Question

Pls, provide answers in a more professional format. Pls, provide the answer in TWO PAGES and must be related to Healthcare Services.

Homework Assignment Finalized Survey and Methodology for Administration

This week, after reviewing materials, engaging in exercises and Constructive Actions, prepare and upload your finalized survey instrument. Be sure to include a narrative discussion of your methodology for administering the survey and a discussion of your sample and methodology for handling and controlling variables.

Answer 1

In approaching the task of evaluating patient safety indicators based on administrative data, we developed a conceptual framework and standardized definitions of commonly used terms. In the literature, the distinctions between medical error, adverse events, complications of care, and other terms pertinent to patient safety are not well established and are often used interchangeably. In this report, the terms medical error, adverse events or complications, and similar concepts are defined as follows:

• Quality: “Quality of care is the degree to which health services for individuals and populations increase the likelihood of desired health outcomes and are consistent with current professional knowledge.” In this definition, “the term health services refers to a wide array of services that affect health...(and) applies to many types of health care practitioners (physicians, nurses, and various other health professionals) and to all settings of care...”4
• Quality indicators: Screening tools for the purpose of identifying potential areas of concern regarding the quality of clinical care. For the purpose of this report, we focus on indicators that reflect the quality of care inside hospitals. Quality indicators may assess any of the four system components of health care quality, including patient safety (see below), effectiveness (i.e., "providing services based on scientific knowledge to all who could benefit, and refraining from providing services to those not likely to benefit), patient centeredness, and timeliness (i.e., “minimizing unnecessary delays”).4
• Patient safety: “Freedom from accidental injury,” or “avoiding injuries or harm to patients from care that is intended to help them.” Ensuring patient safety “involves the establishment of operational systems and processes that minimize the likelihood of errors and maximizes the likelihood of intercepting them when they occur.” 5
• Patient safety indicators:Specific quality indicators which also reflect the quality of care inside hospitals, but focus on aspects of patient safety. Specifically, PSIs screen for problems that patients experience as a result of exposure to the healthcare system, and that are likely amenable to prevention by changes at the system or provider level.
• Medical error: “The failure of a planned action to be completed as intended (i.e., error of execution) or the use of a wrong plan to achieve an aim (i.e., error of planning).”1 The definition includes errors committed by any individual, or set of individuals, working in a health care organization.
• Complication or adverse event: “An injury caused by medical management rather than by the underlying disease or condition of the patient.”6 In general, adverse events prolong the hospitalization, produce a disability at the time of discharge, or both. Used in this report, complication does not refer to the sequelae of diseases, such as neuropathy as a “complication” of diabetes. Throughout the report, “sequelae” is used to refer to these conditions.
• Preventable adverse event: An adverse event attributable to error is a “preventable adverse event.”6 A condition for which reasonable steps may reduce (but not necessarily eliminate) the risk of that complication occurring.
• Case finding indicators:Indicators for which the primary purpose is to identify specific cases in which a medical error may have occurred, for further investigation.
• Rate based indicators:Indicators for which the primary purpose is to identify the rate of a complication rather than to identify specific cases.
• Here i am representing a survey:

• The Seventh Conference on Health Survey Research

  Methods (HSRM) was held in Williamsburg, Virginia, on

  September 24–27, 1999, continuing a series of meetings that

  began in 1975 to discuss new, innovative survey research

  methods to improve health survey research data. The HSRM

  conferences bring together researchers from a variety of dis-

  ciplines, including those who are at the forefront of survey

  methods research, are responsible for major health surveys,

  and use survey data to develop and implement health policy

  and programs. As with the previous HSRM conferences, the

  overarching goal was to review, critique, and add to our body

  of knowledge about survey methodologies to improve the

  quality of health survey methods and enhance the value and

  utility of the data that surveys provide for policymakers

  responsible for shaping health practice, policy, and programs.

  This is accomplished by

  • Selecting presentations that represent progressive survey

  methods research relevant to providing quality data

  related to the nation’s health

  • Providing a forum for critical discussion of the presenta-

  tions, using a format that combines formal discussion by

  expert reviewers and open discussion by all conference

  participants

  • Preparing and publishing a complete written summary

  of the conference, compiled from the formal papers,

  comments from invited discussants, and general discus-

  sion by participants, in the form of a formal conference

  proceeding

  The Seventh Conference focused on

  • Major survey activities within and outside the federal

  statistical system

  • The potential impact of ongoing methodological research

  in surveys

  • How survey methods affect the usefulness of survey data

  in addressing the information and policy needs of those

  charged with planning, delivering, and improving health

  assessments, services, and research to the nation

  The Conference brought together four key groups of stake-

  holders who contribute to and/or benefit from ongoing health

  survey research to review and critique the current state of sur-

  vey methods in this area and develop concrete recommenda-

  tions for how these might be enhanced, improved, and better

  focused. These groups comprised

  • Researchers from various disciplines who are engaged in survey method.

• • Researchers and practitioners who use survey data to
  assess health policies
  • Those in the government who make these policies
  In all, 76 persons attended this conference. Twenty-seven
  papers were selected from 80 submissions. The selected
  papers were presented in five topical sessions:
  1. Collecting Data from Children and Adolescents (5)
  2. Racial and Ethnic Populations: Cross-Cultural Consider-
  ations (5)
  3. Comparability of Data across Different Modes of Data
  Collection (6)
  4. Validity of Results (6)
  5. Needs for State and Local Data of National Relevance (5