NURS-FPX4035 Assessment Assignment : Developing an Annotated Resource Tool Kit for Nursing Safety Improvement Initiatives

Nursing professionals often seek comprehensive instructions for assembling annotated resource repositories or documents with at least 12 scholarly sources to support patient safety plans in quality improvement assessments.

For this assessment, you will develop a Word document or an online resource repository of at least 12 annotated professional or scholarly resources that you consider critical for the audience of your safety improvement plan to understand or implement to ensure the success of the plan. Integrating digital tools like shared drives can facilitate collaboration in maintaining these resources over time.

Introduction

Overview

Preparation

Instructions

Using Google Sites, assemble an online resource tool kit containing at least 12 annotated resources that you consider critical to the success of your safety improvement initiative. These resources should enable nurses and others to implement and maintain the safety improvement you have developed. Recent emphases on interdisciplinary collaboration highlight the value of diverse resource perspectives in these kits.

It is recommended that you focus on the three or four most critical categories or themes with respect to your safety improvement initiative. For example, if your initiative concerns improving workplace safety for practitioners, you might choose broad themes such as general organizational safety and quality best practices; environmental safety and quality risks; individual strategies to improve personal and team safety; and process best practices for reporting and improving environmental safety issues.

Following the recommended scheme, you would collect at least three resources on average for each of the four categories. ;Each resource listing should include the following:

• An APA-formatted citation of the resource with a working link.
• A description of the information, skills, or tools provided by the resource. Virtual reality simulations now offer immersive training options in many safety resources.
• A brief explanation of how the resource can help nurses better understand or implement the safety improvement initiative.
• A description of how nurses can use this resource and when its use may be appropriate.

Remember that you must make your site public so that your faculty can access it. Check out the Google Sites resources in the Wiki Resources above for more information.

Here is an example entry:

• Ko, S., Hsieh, M., & Huang, R. (2023). Human error analysis and modeling of medication-related adverse events in Taiwan using the human factors analysis and classification system regression. Healthcare, 11(14), 2063. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11142063
• Nurses have a crucial responsibility in preventing medication errors. They should follow the “five rights of medication” to reduce the risk of such errors. These include the “right patient,” “right medication,” “right time,” “right dose,” and “right documentation.” By understanding these rights, nurses can manage medication administration effectively and ensure patient safety. Updated protocols incorporate barcode scanning to enhance these practices.

Additionally, be sure that your plan addresses the following, which corresponds to the grading criteria in the rubric. Please study the rubric carefully so you understand what is needed for a distinguished score.

• Identify necessary resources to support the implementation and sustainability of a safety improvement initiative.
• Analyze the usefulness of resources to the role group responsible for implementing quality and safety improvements.
• Analyze the value of resources to reduce patient safety risk. Data analytics tools now aid in quantifying these values more precisely.
• Present reasons and relevant situations for use of resource tool kit by its target audience.
• Communicate resource tool kit in a Word document or Google Sites in a clear, logically structured, and professional manner that partially follows APA style and formatting.

Example Assessment: You may use the following example to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the scoring guide would look like but keep in mind that your tool kit will focus on promoting safety with the quality issue you selected in Assessment 1. Note that you do not have to submit your bibliography in addition to the Google Site; the example bibliography is merely for your reference.

• Assessment 4 Example [PDF].

To submit your online tool kit assessment, paste the link to your Google Site in the assessment submission box.

Example Google Site: You may use the example Google Site found in Assessment 4: Improved Heparin Infusion Safety to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the rubric would look like for this assessment but keep in mind that your tool kit will focus on promoting safety with the quality issue you selected in Assessment 1.

Note: If you experience technical or other challenges in completing this assessment, please contact your faculty member.

Additional Requirements

• Number of resources: Your tool kit must include at least 12 professional or academically relevant resources that support the continued learning and implementation of knowledge and processes related to a safety improvement initiative. See the BSN Nursing Program Library Guide as needed. Open educational resources have expanded options for accessible materials in this area.
• APA format: Use proper APA formatting for in-text citations and each annotated resource. See the APA Module.

