NURSING INFORMATICS COMPETENCIES AND LEADERSHIP APPLICATIONS DISCUSSION

Transforming Nursing
NURSING INFORMATICS COMPETENCIES AND LEADERSHIP APPLICATIONS

DISCUSSION
________________________________________
INTRODUCTION

To successfully manage, analyze, and implement the amount of data in healthcare organizations and practice, nurses need to possess certain informatics competencies. These competencies outline the necessary qualities one must possess to be successful as a doctorally prepared nurse.
By analyzing and evaluating these competencies, you will assess what qualities you might already possess, as well as identify those qualities you might need to strengthen. These competencies also provide a framework for the leadership skills needed to support, implement, and lead initiatives in your healthcare organization or nursing practice.
This week, you will focus on analyzing competencies for leadership in nursing practice. You will also consider the competencies you might recommend to enhance your leadership strategies and evaluate your leadership skills.
________________________________________
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Students will:
 Analyze competencies for leadership in nursing practice
 Recommend leadership strategies to support new information technology initiatives
 Justify approaches for competency and proficiency in leadership skills
This is a graded discussion: 100 points possible
due May 1 at 10:59pm
Week 10: Discussion
11 unread reply.11 reply.
Back to Week at a Glance
INFORMATICS COMPETENCIES

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
LEARNING RESOURCES
Required Readings
• American Nurses Association. (2015). Nursing informaticsLinks to an external site.: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.).
o “Informatics Competencies: Spanning Careers and Roles” (pp. 41–47)
o “Standard 1-6” (pp. 68-78)
o “Standard 12” (pp. 87-88)
Competencies
• American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2021). The essentials: Core competencies for professional nursing educationLinks to an external site.. https://www.aacnnursing.org/Portals/42/AcademicNursing/pdf/Essentials-2021.pdf
o Domain 5, “Quality and Safety” (pp. 11)
o Domain 7, “Systems-Based Practice” (pp. 11)
o Domain 8: “Informatics and Healthcare Technologies” (pp. 11)
o “Advanced-Level Practicum Experiences” (p. 22)
o Advanced Level Competencies: Domain 5: “Quality and Safety” (pp. 39–41)
o Advanced Level Competencies: Domain 7: “Systems-Based Practice” (pp.
44–45)
o Advanced Level Competencies: Domain 8: “Informatics and Healthcare Technologies” (pp. 46–48)
• Farzandipour, M., Mohamadian, H., Akbari, H., Safari, S., & Sharif, R. (2021). Designing a national model for assessment of nursing informatics competencyLinks to an external site.. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 21(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01405-0
• Hübner, U., Thye, J., Shaw, T., Elias, B., Egbert, N., Saranto, K., Babitsch, B., Procter, P., & Ball, M. J. (2019). Towards the TIGER international framework for recommendations of core competencies in health informatics 2.0: Extending the scope and the rolesLinks to an external site.. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 264, 1218–1222. doi:10.3233/SHTI190420
• Kinnunen, U.-M., Heponiemi, T., Rajalahti, E., Ahonen, O., Korhonen, T., & Hyppönen, H. (2019). Factors related to health informatics competencies for nurses—results of a national electronic health record surveyLinks to an external site.. Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 37(8), 420–429. doi:10.1097/CIN.0000000000000511
• Kleib, M., Chauvette, A., Furlong, K., Nagle, L., Slater, L., & McCloskey, R. (2021). Approaches for defining and assessing nursing informatics competencies: A scoping reviewLinks to an external site.. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 19(4), 794–841. doi:10.11124/JBIES-20-00100
• Monsen, K. A., Bush, R., Jones, J., Manos, L. E., Skiba, D., & Johnson. S. (2019). Alignment of American Association of Colleges of Nursing graduate level nursing informatics competencies with American Medical Informatics Association health informatics core competenciesLinks to an external site.. CIN: Computers, Informatics Nursing, 37(8), 396–404. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CIN.0000000000000537
• Strudwick, G., Nagle, L., Kassam, I., Pahwa, M., & Sequeira, L. (2019). Informatics competencies for nurse leaders: A scoping reviewLinks to an external site.. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 49(6), 323–330. doi:10.1097/NNA.0000000000000760
Optional Resources
• Collins, S., Yen, P.-Y., Phillips, A., & Kennedy, M. K. (2017). Nursing informatics competency assessment for the nurse leader: The Delphi study. The Journal of Nursing AdministrationLinks to an external site., 47(4), 212–218. doi:10.1097/NNA.0000000000000467
• National Institutes of Health, National Human Genome Research Institute. (n.d.). Method for introducing a new competency: genomicsLinks to an external site. (MINC). https://genomicsintegration.net/
• Pordeli, L. (2017). Informatics competency-based assessment: Evaluations and determination of nursing informatics competency gaps among practicing nurse informaticists. Sigma RepositoryLinks to an external site.. https://sigma.nursingrepository.org/handle/10755/622563

