The paper indicates reasons for stakeholders in supporting the proposed plan for preventing pressure ulcer occurrence in hospitalized patients at intermediate care units.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
Since patients suffer from pressure ulcer symptoms, the level of support will presumably be high if patients are explained why the changes are implemented. Some difficulties might occur if patients consider them too complicated.
The elements of competing and collaborative styles may be used (Long, 2013). Most patients do not know the advantages and disadvantages of certain pressure ulcer prevention methods, so it is necessary to demonstrate that the promoted measures will win the competitive struggle with the old approach and bring better results. On the other hand, patients’ feedback is significant since they want their experience to be taken into account, and such information is likely to be valuable for possible modernization.
Consolidated Data Services (CDS) Team
It may be expected that a CDS team will back the changes in general. The probable obstacles refer to documentation since nowadays it is not always accurate (Sving, Idvall, Högberg, & Gunningberg, 2014).
Addressing CDS teams, the collaborative style seems preferable. While the terms of reference and core principles for team members are likely to be set in the right direction, some details and documentation format requirements may be controversial. In this context, it is necessary to show the CDS team that the innovations discussed are to make the process of data collection and communication of all stakeholders, including themselves, easier.
Doctors will be interested in the present project. One may assume that they will support the whole idea of changes but at the same time criticize some points. Probably they will claim that the roles of physicians should be enlarged: for example, they may also serve as patient and co-workers educators if necessary or give their suggestions on early stages of alerting strategy development instead of final assessment only.
Compromise may be the most suitable strategy concerning physicians since they are experienced and accustomed to pressure ulcer consequences (Long, 2013). Initially, the project did not include the roles of the educator and developer, but it is possible to come to the accommodation and widen doctors’ roles if they wish, although it may complicate the process of work a little because more time may be needed to coordinate all stakeholders.
100% original paper
on any topic
done in as little as
Pharmacists will also back the suggested changes. However, they might be dissatisfied with the use of alerting strategies and consider it to be redundant for pharmacists.
The combination of competing and collaborative styles will probably be useful: it is necessary to show that the proposed changes are more beneficial. Simultaneously, the pharmacists’ opinions should be regarded. As a result, they will understand the situation.
Risk assessment and testing are specified as priorities nowadays (Padula, Mishra, Makic, & Valuck, 2014). Since nurses address these issues in their practice, they are interested in improvement.
The collaborative style seems preferable in this context. Nurses who directly deal with patients can substantially contribute to the project enhancement. Thus, collaboration links the project benefits and nurses’ working experience: such balance is likely to be effective.
Long, J. (2013). Effective negotiation strategies and preparation.
Padula, W. V., Mishra, M. K., Makic, M. B. F., & Valuck, R. J. (2014). A framework of quality improvement interventions to implement evidence-based practices for pressure ulcer prevention. Advances in Skin & Wound care, 27(6), 280-284.
Sving, E., Idvall, E., Högberg, H., & Gunningberg, L. (2014). Factors contributing to evidence-based pressure ulcer prevention. A cross-sectional study. The International Journal of Nursing Studies, 51(5), 717-725.