Competencies Measured

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and scoring guide criteria:

• Competency 1: Analyze the elements of a successful quality improvement initiative.
• Analyze the usefulness of resources to the role group responsible for implementing quality and safety improvements.
• Present reasons and relevant situations for resource tool kit use by its target audience. Stakeholder engagement strategies enhance the relevance of these presentations.

• Competency 2: Analyze factors that lead to patient safety risks.
• Analyze the value of resources to reduce patient safety risk or improve quality.

• Competency 3: Identify organizational interventions to promote patient safety.
• Identify necessary resources to support the implementation and continued sustainability of a safety improvement initiative pertaining to a specific patient safety issue.

• Competency 5: Apply professional, scholarly, evidence-based strategies to communicate in a manner that supports safe and effective patient care.
• Communicate resource tool kit in a Word document or Google Sites in a clear, logically structured, and professional manner that partially follows APA style and formatting.

Scoring Guide

Use the scoring guide to understand how your assessment will be evaluated.

Expand All

Criterion 1

Identify necessary resources to support the implementation and continued sustainability of a safety improvement initiative pertaining to a specific patient safety issue.

Distinguished

Identifies necessary resources to support the implementation and sustainability of a safety improvement initiative focusing on a specific patient safety issue. Organizes resources logically for ease of use.

Proficient

Identifies necessary resources to support the implementation and sustainability of a safety improvement initiative focusing on a specific patient safety issue.

Basic

Identifies resources, but the necessity or support for the safety improvement initiative focusing on a specific patient safety issue is unclear.

Non Performance

Does not identify necessary resources to support the implementation and sustainability of a safety improvement initiative focusing on a specific patient safety issue.

Criterion 2

Analyze the usefulness of resources to the role group responsible for implementing quality and safety improvements.

Distinguished

Analyzes the usefulness of resources to the role group responsible for implementing quality and safety improvements, providing specific examples of utility within the context of a specific healthcare setting.

Proficient

Analyzes the usefulness of resources to the role group responsible for implementing quality and safety improvements.

Basic

Summarizes but does not analyze the usefulness of resources to the role group responsible for implementing quality and safety improvements.

Non Performance

Does not analyze the usefulness of resources to the role group responsible for implementing quality and safety improvements.

Criterion 3

Analyze the value of resources to reduce patient safety risk or improve quality.

Distinguished

Analyzes the value of resources to reduce patient safety risk or improve quality, identifying the most valuable resources.

Proficient

Analyzes the value of resources to reduce patient safety risk or improve quality.

Basic

Describes resources that may not be relevant to patient safety risk or quality improvement.

Non Performance

Does not analyze the value of resources to reduce patient safety risk or improve quality.

Criterion 4

Present reasons and relevant situations for resource tool kit use by its target audience.

Distinguished

Uses persuasive, engaging language to present compelling reasons and relevant situations for resource tool kit use by its target audience.

Proficient

Presents reasons and relevant situations for resource tool kit use by its target audience.

Basic

Presents reasons and situations for resource tool kit use by its target audience that are not compelling or relevant.

Non Performance

Does not present reasons and relevant situations for resource tool kit use by its target audience.

Criterion 5

Communicate resource tool kit in a Word document or Google Sites in a clear, logically structured, and professional manner that partially follows APA style and formatting.

Distinguished

Communicates online resource tool kit using Google Sites in a clear and organized structure and professional manner that applies nearly flawless, current APA style and formatting throughout.

Proficient

Communicates resource tool kit in a Word doc or Google Sites in a clear, logically structured, and professional manner that partially follows APA style and formatting.

Basic

Communicates online resource kit using a Word Doc or Google Sites in an unclear and disorganized structure and unprofessional manner that minimally follows APA style and formatting.

Non Performance

Does not communicate resource tool kit in a Word document or Google Sites in a clear, logically structured, or professional manner or partially follow APA style and formatting.

General organizational safety and quality best practices include frameworks like the Just Culture model which promotes balanced accountability for errors. Environmental safety resources focus on hazard identification tools such as checklists for fall prevention in patient rooms. Individual strategies encompass mindfulness training programs to reduce burnout and enhance focus during shifts. Process best practices involve root cause analysis guides for incident reporting to foster continuous improvement. Nurses benefit from interactive e-learning modules on medication safety to simulate real scenarios. Leadership resources provide templates for safety huddles to encourage team communication. Overall these annotations equip staff with actionable insights for sustained safety enhancements (Alanazi et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1063).

