Capella 4000 Assessment 4 Analyzing a Current Health Care Issue Student Name Capella University NHS-FPX 4000 Developing a Health Care Perspective Prof. Name Date Analyzing a Current Health Care Problem or Issue In the intricate realm of healthcare, ensuring patient safety and delivering optimal care are paramount. An area that demands immediate attention and reform is medication errors, given their potential for severe consequences. Such errors, born out of oversights during medication prescription, dispensing, and administration, can lead to undesirable outcomes, tarnishing the trust in healthcare systems and affecting patients’ overall well-being. This examination delves into the intricacies of medication errors, utilizing scholarly information to shed light on its causes, consequences, and potential solutions. Using Scholarly Information to Understand a Health Care Problem Medication errors in hospitals and clinics have become a pressing healthcare issue. These errors encompass mistakes made while prescribing, dispensing, and administering medications. The detrimental implications of such errors are vast and varied, often resulting in harmful consequences for patients. Notably, these mishaps have earned a reputation as significant threats to patient safety. The underlying causes of medication errors are multifaceted. Among these, miscommunication among healthcare professionals stands out as a primary culprit. This is compounded by ambiguous medication names, the utilization of confusing medical abbreviations, and more precise directions. Additionally, implementing poor procedures or techniques can further exacerbate the problem. To delve deeper into this issue, I referred to several scholarly articles that comprehensively address the topic. Marufu et al. (2021) elaborated on the significant consequences of medication errors, shedding light on various preventive strategies. Roy et al. (2023) underscored the pivotal role of miscommunication among health professionals, emphasizing that such communication breakdowns significantly contribute to these errors. Additionally, Bourne et al. (2022) critically assessed the existing medication safety protocols, investigating their efficacy in mitigating medication errors. It is paramount to highlight that the credibility and relevance of the articles mentioned above are indisputable. Each comes from renowned medical journals, ensuring their authenticity and the value they bring. Collectively, they offer invaluable insights into the intricacies of medication errors, their origins, and potential prevention strategies. Analysis of the Problem Medication errors transpire predominantly within the confines of hospitals and clinics. These settings, where medications are prescribed and administered, become crucial zones where the risk is inherently magnified. To me, the magnitude of this problem hits close to home. As a stakeholder in the healthcare domain, our primary objective revolves around patient safety and ensuring optimal health outcomes. A misstep, like a medication error, is not merely an operational glitch; it has profound repercussions. It can precipitate a series of adverse medical events, prolong hospital stays, augment healthcare costs, and, tragically, in some instances, lead to irreversible health consequences or fatalities (Bourne et al., 2022). Several demographics are at the receiving end of these medication blunders. At the forefront are patients, who bear the direct brunt of these errors. However, the ripple effects extend to healthcare providers, entangling them in legal and ethical conundrums. Pharmacists, often the last line of defense against such errors, are also scrutinized. Furthermore, hospital administrations confront reputational damages and potential financial liabilities. To encapsulate the severity of the issue, consider these real-life scenarios: Potential Solutions Digital Prescription and Medication Tracking System A paramount solution that emerges in the context of medication errors is the transition from traditional methods of prescription and administration to a comprehensive digital prescription and medication tracking system. The genesis of this solution is intertwined with specific prerequisites. The initial phase requires a robust, secure, and user-friendly digital platform. Post this acquisition, an intricate phase of training and orientation beckons, ensuring that every healthcare professional, from prescribers to pharmacists, is adept at navigating this system. Additionally, regular audits would be indispensable to uphold the system’s integrity and ensure its continued efficacy. These audits would scrutinize the system’s efficiency, identify potential loopholes, and recommend necessary enhancements (Lindén-Lahti et al., 2022). Advantages encompass precision in tracking, a significant downturn in human-induced errors, and real-time notifications about potential drug interactions or allergies. Drawbacks include the substantial initial financial outlay required, resistance to technological change from seasoned professionals, and potential cyber threats or system downtimes (Holmgren et al., 2020). Implementation of Standardized Protocols and Continuous Education Another viable solution lies in establishing and enforcing standardized medication administration protocols and ongoing training for all healthcare professionals involved in the medication process. This approach focuses on unifying the methods, nomenclature, and