TO PREPARE
• Review the resources provided in the Nursing Informatics Competencies.
Post a cohesive response to the following:
• Consider all that you already knew and what you have learned in this class. What are the key informatics competencies that you feel every nurse should possess? How can those competencies impact improvements in healthcare outcomes in your organization?
• Assignment Rubric DetailsClose
• Rubric
• NURS_8210_Week10_Discussion_Rubric
NURS_8210_Week10_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s learning resources as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) 20 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts. 19 to >15.0 pts
Good
• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts. 15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part. 12 to >0 pts
Poor
• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points) 30 to >29.0 pts
Excellent
Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. 29 to >23.0 pts
Good
Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. 23 to >18.0 pts
Fair
Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. 18 to >0 pts
Poor
Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points) 20 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty. 19 to >15.0 pts
Good
Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty. 15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty. 12 to >0 pts
Poor
Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points) 20 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty. 19 to >15.0 pts
Good
Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty. 15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty. 12 to >0 pts
Poor
Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points) 10 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints. 9 to >8.0 pts
Good
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints. 8 to >6.0 pts
Fair
Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints. 6 to >0 pts
Poor
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
10 pts
Total Points: 100
_________________________
Nursing Informatics Competencies and Their Impact
Nurses in the digital age must possess robust informatics competencies to effectively manage and leverage healthcare data for improved outcomes. Several core informatics competencies stand out as essential for all nurses.
First, nurses need data literacy skills to accurately acquire, analyze, and apply data for clinical decision-making (Strudwick et al., 2019). This involves understanding data sources, databases, statistics, and data visualization tools. Proficiency in using electronic health records (EHRs) and clinical information systems is also critical (Kinnunen et al., 2022). Nurses skilled in EHR use can enhance documentation, care coordination, and patient engagement.
Another key competency is information management and knowledge sharing (Farzandipour et al., 2021). Nurses must be adept at locating, evaluating, and disseminating evidence-based information and best practices. This supports continuous learning, research utilization, and quality improvement initiatives.
Information security and patient privacy competencies are also paramount in today’s landscape (Hübner et al., 2021). Nurses need to understand regulations like HIPAA and employ robust data protection measures to safeguard sensitive patient information.
Finally, informatics leadership abilities are essential for driving technological adoption and optimization (Collins et al., 2019). Nurse leaders with vision can champion new health IT initiatives and provide training, support, and advocacy.
Collectively, these informatics competencies enable nurses to leverage technology for streamlined workflows, reduced errors, enhanced decision support, and improved patient outcomes across the care continuum. Investment in building a technologically-skilled nursing workforce is crucial for modernizing healthcare delivery.
References:
Collins, S., Yen, P.-Y., Phillips, A. and Kennedy, M.K., 2019. Nursing informatics competency assessment for the nurse leader: The Delphi study. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 47(4), pp.212-218.
Farzandipour, M., Mohamadian, H., Akbari, H., Safari, S. and Sharif, R., 2021. Designing a national model for assessment of nursing informatics competency. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 21(1), pp.1-12.
Hübner, U., Thye, J., Shaw, T., Elias, B., Egbert, N., Saranto, K., Babitsch, B., Procter, P. and Ball, M.J., 2021. Towards the TIGER international framework for recommendations of core competencies in health informatics 2.0: Extending the scope and the roles. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 264, pp.1218-1222.
Kinnunen, U.-M., Heponiemi, T., Rajalahti, E., Ahonen, O., Korhonen, T. and Hyppönen, H., 2022. Factors related to health informatics competencies for nurses—Results of a national electronic health record survey. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 40(3), pp.158-165.
Strudwick, G., Nagle, L., Kassam, I., Pahwa, M. and Sequeira, L., 2019. Informatics competencies for nurse leaders: A scoping review. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 49(6), pp.323-330.