Home
Resource
Program evaluation: impact of dashboards and coaching on staff performance
PDF
PDF format is widely accepted and good for printing.
Plug-in required
PDF-1(2.12 MB)
Citation & Export
View Usage Statistics
Staff View

Citation & Export
Hide

Simple citation

Burke, Caitlin. Program evaluation: impact of dashboards and coaching on staff performance. Retrieved from https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-a14y-6g13

Export

Click here for information about Citation Management Tools at Rutgers.

Statistics
Hide

Description

TitleProgram evaluation: impact of dashboards and coaching on staff performance
NameBurke, Caitlin (author); Cadmus, Edna (chair); Piech, Lauren K (member); Johansen, Mary (member); Rutgers University; RBHS School of Nursing
Date Created2021
Other Date2021-10 (degree)
SubjectNursing, Dashboards, High reliability orgnaizations, Nursing leadership, Performance, Report cards
Extent1 online resource (74 pages) : illustrations
DescriptionPurpose of Project: The primary aim of the DNP project was to evaluate how dashboards that contain administrative and quality indicators used by managers to provide individual monthly staff report cards improved unit goals. This project was an evaluation of the pilot in two medical-surgical units compared to data from four other units not involved in the pilot project. The project:
•Evaluated the quality and administrative outcomes from the two pilot medical surgical units over a two-year time period.
•Compared the two pilot unit BMV scanning rates, pain reassessment rates, incidental overtime, and HCAHPS scores (Overall score and Nurse Communication score) to four similar medical-surgical units not involved in the pilot.
•Created a toolkit for nurse managers on how to construct and use a manual dashboard using a data processing application from existing reports.
•Evaluated onboarding process for new nurse managers and made recommendations to administration on evaluating individual data and incorporating them into practice. Methodology: The data were evaluated on the pilot units for improvement in BMV, pain reassessment rates, and incidental overtime. These data were compared to the performance of the other medical surgical units. Additionally, the HCAHPS (Overall and Nurse Communication) on the pilot units were compared pre- and post-implementation to the other medical surgical units. Statistical analyses were conducted to examine the pre- and post-implementation data and the impact the pilot had on overall unit performance on the following: incidental overtime, BMV scanning rates, pain reassessment rates, and HCAHPS Overall and Nurse Communication scores. Control charts were used to analyze for variance. The data on incidental overtime and HCAHPS scores were provided to the DNP project manager and compiled in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. Those data consisted of the pre-implementation baseline data and the post-implementation data for the two pilot units and each medical/surgical unit. The data related to BMV and pain reassessment rates were provided to the DNP project manager through the hospital application of Qlik Analytics©. Results: Descriptive statistics were used to review the overall differences in the means and provide the standard deviations between the pilot units and the non-pilot units. Since the data did not meet the normality assumption of the parametric statistics, non-parametric inferential statistics were used to determine differences between groups and whether or not the differences were meaningful. Tables G5–G8 show the means and standard deviations for all six indicators pre- and post- for the two pilot units and four non-pilot units during the same time period.
A Wilcoxon Mann Whitney U test was performed comparing the medians for the six indicators. Table G1 reflects the results of the non-pilot units’ pre- and post-time period for comparison purposes. Three (incidental OT, medication scanning, patient scanning) of the six outcomes measured were significant at the p ≤ .001 level for the non-pilot units during this time period (Table G1). A similar comparison was conducted for the two pilot units’ pre- and post-intervention. Results showed three (pain reassessment, incidental OT, and medication scanning) of the six were significant at ≤ .001 level (Table G2). Finally, a comparison between the pilot and non-pilot units was conducted during the same time period. The results showed two of the six outcomes were significant at ≤ .001 level for the pilot units. Pain reassessment and HCAHPS were significantly higher in the pilot units’ time period as compared to the non-pilot units for the same time period (Table G3). In the post implementation time period four (pain reassessment, incidental OT, medication scanning, and HCAHPS overall) of the six outcomes were significant in the pilot units as compared to the non-pilot units (Table G4). Therefore, the pilot units outperformed the non-pilot units during this time period. Implications for Practice: The report card process has the potential to significantly change the practice of leaders throughout the organization. Units struggling to meet performance metrics are now required to implement the tools from this project to achieve immediate gains. Additionally, it affects the daily practice of staff, engaging them personally in driving quality and financial practices. The focus has changed to how individual accountability drives overall change and improves outcomes throughout the organization; staff and leaders have identified how their individual practice affects the whole, and how accountability and personal ownership are necessary to drive practice changes throughout the organization.
NoteD.N.P.
NoteIncludes bibliographical references
Genretheses
Persistent URLhttps://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-a14y-6g13
LanguageEnglish
CollectionSchool of Nursing (RBHS) DNP Projects
Organization NameRutgers, The State University of New Jersey
RightsThe author owns the copyright to this work.
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024