procedures used across different departments and roles. Continuous education and periodic refresher courses would keep all staff updated on best practices. At the same time, simulations and drills would enhance preparedness, allowing for swift corrective action during real-life medication error events (Haleem et al., 2022). This solution fosters a culture of continual learning and improvement, mitigating risks stemming from outdated knowledge or techniques. It also offers flexibility to be tailored to specific institutions and can be combined with other solutions for compounded benefits. Standardizing across diverse departments and staff can be challenging, especially in large healthcare setups. There is also the need for ongoing investment in training, both in terms of time and resources. Neglecting the issue of medication errors can result in heightened patient harm or fatalities, leading to lawsuits, financial strains, and diminished public trust in healthcare institutions (Nagappa & Naik, 2022). Ethical Implication of Proposed Solutions To implement this digital system, robust technological infrastructure, comprehensive training for healthcare professionals, and rigorous cybersecurity measures are essential to ensure patient data privacy and protection (Haleem et al., 2022). Delving into the ethical dimensions, the principle of beneficence resonates with the system’s intent to bolster patient safety. At the same time, nonmaleficence urges us to be circumspect, ensuring this digital transition does not inadvertently engender new challenges. Autonomy demands clarity for patients regarding medication data management in this digital paradigm, ensuring they grant informed consent. The principle of justice, meanwhile, emphasizes that this system must offer equitable access to all without bias towards any socioeconomic group (Bandari, 2023). For the implementation of standardized

Capella 4000 Assessment 3 Applying Ethical Principles Student Name Capella University NHS-FPX 4000 Developing a Health Care Perspective Prof. Name Date Applying Ethical Principles Healthcare organizations worldwide encounter various problems which must be addressed using ethical principles. These issues are known as ethical dilemmas in healthcare settings. To further understand, ethical dilemmas are described as those circumstances which are developed because of a conflict between two or more moral values and hence require an ethical committee to propose solutions (Giannetta et al., 2021). This article is focused on an ethical case study from Capella University’s Library.  The Ethical Case Study – To Vaccinate, or Not?  This ethical case study is about a child, Anna, who was born 5 days ago at a Community Hospital. The Smiths, Anna’s parents, decided after her birth to let her grow naturally without any foreign interventions which also included childhood immunizations. They were very sure about this as they decided after researching online by reading mommy blogs that vaccinations have several risks for children as compared to benefits. They provided the example of autism cases which are increasing because of childhood vaccines. All of their concerns were carefully heard by Dr. Kerr. She was Anna’s pediatrician and wanted her parents to allow vaccinate Anna. Dr. Kerr succinctly explained her point using various literature advice. She accepted the fact that vaccines have received various controversies in recent times, however, they have saved millions of lives as well. She provided the example of decreased incidences of Haemophilus influenzae type b and measles which are life-threatening infectious diseases in children. Moreover, she talked about autism disorder which was previously said to be caused by Thimerosal but recent studies deny this opinion. Dr. Kerr further established her points by sharing a reporting system that has been developed by governmental bodies to report adverse events from vaccines. This reporting system tends to aware governmental organizations about vaccines so that quality can be improved. To conclude her point, she tried to develop insight for Smiths regarding communal good by explaining Herd Immunity. After all the discussion, Dr. Kerr was sure that she will receive a positive response from the parents but the situation remained the same and became a moral issue for the doctor.  Assessment of Facts from the Case Study  The conclusion of the presented case study is that it is an ethical dilemma for Dr. Kerr to choose between medical recommendations and the wish of Anna’s parents. Childhood immunizations have several controversies and such cases are very common in healthcare settings where parents are reluctant to vaccinate their children and healthcare research is opposite to their opinions. Some of the facts from the case study that can be analyzed are parental refusal, the concept of detrimental effects of vaccines which include online blogs providing unreliable information, medical research about positive effects, and the concept of communal good.   Parental Refusal As mentioned in the case study, the Smiths were not in favor of vaccinating Anna and hence refused it. Literature supports this point by stating that in various parts of the world, parental refusal has been common in terms of vaccinating children. World Health Organization states that every year around 2-3 million children die because of being unvaccinated and one of the common reasons is parental perception (Saeed & Hashmi, 2021). Another source mentions that hesitancy by parents has been a major reason for various outbreaks of diseases that can be prevented by immunizations (Fernández-Basanta et al., 2021).  