NURS 8210: Health Information Technology And Nursing Informatics

NURS 8210: Health Information Technology And Nursing Informatics

Health Information Technology and Nursing Informatics: Introduction

Nursing informatics has evolved in recent years since its inception, with various innovators in the field taking central roles in improving various functionalities of nursing informatics. It entails an integration of nursing science with information management. As such, information systems and technology integration are used to improve nursing practice, patient outcomes, and healthcare delivery (Booth et al.,2021). I have had experience with nursing informatics in various ways. For example, I have explored the foundational principles of nursing informatics, such as the required data standards, why interoperability is key, healthcare data management, and information technology roles in the healthcare domain. Another aspect is exploring the importance of gaining hands-on experience with various nursing informatics aspects, such as electronic health records and retrieving relevant clinical information efficiently and appropriately.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
NURS 8210: Health Information Technology And Nursing Informatics
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

The other experience entails the use of clinical decision support systems with a major focus on improving patient outcomes and decision-making. It is evident that the CDSS helps professionals such as nurses to prevent errors, make informed decisions, and offer evidence-based guidelines (Lu et al.,2021). The experience has also entailed legal and ethical considerations connected with nursing informatics. This course can play a significant role in enhancing my informatics skills and competencies. This course focuses on health information technology and nursing informatics. As such, it is important to note that this course will help enhance these skills and knowledge in various ways. For example, this course will offer foundational knowledge that focuses on aspects such as concepts, theories, and principles associated with healthcare information technology, systems, and nursing informatics (McGonigle& Mastrian, 2024). I am also likely to achieve improved proficiency regarding various informatics aspects, such as the clinical decision support system and electronic health records. Such an aspect can lead to the improvement of technical proficiency.

 

References

Booth, R., Strudwick, G., McMurray, J., Chan, R., Cotton, K., & Cooke, S. (2021). The future of nursing informatics in a digitally-enabled world. Introduction to nursing informatics, 395–417. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-58740-6_16

Lu, S. C., Brown, R. J., & Michalowski, M. (2021). A clinical decision support system design framework for nursing practice. ACI Open5(02), e84-e93. Doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1736470

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. (2024). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

In the video, Nursing Informatics Innovators, you are provided an extensive list of 34 nursing informatics innovators. Each of these individuals has been integral in advancing nursing informatics and the field of nursing practice.

Innovators in the field of nursing informatics, led the way in shifting the perception of a nurse as an art of patient care, to the practice of nursing as a science, vested in science, technology, and advancements.

Nursing informatics innovators facilitated and created major advancements in the field of nursing and ensured the field would be one of advancement, continual change, and scientific innovation. Exploring the work of these innovators is essential in understanding where nursing informatics began, where it is now, and where it continues to go.

For this Discussion, reflect on the role of individual nursing informatics innovators and consider their contributions, the impact of their contributions, and what you might specifically learn from them in your nursing practice. Reflect on your background and experiences in nursing informatics. You will also review Table 1 from the American Nurses Association (2015) Scope and Standards of Practice (2nd ed.) Explore on how you might apply the knowledge of these innovators and the information from Table 1 to your nursing practice, your education, and your future goals.

RESOURCES

 

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

  • Sipes, C. (2020). Project management for the advanced practice nurse (2nd ed.). Springer Publishing.
    • Chapter 1, “Basic Project Management for the Advanced Practice Nurses and Healthcare Professionals” (pp. 3–16)
    • Chapter 2, “Advanced Practice Nurse Role Descriptions and Application of Project Management Concepts” (pp. 17–46)
    • Chapter 3, “Design/Initiation: Project Management—Phase 1” (pp. 58–62)
  • American Nurses Association. (2015). Nursing informaticsLinks to an external site.: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.).
    • “Introduction” (p. 1)
    • “The Scope of Nursing Informatics Practice” (pp. 1–6)
    • “Standard 1: Assessment” (pp. 68–69)
    • “Standard 2: Diagnosis, Problems, and Issues Identification” (p. 70)
  • Marr, B. (2020). These 25 technology trends will define the next decadeLinks to an external site.. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2020/04/20/these-25-technology-trends-will-define-the-next-decade/?sh=459cc02129e3
  • Walden University Oasis: Writing Center. (n.d.). Citations: OverviewLinks to an external site.. https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/apa/citations
  • Walden University Oasis: Writing Center. (n.d.). Common assignments: Discussion postLinks to an external site.. https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/discussionpost

Required Media

Optional Resources

 

TO PREPARE

  • Review the American Nurses Association. (2015). Nursing informatics: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.).
    • “Introduction” (p. 1)
    • “The Scope of Nursing Informatics Practice” (pp. 1–6) in this week’s resources.

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 1

After reviewing the weekly resources, including the nursing informatics innovators stories, discuss your experience with nursing informatics and how this course could enhance your informatics skills and competencies.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 1

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days, continue the discussion by commenting on how your classmates experience could enhance your own practice.

 

NURS_8210_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8210_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s learning resources as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)
20 to >19.0 ptsExcellent

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

19 to >15.0 ptsGood

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

15 to >12.0 ptsFair

• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.

12 to >0 ptsPoor

• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.

20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)
30 to >29.0 ptsExcellent

Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

29 to >23.0 ptsGood

Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

23 to >18.0 ptsFair

Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.

18 to >0 ptsPoor

Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.

30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)
20 to >19.0 ptsExcellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 ptsGood

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 ptsFair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 ptsPoor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)
20 to >19.0 ptsExcellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 ptsGood

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 ptsFair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 ptsPoor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)
10 to >9.0 ptsExcellent

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

9 to >8.0 ptsGood

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

8 to >6.0 ptsFair

Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

6 to >0 ptsPoor

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

10 pts
Total Points: 100

 

Open chat
Dr.Nursingpapers
Hello
Can we help you?