NURS FPX 6612 Assessment 1 Triple Aim Outcome Measures

Triple Aim Outcome Measures

Hi everyone, my name is Wendy, and I am a case manager at the Sacred Heart Hospital (SHH) in a rural region. In this presentation, I will discuss the impact of the triple aim in enhancing population health, lowering medical expenses, and improving the standard of care, which can be employed by hospital leaders and other medical professionals at SHH. Furthermore, I will discuss the governmental policies and programs that improve care coordination and aid in achieving SHH’s triple aim.

Purpose

This presentation aims to raise awareness and comprehension among hospital and clinical management about the significance of improved, coordinated care to achieve the triple aim in the Barnes County Community in which SHH is situated. It can be accomplished by employing different models, including the Patient Self-Management Model (PSMM) and Care Coordination Model (CCM), government rules and regulations, and effectiveness metrics. Care coordination is crucial for accomplishing the triple aim, and interdisciplinary healthcare organizations need joint efforts.

Triple Aim and its Contribution to Healthcare Organization

The triple aim is a collection of targets to advance the standard of healthcare services. The goals are to boost the patient experience, make populations healthier, and reduce medical expenditures. Adequate care coordination is essential to attaining the triple aim. In SHH, employing a triple aim can offer advantages, which are given below:

Patient Satisfaction and Experience

Advancing the patient experience of healthcare at SHH requires multiple strategies focused on promoting patient satisfaction. For instance, this can be accomplished by employing individualized care methods and promoting transparent and efficient interaction and communication among medical professionals and patients (Tran, 2021). Furthermore, considering the patients’ requirements and demands, like promoting health awareness and ensuring demand for health insurance, shortening waiting periods, and making follow-up care more accessible for patients.

These approaches will improve patient satisfaction and trust in medical staff and hospital settings (Thurah et al., 2020). For effective health outcomes, patient satisfaction is critical because it influences compliance with care and patient involvement in decision-making (Ehlers et al., 2019).

Promoting Population and Community Health

The Triple Aim attempts to improve the population’s health by identifying and addressing health needs. SHH can enhance the community’s overall health by establishing proactive medical programs and health awareness that ensure patients adopt safeguards into their daily lives to enhance their general wellness (Aljassim & Ostini, 2020). Furthermore, it targets socioeconomic factors that influence health, including a shortage of transportation and inadequate health education.

To reach this goal, different strategies can be valuable; for instance, medical professionals must assess demographic data and develop strategies to improve health outcomes. Care coordination is vital in this process because care coordinators can recognize vulnerable patients and ensure they receive proper treatment. Healthcare facilities can engage with community groups to deal with social well-being variables and implement preventative initiatives such as health screenings (Alderwick et al., 2021).

Reducing Per Capita Costs

Initiatives to reduce per capita expenses at SHH necessitate an adequate balance between cost-effectiveness and the standard of care. To improve the quality of medical procedures, the hospital needs to employ economic models of care and adoption of technology. Effective coordinated care can assist in minimizing costs by lowering hospitalizations and avoiding needless treatment evaluation and recurrence.

Medical professionals can lower illness management expenditures by coordinating with community groups and can overcome socioeconomic challenges (Alderwick et al., 2021). Furthermore, coordination and collaboration with governmental and medical organizations can support economic sustainability for efficient care (Hilts et al., 2021). By adhering to the offered approaches, SHH can accomplish the triple aim adapted to meet the communal and medical facilities’ needs. 

Analysis of the Relationship between the Health Model and Triple Aim

To investigate the association between health frameworks and the triple aim, I selected PSMM and CCM.

Patient Self-Management Model 

The PSMM’s rationale is to enable individuals to take an active role in their healthcare. This paradigm is based on the concept that patients can take part in making well-informed health choices with the necessary knowledge and capabilities. The model improves patient medical outcomes (Sattoe & Staa, 2021). This strategy has been transformed from an authoritative approach to individualized and coordinated care. Medical personnel became aware of the need to involve patients in making decisions, which fosters autonomy and transparency. This model contributed to patient-centered care, which can increase the probability of compliance with therapy regimens and improve patient outcomes (Zhang et al., 2019). 

The PSMM improves healthcare standards through increased compliance, health outcomes, proactive maintenance, prompt treatment, and patient satisfaction. Individuals involved in self-management adhere to care guidelines, boosting their medical conditions. Furthermore, increased accountability promotes ownership, improving medication compliance and lifestyle changes (Zhang et al., 2019).