Harmful Effects of Vaccines According to the literature, the component used in childhood vaccines – thimerosal is considered safe and effective by the World Health Organization. Moreover, various peer-reviewed studies also indicate a “no risk” of autism from vaccines that have thimerosal. Hence, there is no evidence of a link between autism disease and childhood vaccinations (Gabis et al., 2022). As shared in the case scenario, online resources like blogs and videos on social media channels from people who are against vaccinations can be unreliable for parents. The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control identified that digital media especially social apps and websites are primarily affecting vaccine reluctance in parents because they are easily captured by the myths and rumors which are shared online (Garett & Young, 2021).  Positive Effects of Vaccines  In the case study, Dr. Kerr elaborated on the benefits of vaccines. She focused on two infectious diseases (measles and Haemophilus influenzae). A research study identifies that globally around 66% of measles cases decrease from the year 2000-2018. The major reason behind this is routine vaccination that prevents measles disease (Gastañaduy et al., 2021). Talbird and colleagues (2022), mentioned in their study that vaccinations have proved to decrease the incidence of Haemophilus influenzae type B by 80% (Talbird et al., 2022).  Communal Good – Herd Immunity Another fact from the case study that Dr. Kerr mentioned about is herd immunity. It is defined as immunizing healthy individuals so that they can save immunocompromised people from infectious diseases (Ashby & Best, 2021). A study provides evidence that vaccines are ethically implied on healthy children so that other children in the community who are contraindicated from vaccines can be benefitted as well. This is called the “common good” (Rus & Goselj, 2021). The reasons for using these resources are a) they explain vaccine reluctance in detail, b) they provide researched evidence against the unreliable resources available online, c) explicitly support the importance of vaccines to prevent diseases, and d) explain the concept of herd immunity as a common good.   Communication Approaches and their Effectiveness  The communication approaches present in the case study are; effective patient/family education for informed decisions and a therapeutic approach to rapport building. In healthcare settings, informed decision-making is highly important. It is defined as a two-way communication between the patient/family and healthcare provider about the advantages, hazards, and alternatives of medical treatment so that they make decisions with informed choices (Paterick et al., 2020). Patient/family education is one of the ways to achieve informed communication likewise in the case study where Dr.

Capella 4000 Assessment 2 Applying Research Skills Student Name Capella University NHS-FPX 4000 Developing a Health Care Perspective Prof. Name Date Applying Research Skills Healthcare systems worldwide face numerous challenges due to various obstacles that must be addressed to prevent adverse health consequences. One significant barrier to healthcare is limited accessibility, a topic of interest because ensuring adequate access for every individual is a crucial goal. Healthcare providers should collaborate with governmental bodies and policymakers to achieve positive outcomes. During my professional journey, visiting low-economic communities revealed a lack of primary care facilities, few underqualified healthcare professionals, and, consequently, increased vulnerability to poor health outcomes. Applying Peer-Reviewed Articles to Limited Healthcare Access Health is vital for a comprehensive life, and healthcare access is essential to achieve this. The World Health Organization recognizes healthcare as a basic human right, emphasizing the responsibility to provide citizens with their health rights (Zegeye et al., 2021). Inadequate healthcare access is influenced by factors such as geographical locations, provider shortages, commuting issues, and lack of awareness, leading to poor health outcomes and economic burdens (Dawkins et al., 2021). The inclusion of recent peer-reviewed articles in this analysis is crucial for their explicit explanations of limited healthcare access, identifying barriers, and proposing effective strategies. These articles were sourced from reputable databases such as Capella University’s Library, BioMed Central, PubMed Central, Google Scholar, CINAHL, and ScienceDirect. Utilizing relevant keywords facilitated the research process. Assessing Credibility and Relevance of Resources The CRAAP test, assessing Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose, is employed to determine the credibility of resources (Lewis, 2018). Articles included in the annotated bibliography meet these criteria, with emphasis on relevance. Articles were selected based on their publication within the last five years, authorship by healthcare professionals, and alignment with the topic of limited healthcare access. Annotated Bibliography Brusnahan, A., Carrasco-Tenezaca, M., Bates, B. R., Roche, R., & Grijalva, M. J. (2022). Identifying health care access barriers in southern rural Ecuador. International Journal