NURS FPX 6214 Assessment 3 Implementation Plan
NURS FPX 6214 Assessment 3 Implementation Plan
Name
Capella university
NURS-FPX 6214 Health Care Informatics and Technology
Prof. Name
Date
Implementation Plan
Technological advancements continue to revolutionize healthcare, allowing for more efficient and accessible patient care. The integration of Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) systems enables healthcare organizations to enhance care delivery while maintaining a competitive edge (AlQudah et al., 2021). At Mayo Clinic, implementing an RPM system aims to optimize real-time data collection, improving the management of Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) patients. This implementation framework outlines the essential steps required to deploy this telehealth innovation, ensuring improved patient outcomes.
Infrastructure Assessment and Integration
Assessing Mayo Clinic’s existing telehealth infrastructure is crucial for a seamless RPM implementation. This includes evaluating network capacity, system compatibility, and security protocols to ensure real-time data transmission without disruptions. Adequate performance, system memory, and network security must be optimized for effective integration with existing Electronic Health Records (EHRs) (El-Rashidy et al., 2021). To accommodate the new RPM technology, network infrastructure must be upgraded to support high data throughput and secure information exchange.
Additionally, integrating RPM devices with EHR systems is essential to avoid data fragmentation and ensure continuity of care. Addressing these integration challenges will prevent workflow disruptions and enhance the efficiency of CHF management. A proactive approach to infrastructure enhancement will mitigate potential technical issues and improve the overall patient experience (Boikanyo et al., 2023).
Implementation Schedule and Staff Training
The execution of the RPM system follows a structured six-month schedule to ensure successful deployment. The initial planning stage (one month) focuses on developing an action plan, engaging stakeholders, and securing resources. The setup phase (one month) involves infrastructure upgrades, acquisition of RPM tools, and the creation of training materials. A one-month training period ensures that healthcare professionals gain proficiency in using RPM devices and analyzing real-time patient data (Ferrua et al., 2020).
A trial phase (one month) will be conducted in a controlled environment to assess system functionality and address potential challenges. Finally, the deployment phase (two months) will implement the RPM system across the hospital, offering continuous support and monitoring. If any stage encounters significant obstacles, the trial period may be extended by one month to facilitate thorough issue resolution. A contingency plan, such as manual record-keeping, will be utilized to ensure uninterrupted patient care during unexpected delays (Lawrence et al., 2023).
To ensure staff preparedness, a blended learning approach will be adopted, including virtual training, interactive seminars, and simulation exercises (Annis et al., 2020). Ongoing training sessions and continuous education resources will be available to address emerging concerns and maintain proficiency. Training effectiveness will be measured through staff assessments and feedback mechanisms, enabling necessary adjustments for improved learning outcomes.
Collaboration and Post-Deployment Evaluation
Engaging both patients and healthcare providers is crucial to ensure the successful adoption of RPM technology. While some individuals readily accept new technology, others may experience concerns regarding data security, usability, or workflow disruptions (Thomas et al., 2021). To address these challenges, comprehensive patient education sessions will be conducted to highlight the benefits of RPM monitoring and ensure ease of use. Additionally, continuous support and follow-ups will be provided to resolve uncertainties and encourage active participation (Tan et al., 2024).
Post-deployment evaluation focuses on assessing system performance, patient satisfaction, and hospital readmission rates. Continuous monitoring ensures that the RPM system aligns with Mayo Clinic’s healthcare quality standards. Key performance indicators (KPIs) include patient engagement levels, system responsiveness, and clinical outcomes (Rhoden et al., 2022). A structured maintenance plan, including software updates, cybersecurity monitoring, and workflow optimization, will sustain system functionality and minimize operational disruptions. Through data-driven insights and stakeholder feedback, RPM implementation at Mayo Clinic aims to enhance CHF management and optimize patient-centered care.
Implementation Plan
Key Focus Area | Implementation Strategy | Expected Outcome |
---|---|---|
Infrastructure Assessment and Integration | Evaluate telehealth network capacity, security, and EHR compatibility (El-Rashidy et al., 2021). Upgrade network performance to support RPM data transmission (Boikanyo et al., 2023). | Seamless RPM-EHR integration with enhanced security and efficiency. |
Implementation Schedule and Staff Training | Develop six-month structured execution plan (Ferrua et al., 2020). Utilize blended learning (virtual, simulation, and seminars) for staff training (Annis et al., 2020). | Improved staff competency, minimized workflow disruptions during transition. |
Collaboration and Post-Deployment Evaluation | Conduct patient education sessions on RPM benefits and usability (Tan et al., 2024). Implement KPIs to track patient outcomes, readmission rates, and system efficiency (Rhoden et al., 2022). | Enhanced patient engagement, reduced hospital readmission rates, and improved CHF management. |
References
AlQudah, A. A., Al-Emran, M., & Shaalan, K. (2021). Technology acceptance in healthcare: A systematic review. Applied Sciences, 11(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210537
Annis, T., Pleasants, S., Hultman, G., Lindemann, E., Thompson, J. A., Billecke, S., Badlani, S., & Melton, G. B. (2020). Rapid implementation of a COVID-19 remote patient monitoring program. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 27(8), 1326–1330. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa097
Boikanyo, K., Zungeru, A. M., Sigweni, B., Yahya, A., & Lebekwe, C. (2023). Remote patient monitoring systems: Applications, architecture, and challenges. Scientific African, 20(1), e01638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2023.e01638
NURS FPX 6214 Assessment 3 Implementation Plan
El-Rashidy, N., Sappagh, S., Islam, S. M. R., Bakry, H., & Abdelrazek, S. (2021). Mobile health in remote patient monitoring for chronic diseases: Principles, trends, and challenges. Diagnostics, 11(4), 607. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11040607
Ferrua, M., Minvielle, E., Fourcade, A., Lalloué, B., Sicotte, C., Palma, M., & Mir, O. (2020). How to design a remote patient monitoring system? A French case study. BMC Health Services Research, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05293-4
Lawrence, K., Singh, N., Jonassen, Z., Groom, L. L., Alfaro Arias, V., Mandal, S., Schoenthaler, A., Mann, D., Nov, O., & Dove, G. (2023). Operational implementation of remote patient monitoring within a large ambulatory health system: Multimethod qualitative case study. JMIR Human Factors, 10, e45166. https://doi.org/10.2196/45166
Rhoden, P. A., Bonilha, H., & Harvey, J. (2022). Patient satisfaction of telemedicine remote patient monitoring: A systematic review. Telemedicine and E-Health, 28(9). https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2021.0434
NURS FPX 6214 Assessment 3 Implementation Plan
Tan, S. Y., Sumner, J., Wang, Y., & Wenjun Yip, A. (2024). A systematic review of the impacts of RPM interventions on safety, adherence, quality-of-life and cost-related outcomes. npj Digital Medicine, 7(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01182-w
Thomas, E. E., Taylor, M. L., Banbury, A., Snoswell, C. L., Haydon, H. M., Gallegos Rejas, V. M., Smith, A. C., & Caffery, L. J. (2021). Factors influencing the effectiveness of remote patient monitoring interventions: A realist review. BMJ Open, 11(8), e051844. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051844