Part 6: Evaluation Plan

Running head: evaluation methodology 0

Evaluation Methodology

Name

University

Date

Evaluation Methodology

Evaluation methodology plan becomes the tool helping one to understand various steps involved in performing a quality assessment (Friedman & Wyatt, 2010). The project manager can learn what he or she needs to know to determine the quality level of performance within the hospital setup. The purpose of the paper is to describe the evaluation methodology plan to answer the PICO question: Does implementing a new unified acute and ambulatory EHR (Electronic Health Record) system in the hospital, compared to when they are not used, improve the health care quality for the patients through documentation? More so, there is specifying of the research design, the information sources, and the data collection methods to be used. There is a description of evidence around the PICO question through the synthesis of what works, when, who, where, and how regarding the evaluation. It also focuses on identifying the analyses types performed on the data gathered. Eventually, there is the discussion relating to the measure of success relating to assessment and the summarizing of results.

The evaluation methodology to be used to answer the PICO question is cognitively-based, which requires expertise in medicine as well as the human-computer interaction. Participants from both teams will collaborate on the pragmatic and theoretical aspect of the evaluation process. The evaluation process will be divided into four sections: profiling testers, designing scenarios, creating an evaluation form and designing questionnaire for the evaluator (Centers for Disease Control, n.d.). The purpose of profiling testers is to identify and select potential users of the EHR system. Four panels of users will be designed based on several requirements from information technology experts and health care professionals.

Additionally, A research design is an overall strategy chosen for integration of various components of study in a logical and coherent way, hence ensuring effectiveness in addressing the PICO question. The design comprises the blueprint regarding collecting, measurement as well as the data analysis. The design involved is the peer-reviewed and the predetermined process derived from the identification of research or PICO question, the study protocol, analysis, and the interpretation of the results. The sources of information are the peer review groups that help in identifying research materials through electronic databases, pursuing references, experts’ advice, and hand-searching journals. The selected literature is based on medical history information and predictions. The data is mainly collected from the experimental data, by using the data extraction forms. Any qualitative data is usually coded based on medical documentation reviews for validity, and robustness.

Studies reveal that usability and acceptability of a system can be tested using a group of five testers to obtain meaningful results (Viitanen, Kuusisto & Nykänen, 2011). With the help of a small questionnaire, I will define the panels regarding computer systems' experience and understanding of auto-medication. Based on my PICO question, the improvement of the quality of health care for patients through documentation can only be realized if the users understand the system and accept it in their environment. Past experience of the users regarding similar technology can also determine whether the system will improve the quality of health care in the hospital. Experienced system users will be assumed to be those with at least six months’ experience of interaction with related technology and at least three hours of browsing weekly. A user ready for electronic health record is someone who knows how to use the internet and can at times prescribe medication to himself or interpret medication information with minimal or no consultation with a general physician.

Moreover, the evaluation process should take place in the real working environment. I will also design evaluator forms to take notes during the evaluation process. The scenario here will be an examination of usability of EHR and accuracy of documentation, the efficiency of documentation using the new system and exploitation of the documented information (Viitanen et al., 2011).

The results obtained from the evaluator forms, as well as the questionnaires, form a valuable source of data. Formal data will be summarized in table forms. The results will be emphasized that all scenarios were conducted successfully. Quantitative analysis will be used to analyze the data. The decision to use quantitative analysis is informed by the fact that the data collect is in quantitative form. This means that the data was collected through participant observation and questionnaires while assuming fixed and measurable reality (Centers for Disease Control, n.d.). Thus, the analysis will involve numerical comparisons and statistical inferences. Inferential statistics will enable me to examine the difference and relationships different samples of the population under study. Although it is complex analyses, it provides significant differences between variables. Inferential statistics will allow me to evaluate my PICO question and generalize the results. The correction will be used to describe the relationship between outcomes obtained regarding the usability of EHR (Friedman & Wyatt, 2010).

To ensure the success of the evaluation, the survey will be conducted in the real working environment. The focus will be on the usability of EHR and its five attributes; memorability, learnability, errors, efficiency, and satisfaction (Viitanen et al., 2011). These attributes will be measured on a percentage scale. A higher percentage means success in the given attribute. The results will also be presented in a tabular form.

To sum it up, a cognitive-based evaluation methodology will be valuable for EHR evaluation. The analysis of the data obtained will help in redesigning some aspects of the system. Moreover, the evaluation information will also be helpful to communicate with users of the system. The evaluation methodology focuses on usability, and it only tests with the potential users of the system. A cognitive approach is important when designing the panel of users, evaluation forms, scenarios, and questionnaires. Regarding the EHR, it will be necessary to study patients and other users exposed to such technological tool as well as studying patient-doctor relation over a period (Stroud & Gansauer, n.d.). This will ensure credibility and reliable results.

References

Centers for Disease Control. (n.d.). Evaluation Planning: What is it and how do you do it? Retrieved from: http://www.cdc.gov/healthcommunication/research/evaluationplanning.pdf

Friedman, C. P., & Wyatt, J. C. (2010). Evaluation methods in biomedical informatics (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

Stroud, S., & Gansauer, L. (n.d.). Nursing evidence-based nursing practice tool kit: Practice, evidence, and translation process. Spartanburg Regional Health Care System. Retrieved from: https://www.spartanburgregional.com/app/files/public/537/Nursing-evidence-based-practice-tool-kit.pdf

Viitanen, J., Kuusisto, A., & Nykänen, P. (2011). Usability of electronic nursing record systems: definition and results from an evaluation study in Finland. In ITCH (pp. 333-338). doi/abs/10.1177/0018720815576827