Encouraging patients to self-care entails guidance on prompt detection of health issues. This proactive strategy can help to prevent difficulties and identify medical problems earlier. Patients’ medical care improves their standard of living. The PSMM paradigm also improves patient satisfaction by encouraging a coordinated and interactive medical experience with health professionals. Patients trained on self-care of their medical condition according to PSMM and receive individualized care plans experience greater satisfaction, increased trust in medical care, and positive interactions with medical professionals (Vainauskienė & Vaitkienė, 2021).

Care Coordination Model

The CCM enables medical care to be delivered consistently and coordinated across different healthcare settings. This paradigm emphasizes that efficient interaction and teamwork among medical professionals are vital for holistic and individualized care. The model has improved the general care delivery to a comprehensive and coordinated care system (Daumit et al., 2019).

CCM can improve the standard of medical care by eliminating discrimination and health inequity, increasing patient safety, and encouraging a continuum of treatment. This model improves interaction and interoperability among medical personnel. Furthermore, it avoids the misconception of care strategies caused by poor collaboration and interaction, resulting in cost savings and enhanced productivity. CCM can also lower the risk of medical and therapeutic errors, increasing patient safety (Karam et al., 2021). Technology improvements and multidisciplinary collaboration support in care coordination.

This approach employs technological tactics like telemedicine services, Electronic Health Records (EHRs), and web-based patient portals to ensure medical personnel can acquire patient information (Gill et al., 2020). Furthermore, care coordination facilitates a smooth transition of care among many medical facilities (Karam et al., 2021). Both evidence-based models improve care quality, increase patient health outcomes, lower healthcare expenditures, and enhance community health, promoting the Triple Aim of enhancing treatment and reducing costs.

Structure of Selected Health Care Models

The PSMM and CCM frameworks help collect and assess the integrity of evidence-based data, improving the care standard. These models use a variety of ways of gathering and evaluating evidence-based data, allowing clinicians to make informed choices and enhance the quality of patient care. The PSMM highlights the role of patients in decision-making, offering an individualized treatment strategy in medical care to enable people to control their illnesses (Lin & Hwang, 2020). This technique entails systematic information collection using patient feedback, lifestyle modification, and self-management activities. This strategy also requires integrating digital medical technology like mobile phones and wearable devices.

These tools provide an organized structure for constant data gathering and real-time tracking and evaluating patients’ device-generated medical information. Technology integration ensures reliable and precise information, allowing medical professionals to make accurate decisions (Fan & Zhao, 2022). This systematic data collection helps to generate evidence-based conclusions regarding the effectiveness of managing patient procedures (Timmermans et al., 2022).

NURS FPX 6612 Assessment 1 Triple Aim Outcome Measures

The CCM ensures the continuum of care for patients who require ongoing treatment. This model prioritizes collaboration by employing evidence-based therapies to ensure that patients receive the best possible care throughout the treatment process. Furthermore, it is designed to develop integrated medical systems, facilitating efficient communication and information exchange among multidisciplinary medical groups. This relationship promises that pertinent and appropriate information is available across different disciplines for the continuum of care (Peterson et al., 2019).

Furthermore, the CCM highlights the significance of telehealth services and EHRs to improve communication and collaboration by enabling medical professionals to access patient data and improve patient safety (Gill et al., 2020). This approach also incorporates performance indicators and quality criteria to evaluate coordinated care efficiency. The standardized initiatives offer a structured method for assessing the standard of care provided in different hospital units, aiding in evaluating care coordination success (Javed et al., 2020).

Evidence-Based Data Shaping Coordinated Care Procedure

Evidence-based information is critical in improving the care coordination approach in nurses’ practice because it provides a platform for informed decision-making. It also improves interaction and communication between healthcare practitioners, improving patient medical consequences and treatment standards. When nurses acquire and evaluate evidence-based data for coordinating treatment, they make decisions based on the most reliable available evidence (Khatri et al., 2023). Leveraging data in coordinating care assists in identifying shortcomings and areas for advancement, allowing medical personnel to create efficient care plans. Care coordination is a collaborative effort among medical professionals, patients, and their families so that patients experience holistic care (Khatri et al., 2023).

Efficient care coordination leverages evidence-based data to determine patient requirements, including long-term conditions, treatment compliance, and socioeconomic aspects of health. Care coordination helps establish individualized care plans based on patient’s requirements. Additionally, nurses can use research findings and clinical standards to make informed decisions and provide evidence-based care. Coordinated care minimizes the possibility of medical errors, improving patient outcomes (Jara et al., 2021). Evidence-based data helps medical professionals communicate effectively by sharing pertinent patient details, care strategies, and outcomes through interdisciplinary discussions, improving care standards. Coordination care facilitates formulating approaches based on specific patient circumstances (Kwame & Petrucka, 2021).

