NHS-FPX 6008 Assessment 1: Identifying a Local Healthcare Economic Issue
Identifying a Local Healthcare Economic Issue
How people, organizations, and communities access, receive, and successfully use treatment is primarily determined by health care economics. Inequities in care arise from frequent financial and resource constraints in local health systems, affecting both patients and physicians (Lasater et al., 2021). Identifying and comprehending these issues is crucial to developing solutions that improve the health system’s effectiveness, equity, and quality. A thorough economic analysis helps management identify evidence-based expenditures that promote patient safety, staff retention, and financial sustainability. This paper will examine the issue of inadequate nurse staffing ratios as a local health care economic problem, explain the rationale for selecting this topic, analyze its impact on my work and organization, and identify the gaps contributing to this challenge.
Description of the Healthcare Economic Issue
One of the most important economic problems in health care is the shortage of nurses. There are not enough nurses to match the demand for treatment in many hospitals, including the one where I work. As a result, patients do not receive the best possible treatment, and nurses are forced to work harder. According to the American Nurses Association, staff shortages are associated with higher mortality, prescription errors, and longer hospital stays (Shah et al., 2021). From an economic perspective, these results increase costs for businesses through readmissions, quality-metric-related fines, and lower patient satisfaction. Lack of staff also causes problems that hurt value-based care programs and payment models, as hospitals are punished for issues that could have been avoided and for longer-than-expected stays.
Also, poorer areas are more likely to have this problem than wealthier areas because they lack sufficient staff or funding. For instance, it can be hard for rural hospitals to hire and retain trained nurses because they pay lower salaries and have fewer staff. According to the Health Resources and Services Administration, more than 80 million Americans live in areas with insufficient numbers of doctors and nurses (Assaye et al., 2020). This really shows how bad the problem is. So, not having enough staff is not just a problem for the people who work there; it is also a broader economic issue that affects the level of care and how easily vulnerable groups can access it. Over time, this leads to bigger differences in health, and when the economy is not working well, it directly affects health equity and community results.
Rationale for Choosing the Issue
Professional expertise and the noticeable impacts on the community serve as the rationale for selecting inadequate nurse staffing ratios. As a nurse, I am aware of the adverse effects of having too many patients per nurse on people’s stress levels, confidence, and likelihood of quitting. The company’s long-term survival and patient care are negatively impacted by these ongoing personnel issues (Peng et al., 2022). This problem, in my opinion, is crucial because it illustrates the link between fairness and health care costs. When hospitals are unable to recruit enough staff to guarantee the safety of both patients and workers, everyone loses. There is much evidence that safer hiring leads to better results. Financial benefits may directly lower costs and save lives, claim Griffiths et al. (2023). Restricting the number of hires aligns with the ethical principles of fairness and compassion. This ensures that budgetary decisions will not compromise patient safety or treatment quality. So, choosing this issue gives us a chance to explore options grounded in facts that do not break the bank while still addressing a significant problem in healthcare delivery. By looking into this issue, I hope to contribute to policy discussions that seek a balance between smart spending and running healthcare systems with people in mind.
Impact on Work, Organization, Colleagues, and Community
The implications of not having enough staff are pretty clear in my job and the surrounding community. High ratios cause personnel to be stressed, tired, and morally upset, making them less happy with their jobs and more likely to leave. This creates a loop in which companies must spend more on hiring, training, and employing temporary workers, placing an even greater burden on their finances (Peng et al., 2022). Patients who are understaffed have to wait longer, get worse treatment, and are more likely to have bad results. The current shortage also makes it harder for people from different fields to work together, since nurses often do not have time for team-based care or teaching patients. People in communities with lower socioeconomic levels may feel these effects more strongly since they may not have access to other health services. Like, in my area, many people who cannot afford private care go to state hospitals, which often lack sufficient staff. This leads to larger health disparities, making things even worse for groups that are already struggling economically and socially. So, this problem impacts not just individual providers and organizations but also the whole health ecosystem. People lose faith in the health system when the staff is unstable for a long time. This means fewer people use preventive services, leading to worse long-term outcomes.
Identifying the Gap
The primary reason there are not enough staff is that resources are not being used to meet patients’ needs. Research consistently indicates that safe staffing ratios are appropriate for organizations; nevertheless, many do not apply them due to insufficient funding or regulations. Lasater et al. (2021) conducted a recent study demonstrating that hospitals with higher staffing levels achieved significantly improved patient outcomes and lower mortality rates; however, economic challenges impeded widespread adoption.