for Equity in Health, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01660-1 This article introduces the Health Care Assess Barrier (HCAB) Model, aiming to identify barriers to healthcare access in southern rural Ecuador. The HCAB model categorizes barriers into financial, structural, and cognitive themes, providing insights for effective interventions such as mobile clinics/primary care. Capella 4000 Assessment 2 The article’s credibility is affirmed through adherence to the CRAAP criteria, including recent publication, relevance to the research topic, authorship by healthcare professionals, accurate information, and a clear purpose. Coombs, N. C., Campbell, D. G., & Caringi, J. (2022). A qualitative study of rural healthcare providers’ views of social, cultural, and programmatic barriers to healthcare access. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07829-2 This qualitative study explores the views of 12 rural healthcare providers in the U.S., identifying barriers such as limited healthcare providers, cultural differences, and resource unavailability. The article underscores the need for careful monitoring of all aspects to improve health outcomes in rural populations. The article is relevant, published in 2022, authored by healthcare professionals, and aligns with the focus on limited healthcare access. George, M. S., Davey, R., Mohanty, I., & Upton, P. (2020). “Everything is provided free, but they are still hesitant to access healthcare services”: Why does the indigenous community in Attapadi, Kerala continue to experience poor access to healthcare? International Journal for Equity in Health, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-020-01216-1 This article examines poor healthcare access in Attapadi, Kerala, despite free healthcare services. It emphasizes the importance of culturally sensitive interventions involving active community participation. The article’s relevance lies in its current publication date, alignment with global healthcare issues, and insightful purpose. Learnings from this Assessment This assessment highlights the importance of evidence-based research to address healthcare issues effectively. Evaluating resource credibility using the CRAAP test ensures reliable and relevant information for developing quality plans. Studying various articles on limited healthcare access enhances knowledge and emphasizes the need to identify barriers for positive health outcomes, informing future community practices. References Dawkins, B., Renwick, C., Ensor, T., Shinkins, B., Jayne, D., & Meads, D. (2021). What factors affect patients’ ability to access healthcare? An overview of systematic reviews. Tropical Medicine & International Health, 26(10), 1177–1188. https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.13651 Zegeye, B., El-Khatib, Z., Ameyaw, E. K., Seidu, A.-A., Ahinkorah, B. O., Keetile, M., & Yaya, S. (2021). Breaking barriers to healthcare access: A multilevel analysis of individual- and community-level factors affecting women’s access to healthcare services in Benin. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(2), 750. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020750 Capella 4000 Assessment 2

Student Name Capella University NHS-FPX 4000 Developing a Health Care Perspective Prof. Name Date Academic Honesty Pledge I hereby pledge that all work completed for this course, as well as for any other courses, will be exclusively and entirely my own. I affirm that I will act as the sole author of my work, ensuring that the words, sentences, and paragraphs presented are of my own creation, unless explicitly noted through direct quoting, paraphrasing, or summarizing of another individual’s work. It is understood that utilizing any portion of a peer’s discussion post without appropriate citation constitutes plagiarism. I am aware that duplicating a peer’s discussion post as a model and making minimal word modifications also constitutes plagiarism. I commit to promptly notifying my instructor in the event that another learner misrepresents my work or the work of others. I recognize the shared responsibility we all bear in upholding the integrity of the Capella degree we strive to attain. When directly quoting someone, I will use quotation marks, provide contextual information, and format the quote in accordance with APA guidelines. This includes both in-paragraph citations with page numbers and a complete reference citation at the end. In cases of paraphrasing or summarizing from external sources, I will appropriately cite the material within the text and include a reference at the conclusion of my work. I will employ language distinct from the original source and alter the fundamental sentence structure. I commit to reviewing the following resources on academic honesty: I am cognizant that any utilization of another person’s work in a manner inconsistent with the aforementioned statements constitutes plagiarism—a severe breach of academic integrity as per Capella University’s policies. In the event of an instructor discovering an act of academic dishonesty, I acknowledge that the instructor will: Should any questions arise regarding this pledge, I will seek clarification from my instructor before affixing my full name below. By entering my full name, I affirm my understanding and commitment to adhere to all the aforementioned rules, aligning with Capella University’s academic policies, from this day forward. Capella 4000 Assessment 1