Source Evaluation: Patient Informatics
Frequently in healthcare valuable time, finances, and resources are spent due to the lack of communication and accessibility of patient information. This waste of resources comes in the form of unnecessary testing, because a similar test had been completed at another facility; and unnecessary questions that could have already been answered, such as allergies and confounding health issues. This reduction in efficacy is manifests in higher than necessary medical costs and time spent by the patient. Providers who have a greater accessibility to patient information could save lives by decreasing response time by having access to important answers, decreasing error rates made by patients who are poor historians, decreasing unnecessary procedures and diagnostics, increase time spent with patients dealing with their current situation, increasing the relationship between provider and patient. Though there may be several ways to address this lack of consistency in health care communication, I feel strongly that the most effective solution for the dissemination of patient information is via a government-sanctioned centralized patient medical database. This medical database would house all of the patient information from emergency room visits in New York to wellness check-ups in Seattle to immunization records from childhood. This database would be accessible via a patient’s government designated number, e.g., social security number, to all healthcare providers in all networks regardless of insurance provider or hospital system. This integrated and universal database would allow for a collaborative effort amongst providers to ensure that the patient in their care is cared for in a properly informed and cost-effective manner. In this paper, I will examine four sources that present research in the field of patient informatics: A source from popular literature, a scholarly website, and two from scholarly literature. My purpose is to utilize critical thinking strategies and questions as suggested by Brown and Keeley (2012) to assess the congruency of these resources so that I may evaluate the claims made by the authors in a logic manner. Analysis of Sources
Article 1— Scholarly Source —Perspective
Bakken (2006) reviews nursing research practice and the necessity for informatics to play a more prominent role in the competencies of nursing education and practice. Bakken (2006) describes the components of an informatics infrastructure within the context of the national framework, then summarizes the relevant current nursing research and the gaps that exist within the existing system that need to be improved upon. Bakken (2006) concludes that the implementation of informatics into nursing practice will assist in the reduction of sentinel events and allow for the preferment of patient safety, and will aide in the amelioration of “practice-based nursing knowledge” (p. 220). Brown and Keeley (2012) suggest that there are critical questions that need answered regarding an article that will help to ascertain the strength of that article; some of the first questions that should be understood are what the issue being presented is and what was the author’s conclusion. Bakken (2006) states that the issues are the errors made in healthcare and the promotion of patient safety can be found at the beginning of the paper in the Abstract section. The author concludes that though much has been done in the way of centralizing information that promotes the development of nursing knowledge, there is still much more work that needs to be completed. In addition to this conclusion, the author outlines a set of objectives of how to accomplish this goal. Brown and Keeley (2012) also suggest that when reviewing an article that it is pertinent to understand the reasons behind the issue and that the reader clearly understands any assumptions made by the author. Bakken (2006) asserts a value assumption...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document