Staffing has not been a high priority in my local health system due to limited funds and a focus on short-term cost-cutting measures. Griffiths et al. (2023) argue that companies tend to prioritize short-term profits over long-term worker survival. This focus on the short term prevents data-driven recommendations from being implemented. Another big problem is that there are no national rules to make sure that nurse-to-patient ratios are followed. In other words, different institutions use different ways to hire staff. To fix this problem, there is a need to push for laws that set hiring standards to promote fairness, quality, and long-term success. Lawmakers, nurse leaders, and financial managers need to work together to build a long-lasting system that combines professional quality with cost-effectiveness.
Conclusion
The local health care economy still faces a significant shortage of nurses. This affects patient safety, costs, and fairness. People who are not receiving adequate care are at the most significant risk, while companies are struggling to retain workers and address financial problems. There is evidence that safe hiring is effective, but implementation remains problematic. A measured approach that combines fiscal responsibility with evidence-based staff planning could turn this problem into an opportunity for long-lasting change in the health system. To fix this issue, the organization needs to ensure that financial plans align with the provision of responsible care to stay in business and improve health outcomes.
References
Assaye, A. M., Wiechula, R., Schultz, T. J., & Feo, R. (2020). Impact of nurse staffing on patient and nurse workforce outcomes in acute care settings in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 19(4), 751–793. https://doi.org/10.11124/jbisrir-d-19-00426
Griffiths, P., Saville, C., Ball, J., Dall’Ora, C., Meredith, P., Turner, L., & Jones, J. (2023). Costs and cost-effectiveness of improved nurse staffing levels and skill mix in acute hospitals: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 147, 104601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104601
Lasater, K. B., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D., French, R., Martin, B., Alexander, M., & McHugh, M. D. (2021). Patient outcomes and cost savings associated with hospital safe nurse staffing legislation: an observational study. BMJ Open, 11(12), e052899. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052899
Peng, X. D., Ye, Y., Fan, R. L., Ding, X. D., & Chandrasekaran, A. (2022). Cost-quality tradeoff in nurse staffing: an exploration of USA hospitals facing market competition. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 42(5), 577–602. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm-07-2021-0453
Shah, M. K., Gandrakota, N., Cimiotti, J. P., Ghose, N., Moore, M., & Ali, M. K. (2021). Prevalence of and factors associated with nurse burnout in the US. JAMA Network Open, 4(2), e2036469. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36469
CLICK HERE TO ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER
Note: Each assessment in this course builds upon the work you have completed in previous assessments. Therefore, you must complete the assessments in the order in which they are presented.
Health care economics has the potential to affect each of us either personally or professionally. This impact can be viewed from a health economics point-of-view (where we discuss the value of health care and its efficiency), or it can examine how health care is financed (focus on how health care is funded). Health economics and health care funding have the potential to influence health care outcomes in a variety of ways. As you move through this course, you will work toward developing a potential solution for a health care issue within your current or desired health care system. The goal of this assessment is to identify an economic health care issue that you will address throughout the course.
Context and Background
Health care economics has the potential to affect each of us either personally or professionally. This impact can be viewed from a health economics point-of-view (where we discuss the value of health care and its efficiency) or it can examine how health care is financed (focus on how health care is funded). Health economics and health care funding have the potential to influence health care outcomes in a variety of ways. The bulleted list below outlines topics and health care issues that many institutions encounter. Organizations often have to implement strategies or initiatives to resolve or improve these issues and create positive patient and institution outcomes.
Examples of health care economic issues:
- The influence of health care economics on community health—for example, social determinants of health (such as access to care and health care finance).
- Supply and demand: How do we in the health care environment exist when there are more needs from communities and patients than we have the resources to supply? An example of this would be a high number of patients and low resource levels such as staff, supplies, and equipment.
- The public’s attitude toward health, disease, and the health care system—for example, how money is distributed has the potential to impact the health care outcomes of certain populations. An example of this would be the lack of access and funding for underserved and rural communities.
- Other issues might include access to care, social determinants of health, senior health, food insecurity or food desserts, inadequate staffing, homelessness, rehospitalization environmental issues leading to chronic disease, et cetera.
As you move through this course, you will work toward developing a potential solution for a health care issue within your current or desired health care system. The goal of this assessment is to identify an economic health care issue that you will address throughout the course.
Later in the course, you will (a) conduct a needs analysis to justify your focus on this topic area using the literature of the field, (b) present an argument for change in your organization bolstered by a cost-benefit analysis, and (c) advocate for this change at the state level. Keep these future assessments in mind as you select your topic.
Instructions
For this assessment, you will write a brief 2–3 page report about the health care economic issue that you have identified. In addition, you will also be asked to:
- Address the reasons you selected the issue.
- Identify how the issue impacts the work of you, your colleagues, and your organization.
