Patient Safety Issues

 

The need for increased awareness concerning patient safety issues within the current U.S. health care delivery system, definitive protocols, universal procedures, and strong leadership has reached a critical juncture. Data suggests increases in medical errors within the last decade to be staggering. Poignant and dramatic speculations have been argued, yet there seems to be a lack of solidification regarding the causative agent. Furthermore, “preventing errors means designing the health care system at all levels to make it safer. Building safety into processes of care is a more effective way to reduce errors than blaming individuals” (Institute of Medicine, 2000, p.4). Suggestions have been incorporated into the demographics pertaining to policy, procedures, areas of concern, and overlapping departmental operations. However, the most prominent recommendations highlight leadership, research, watchdog reporting efforts, yet also introducing increased levels of patient safety within individual organizations.
Competency within leadership positions and the ability to implement improved patient safety protocols will produce greater return regarding applicability of processes. The ability to think critically automatically improves systems, “the growing awareness of the frequency and significance of errors in health care creates an imperative to improve our understanding of the problem and devise workable solutions” (Institute of Medicine, 2000, p.7). With this in mind, the ability to learn from past performance short comings, and the ability to create systems/ processes pertaining to monitoring future progress will aid the U.S health care delivery system in producing increased patient safety standards. Leadership will ultimately be the key predicator regarding the actual application phase of increased patient safety standards; however, this does not necessarily mean leadership at the federal and state level, individual leadership among organizations will undoubtedly afford great strides in the endeavor to produce, maintain, and extrapolate vast areas of improvement issues pertaining to protocol and data.
An ongoing issue, patient safety and quality of care, limitations exist within all areas of application. Within the current system, “there are large gaps between the care people should receive and the care they do receive. This is true for preventative, acute, and chronic care, whether one goes for a checkup, a sore throat, or diabetic care” (Institute of Medicine, 2001, p.236). Research and knowledge will ultimately prevail as the capstone regarding increased patient safety along the various avenues of health care, areas such as primary, secondary, and tertiary care will need to be educated pertaining to data driven conclusions, continual educations seminars, and mandates set in place by state and federal organizations. The application of leadership dedicated and focused regarding long term improvement; along with, accurate and applicable data driven assessments will provide avenues for advancement and possible catch up pertaining to strides archived by outside industry. Incorporating commitment and communication within the U.S. health care delivery system will produce a new era of increased patient safety standards.

 

Sample Solution

In this exposition I will examine the associations between authority, inspiration and cooperation speculations, how they interface with training in associations and their impediments, offering arrangements where difficulties emerge. The exposition expects to make determinations on the appropriateness of Fiedler’s Contingency Theory of Leadership, Tuckman’s Model of Group Development, Belbin’s Team Theory, and Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory practically speaking, and how intricacies like power and impact shape how they can be applied to best suit what is happening a pioneer faces.

Initiative Contingency based hypotheses of authority recommend that there is no right or most ideal way to lead a gathering, or association, because of the critical number of limitations on a circumstance (Flinsch-Rodriguez, 2019). Fiedler, in his Contingency Theory of Leadership (Fiedler, 1967), proposes that the viability of a gathering is reliant upon the authority styles of the pioneer and their favourability to everything going on. A large part of the hypothesis is laid out around the most un-favored associate scale (LPC). The LPC plans to measure a potential chiefs way to deal with an errand on a size of relationship propelled to task persuaded, where the pioneer fits on the scale permits what is going on to be reasoned, and consequently permits the ID of appropriate pioneers for assignments. The favourableness of the present circumstance relies upon three qualities: pioneer part relations, the help and trust the pioneer as from the gathering; task structure, the clearness of the assignment to the pioneer; and positional power, the power the pioneer needs to evaluate a gatherings execution and give prizes and disciplines (Fiedler, 1967). In the event that the pioneers approach matches what is expected from going on, achievement is anticipated for the gathering. Fiedler’s possibility model offers an extremely severe categorisation of initiative, obviously characterizing which circumstances endlessly won’t bring about progress for an expected pioneer. At the senior administration level of a hierarchal construction inside an association the hypothesis can be applied unreservedly, right off the bat because of the simplicity at which people can be supplanted in the event that their LPC score doesn’t match that expected of everything going on (Pettinger, 2007). Besides, and in particular, is to guarantee that the senior administration are ideally suited to effectively lead the association. Be that as it may, further down the progressive system Fielder’s possibility hypothesis starts to hold substantially less importance, it becomes unreasonable according to a hierarchical point of view because of the quantity of individuals at this degree of administration. The strategies of coordinating the pioneer with their most un-favored associate is difficult to reliably accomplish, so a more continuum based approach is required. Figure 1: Chelladurai’s Multi-Dimensional Model of Leadership (Miller and Cronin, 2012)

There are other possibility hypotheses that give a more continuum based approach like Redding’s hypothesis of administration and the board, but Fielder’s portrayal of how situational factors influence the authority style expected for everything going on is incredibly helpful in grasping the basics of initiative (Pettinger, 2007). Chelladurai in his Multi Dimensional Model of Leadership, develops a lot of Fiedler’s hypothesis yet in a continuum based approach, in which the pioneer can adjust their authority style to fit everything going on (Chelladurai and Madella, 2006). Chelladurai’s hypothesis is taken from sports brain science however can be applied to a hierarchical situation. It gives a considerably more exact categorisation of assignment structure, obviously separating a plenty of circumstances that require specific administration styles for progress. Chealld

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.