Governmental Regulatory Initiatives and Outcome Measures

Several government regulation programs endeavor to improve coordinated care and fulfill the triple aim by improving patient outcomes and patient experience and lowering medical costs. The government program, the Health Information Exchange (HIE) program, supports efficient patient medical data sharing among medical professionals and care settings. These initiatives promote the electronic information exchange to provide coordinated, continuous treatment. This initiative’s outcome metrics include less unnecessary testing, reduced medical error rates, and improved continuity of care (Holmgren et al., 2023).

Technology-enabled coordinated care improves data sharing, reduces repetitions, and enhances patient safety by reducing medication errors during care, ultimately leading to cost savings. Another policy is the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP), which encourages medical organizations to coordinate care, ensuring a continuum of care and lower medical expenditures.

NURS FPX 6612 Assessment 1 Triple Aim Outcome Measures

The MSSP makes it easier to transmit patient data among interdisciplinary groups, improving care and efficiency. This program increases savings through increased care quality and affordability. The outcomes of this program include cost savings and increased patient satisfaction levels (Bravo et al., 2022). SHH’s participation in this program can aid in coordinating with regional medical personnel, ensuring cost-effective patient care, reducing per capita medical costs, and enhancing patient outcomes, supporting the triple aim.

Another regulatory program that can improve care coordination at SHH is the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), which restricts hospitals with higher-than-expected readmission rates. This program aids in reducing medical costs by avoiding unnecessary hospital admissions and improving the care of patients who need intensive care. By implementing care coordination protocols, SHH can lower readmissions and medical costs and promote patient outcomes. This will help to fulfill the triple aim by boosting patient satisfaction, improving the health of a population, and lowering medical expenditures (Banerjee et al., 2022).

Process Improvement Recommendations to Stakeholders

The SHH should enhance the coordinated care procedure to accomplish the triple aim for community health through effective collaboration with medical professionals, leadership, and hospital management. The current care coordination process is ineffective, resulting in unsatisfactory patient experience, poor medical results, and rising per capita medical costs. The stakeholders are concerned about the expenditure and subsequent operational disruptions. Furthermore, problems can arise about the staff’s adaptability for automating operations.

To overcome these issues, emphasize pilot testing to reduce inconveniences and enable staff to adjust to the coordination care process. Implementing training programs for an effortless shift and increasing staff capability is also recommended (Lee et al., 2021). Furthermore, stakeholders should initiate continual quality enhancement strategies to evaluate the procedure’s effectiveness for coordinating care. Additionally, open and honest communication approaches should be promoted to improve coordination and collaboration among interdisciplinary groups, improving the quality of care (Tran, 2021). 

Conclusion

In conclusion, care coordination is vital to fulfill the triple aim by incorporating healthcare frameworks, including PSMM and CCM. The triple aim can be achieved through the coordinated efforts of the community leadership, administrators, and medical staff. It results in an improved standard of care and health outcomes.

References

Alderwick, H., Hutchings, A., Briggs, A., & Mays, N. (2021). The impacts of collaboration between local health care and non-health care organizations and factors shaping how they work: A systematic review of reviews. BioMed Central Public Health, 21, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10630-1

Aljassim, N., & Ostini, R. (2020). Health literacy in rural and urban populations: A systematic review. Patient Education and Counseling, 103(10), 2142-2154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.06.007

Banerjee, S., Paasche-Orlow, M. K., McCormick, D., Lin, M. Y., & Hanchate, A. D. (2022). Readmissions performance and penalty experience of safety-net hospitals under Medicare’s Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1), 338. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07741-9

Bravo, F., Levi, R., Perakis, G., & Romero, G. (2022). Care coordination for healthcare referrals under a shared‐savings program. Production and Operations Management, 32(1), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13830

Daumit, G. L., Stone, E. M., Kennedy-Hendricks, A., Choksy, S., Marsteller, J. A., & McGinty, E. E. (2019). Care coordination and population health management strategies and challenges in a behavioral health home model. Medical Care, 57(1), 79. https://doi.org/10.1097%2FMLR.0000000000001023

Ehlers, S. L., Davis, K., Bluethmann, S. M., Quintiliani, L. M., Kendall, J., Ratwani, R. M., & Graves, K. D. (2019). Screening for psychosocial distress among patients with cancer: Implications for clinical practice, healthcare policy, and dissemination to enhance cancer survivorship. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 9(2), 282-291. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/iby123