- Describe the gap that you see contributing to this issue.
Be sure to address each main point. Review the assessment instructions and scoring guide, including performance-level descriptions for each criterion, to ensure you understand the work you will be asked to complete and how it will be assessed. In addition, note the requirements for document format and length and for supporting evidence.
Overall, you will be assessed on the following criteria:
- Describe a health care economic issue and how it impacts a specific community or population.
- Note the data, information, or observations used to support your description.
- Explain the rationale for choosing your health care economic issue.
- Explain how the health care economic issue has affected your work, your organization, your colleagues, and your community.
- Identify the gap that is contributing to the need to address the economic issue.
- Cite at least one piece of evidence to support your identification of the gap. This could be public health data, a peer-reviewed journal article, or another scholarly source.
- Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards.
Additional Requirements
- Length of Submission: 2–3 double-spaced pages.
- Number of References: Cite at least one piece of evidence to support your identification of the gap. This could be public health data, a peer-reviewed journal article, or another scholarly source.
- APA formatting: Titles, headings, resources, and citations are formatted according to the APA style.
Note: As you revise your writing, check out the resources listed on the Writing Center’s Writing Support page.
Competencies Measured
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and scoring guide criteria:
- Competency 1: Analyze the effects of financial and economic factors (such as cost-benefit, supply and demand, return on investment, and risks) in a health care system on patient care, services offered, and organizational structures and operation.
- Explain the rationale for choosing the health care economic issue.
- Competency 2: Develop ethical and culturally equitable solutions to economic problems within a health care organization in an effort to improve the quality of care and services offered.
- Describe a health care economic issue and how it impacts a specific community or population.
- Competency 3: Justify the qualitative and quantitative information used to guide economic decision making to stakeholders and colleagues.
- Identify the gap that is contributing to the need to address the economic issue.
- Competency 4: Develop ethical and culturally equitable economic strategies to address dynamic environmental forces and ensure the future security of an organization’s resources and its ability to provide quality care.
- Explain how the health care economic issue has affected your work, your organization, colleagues, and community.
- Competency 5: Produce clear, coherent, and professional written work, in accordance with Capella writing standards.
- Convey purpose in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards.
Describe a health care economic issue and how it impacts a specific community or population.
Distinguished
Describes a health care economic issue and how it impacts a specific community or population. Notes the data, information, or observations used to support the description.
Proficient
Describes a health care economic issue and how it impacts a specific community or population.
Basic
Describes a health care economic issue. However, does not address, or it is unclear, how it impacts a specific community or population.
Non Performance
Does not describe a health care economic issue.
Criterion 2
Explain the rationale for choosing the health care economic issue.
Distinguished
Explains the rationale for choosing the health care economic issue. Reflects on how personal experiences and values informed the choice of issue.
Proficient
Explains the rationale for choosing the health care economic issue.
Basic
Lists reasons for choosing the health care economic issue, but does not provide a full explanation.
Non Performance
Does not list reasons for choosing the health care economic issue.
Criterion 3
Explain how the health care economic issue has affected your work, your organization, colleagues, and community.
Distinguished
Explains how the health care economic issue has affected your work, your organization, colleagues, and community. Specifically notes ways in which the issue may be having greater impacts on diverse or lower socio-economic groups.
Proficient
Explains how the health care economic issue has affected your work, your organization, colleagues, and community.
Basic
Explains how the health care economic issue has affected some but not all of your work, your organization, colleagues, and community.
Non Performance
Does not explain how the health care economic issue has affected any of your work, your organization, colleagues, and community.
Criterion 4
Identify the gap that is contributing to the need to address the economic issue.
Distinguished
Identifies the gap that is contributing to the need to address the economic issue. Cites at least one piece of evidence to support the identification of the gap. This could be public health data, a peer-reviewed journal article, or another scholarly source.
Proficient
Identifies the gap that is contributing to the need to address the economic issue.
Basic
Identifies a gap, but it is unclear if the gap is contributing to the need to address the economic issue.
Non Performance
Does not identify a gap.
Criterion 5
Convey purpose in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards.
Distinguished
Conveys clear purpose in a tone and style well-suited to the intended audience. Supports assertions, arguments, and conclusions with relevant, credible, and convincing evidence. Exhibits strict and nearly flawless adherence to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards, including APA style and formatting.
Proficient
Conveys purpose in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards. Applies APA style and formatting.
Basic
Conveys purpose in an appropriate tone or style. Clear, effective communication is inhibited by insufficient supporting evidence or minimal adherence to applicable writing standards.
Non Performance
Does not convey purpose in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and writing scholarly standards.