformance of this benchmark will result in higher hospital readmission rates impacting organizational functionality and increasing financial costs, and staff burnout due to patient overload.   Improving professional performance by performing this benchmark can enhance the quality of care and better-quality performance as the reduction in diabetes complications is favorable. 

    Ethical and Sustainable Actions for the Underperformance of Benchmark

     It is crucial to implement ethical and sustainable actions that directly target a suitable group of health professionals to address the underperformance of a significant benchmark of HgbA1c for diabetes care. The ethical principles of care treatment include patient autonomy, beneficence, justice, and non-maleficence. In MMC, primary care physicians, nurses, dieticians, and pharmacists are the stakeholders necessary to perform ethical and sustainable actions. This interprofessional group must take several ethical and sustainable steps to facilitate the HgbA1c benchmark performance.

    Ethical Actions

    • The ethical principles of autonomy and beneficence are important in providing patient-centered care to diabetes patients. When the patients visit the clinical care setting, the stakeholder group should direct the patient on performing this test in managing diabetes to provide the right care treatment plan to the patient. 
    • Ensure that patients access diabetes care equitably without considering biases or factors related to racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic status.
    • Practicing non-maleficence and not harming patients deliberately while striving to achieve optimal glycemic levels and reducing the risk of hypoglycemia. 
    • As the established benchmark prescribes, be kind and educate the patients on the long-term impact of conducting HgbA1c testing and managing glycemic levels (Cameron et al., 2018).

    Sustainable Actions

    • Enhance collaborative endeavors with policymakers to develop and implement policies to promote equitable access to diabetes care from early diagnosis to long-term disease management so that sustainable diabetes care is provided.
    • Implementing a patient-centered and holistic approach to care treatment for diabetes to reduce hospital readmissions and long-term diabetes complications leading to improved hospital efficiency and sustainability of healthcare resources. Furthermore, by preventing diabetes-related complications through early diagnostic testing of HgbA1c levels, overall community health becomes the central focus that aligns with the sustainability efforts in bringing wellness to community individuals (Basu & Sharma, 2019).

    By implementing ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, justice, and non-maleficence, the healthcare group can enhance patients’ participation in assessing their HgbA1c levels and promote effective management of diabetes through efficient care planning and providing equitable access to diabetes care to all affected patients. Moreover, recommended actions of delivering patient-centered care that aligns with patients’ health needs and preferences can promote long-term patient outcomes and patient safety. This will lead to an enhanced hospital reputation and increase overall revenue.

    Conclusion

    Mercy Medical Center falls short of specific benchmarks established by national benchmarks for diabetes, such as eye exams, foot exams, and HgbA1c testing. Failure to meet the launched standards has various health consequences, such as the incidence of diabetes-associated diseases and reduced patient safety. Moreover, HgbA1c is an important benchmark in the early identification of diabetes in patients, and its underperformance requires intricate efforts to promote the application of this benchmark. 

    References

    AHRQ. (n.d.). NHQDR data tools – national healthcare quality and disparities reports (NHQDR). https://datatools.ahrq.gov/nhqdr/

    Basu, S., & Sharma, N. (2019). Diabetes self-care in primary health facilities in India – challenges and the way forward. World Journal of Diabetes, 10(6), 341–349. https://doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v10.i6.341  

    Cameron, F. J., Moore, B., & Gillam, L. (2018). Two’s company, is three a crowd? Ethical cognition in decision making and the role of industry third parties in pediatric diabetes care. Pediatric Diabetes, 20(1), 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12786 

    NHS FPX 6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

    Déruaz‐Luyet, A., Raabe, C., Garry, E. M., Brodovicz, K. G., & Lavery, L. A. (2020). Incidence of lower extremity amputations among patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the united states from 2010 to 2014. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism. https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.14012 

    Kaiafa, G., Veneti, S., Polychronopoulos, G., Pilalas, D., Daios, S., Kanellos, I., Didangelos, T., Pagoni, S., & Savopoulos, C. (2020). Is hba1c an ideal biomarker of well-controlled diabetes? Postgraduate Medical Journal, 97(1148). https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-138756 

    NHS FPX 6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

    Kontoangelos, K., Raptis, A., Lambadiari, V., Economou, M., Tsiori, S., Katsi, V., Papageorgiou, C., Martinaki, S., Dimitriadis, G., & Papageorgiou, C. (2022). Burnout related to diabetes mellitus: A critical analysis. Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.2174/17450179-v18-e2209010 

    World Health Organization. (2023, April 5). Diabetes. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diabetes 

    Zaharia, O. P., Strassburger, K., Strom, A., Bönhof, G. J., Karusheva, Y., Antoniou, S., Bódis, K., Markgraf, D. F., Burkart, V., Müssig, K., Hwang, J.-H., Asplund, O., Groop, L., Ahlqvist, E., Seissler, J., Nawroth, P., Kopf, S., Schmid, S. M., Stumvoll, M., & Pfeiffer, A. F. H. (2019). Risk of diabetes-associated diseases in subgroups of patients with recent-onset diabetes: A 5-year follow-up study. The Lancet. Diabetes & Endocrinology, 7(9), 684–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30187-1