Fan, K., & Zhao, Y. (2022). Mobile health technology: A novel tool in chronic disease management. Intelligent Medicine, 2(1), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imed.2021.06.003

Gill, E., Dykes, P. C., Rudin, R. S., Storm, M., McGrath, K., & Bates, D. W. (2020). Technology-facilitated care coordination in rural areas: What is needed?. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 137, 104102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104102

NURS FPX 6612 Assessment 1 Triple Aim Outcome Measures

Hilts, K. E., Yeager, V. A., Gibson, P. J., Halverson, P. K., Blackburn, J., & Menachemi, N. (2021). Hospital partnerships for population health: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Healthcare Management/American College of Healthcare Executives, 66(3), 170. https://doi.org/10.1097%2FJHM-D-20-00172

Holmgren, A. J., Esdar, M., Hüsers, J., & Coutinho-Almeida, J. (2023). Health information exchange: Understanding the policy landscape and future of data interoperability. Yearbook of Medical Informatics, 32(01), 184-194. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1768719

Jara, A. L., Luckhurst, C. L., Dismore, R. A., Arthur, K. J., Ifeachor, A. P., Militello, L. G., & Weiner, M. (2021). Care coordination strategies and barriers during medication safety incidents: A qualitative, cognitive task analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06386-w

Karam, M., Chouinard, M. C., Poitras, M. E., Couturier, Y., Vedel, I., Grgurevic, N., & Hudon, C. (2021). Nursing care coordination for patients with complex needs in primary healthcare: A scoping review. International Journal of Integrated Care, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.5334%2Fijic.5518

Khatri, R., Aklilu Endalamaw, Erku, D., Eskinder Wolka, Frehiwot Nigatu, Zewdie, A., & Assefa, Y. (2023). Continuity and care coordination of primary health care: A scoping review. BioMed Central Health Services Research, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09718-8

Kwame, A., & Petrucka, P. M. (2021). A literature-based study of patient-centered care and communication in nurse-patient interactions: Barriers, facilitators, and the way forward. BioMed Central Nursing, 20(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00684-2

Lee, L. K., Ruano, E., Fernández, P., Ortega, S., Lucas, C., & Joachim-Célestin, M. (2021). Workforce readiness training: A comprehensive training model that equips community health workers to work at the top of their practice and profession. Frontiers in Public Health, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.673208

Lin, C. C., & Hwang, S. J. (2020). Patient-centered self-management in patients with chronic kidney disease: Challenges and implications. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(24), 9443. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/24/9443#

NURS FPX 6612 Assessment 1 Triple Aim Outcome Measures

Peterson, K., Anderson, J., Bourne, D., Charns, M. P., Gorin, S. S., Hynes, D. M., & Yano, E. M. (2019). Health care coordination theoretical frameworks: A systematic scoping review to increase their understanding and use in practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 34, 90-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-04966-z

Sattoe, J. N., & Staa, V. A. (2021). The development of self-management in young people with chronic conditions: A transitional process. Self-Management of Young People with Chronic Conditions: A Strength-Based Approach for Empowerment and Support, 37-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64293-8_3

Thurah, D. A., Bremander, A., & Primdahl, J. (2020). High-quality RMD rehabilitation and telehealth: Evidence and clinical practice. Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology, 34(2), 101513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2020.101513

Timmermans, L., Dagje Boeykens, Mustafa Muhammed Sirimsi, Decat, P., Foulon, V., Ann Van Hecke, Mieke Vermandere, Birgitte Schoenmakers, Remmen, R., Verté, E., Muhammed Mustafa Sirimsi, Peter Van Bogaert, Hans De Loof, Van, K., Anthierens, S., Ine Huybrechts, Raeymaeckers, P., Veerle Buffel, Devroey, D., & Aertgeerts, B. (2022). Self-management support in flemish primary care practice: The development of a preliminary conceptual model using a qualitative approach. BioMed Central Primary Care, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-022-01652-8

Tran, B. Q. (2021). Strategies for effective patient care: Integrating quality communication with the patient‐centered approach. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(1), e12574. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12574

NURS FPX 6612 Assessment 1 Triple Aim Outcome Measures

Vainauskienė, V., & Vaitkienė, R. (2021). Enablers of patient knowledge empowerment for self-management of chronic disease: An integrative review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(5), 2247. https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fijerph18052247

Zhang, Y., Liu, S., Sheng, X., Lou, J., Fu, H., & Sun, X. (2019). Evaluation of a community‐based hypertension self‐management model with general practitioners. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 34(3), 960-974. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2867