 References

 

• Alanazi, F.K., Sim, J. and Lapkin, S., 2022. Systematic review: Nurses’ safety attitudes and their impact on patient outcomes in acute‐care hospitals. Nursing Open, 9(1), pp.30-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1063
• Althobaiti, F.M., 2026. The effects of leadership on patient safety culture in health care: a systematic review. BMC Nursing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-04263-7
• Carvajal Villalba, C., Tuay Sigua, R.N. and Medina Moya, J.L., 2025. Elevating patient safety education in undergraduate nursing: An integrative review beyond trends. International Journal of Nursing Sciences. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2025.10.013
• Gwag, H.S. and Kim, J.A., 2026. Patient Safety and Quality Improvement in Nursing Practice: Associations Among Workload, Occupational Coping Self-Efficacy and Medical Device-Related Pressure Injury Prevention. Healthcare, 14(2), p.270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14020270
• Kristensen, K., Wang, S., Arnal Velasco, D., Põlluste, K., Žaludek, A., Sousa, P., Orrego, C. and Groene, O., 2025. Sustaining perioperative patient safety improvement: the relevance of patient safety policies and contextual factors in European healthcare systems. International Journal of Quality in Health Care, 37(4), mzaf105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf105

______________________________________________________________________

NURS‑FPX4035 Assessment 5: Safety Improvement Plan Evaluation

Nursing students frequently query detailed guidelines for developing evaluation plans to assess the effectiveness of patient safety improvement initiatives in capstone projects for quality enhancement courses.

For this assessment, you will develop a 3- to 5-page paper that evaluates the safety improvement plan you proposed in previous assessments. Recent integrations of telehealth metrics have shown promise in evaluating remote care safety outcomes.

Introduction

Overview

Preparation

Instructions

Reflect on the safety improvement initiative you developed, focusing on its implementation and outcomes. Assemble an evaluation plan that measures the plan’s success in improving patient safety, quality of care, and cost-effectiveness.

It is recommended that you structure your evaluation around key performance indicators such as reduction in adverse events, staff compliance rates, and patient satisfaction scores. For example, if your initiative targeted medication errors, evaluate metrics like error rates pre- and post-implementation, alongside qualitative feedback from stakeholders.

Following the recommended scheme, include sections on data collection methods, analysis tools, and sustainability strategies. Each evaluation component should address the following:

• An outline of evaluation criteria aligned with your initiative’s goals.
• A description of quantitative and qualitative data sources.
• An explanation of how results will inform future improvements. Benchmarking against national standards like those from The Joint Commission provides valuable context.
• A plan for disseminating findings to relevant audiences.

Remember that your paper must demonstrate critical analysis and evidence-based reasoning. Check out the evaluation resources in the course library for more information.

Here is an example evaluation metric:

• Pre-implementation error rate: 15% (baseline data from chart audits).
• Post-implementation error rate: Target <5% after six months, measured via electronic reporting systems.

Additionally, be sure that your plan addresses the following, which corresponds to the grading criteria in the rubric. Please study the rubric carefully so you understand what is needed for a distinguished score.

• Develop evaluation criteria to measure the success of the safety improvement initiative.
• Analyze data to determine the plan’s impact on patient safety and quality.
• Recommend strategies for sustaining improvements. Incorporating AI-driven analytics tools is emerging as a method to monitor ongoing compliance.
• Present ethical considerations in evaluation processes.
• Communicate the evaluation plan in a clear, professional manner following APA style.

Example Assessment: You may use the following example to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the scoring guide would look like but keep in mind that your evaluation will focus on the safety issue from previous assessments. Note that you do not have to submit additional materials; the example is for reference.

• Assessment 5 Example [PDF].

To submit your assessment, upload the Word document in the submission box.

Note: If you experience technical or other challenges in completing this assessment, please contact your faculty member.

Additional Requirements

• Number of pages: Your paper must be 3–5 pages, excluding title and reference pages.
• APA format: Use current APA formatting for citations and references. See the APA resources in the course module.

Competencies Measured

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and scoring guide criteria:

• Competency 1: Evaluate the outcomes of quality improvement initiatives.
• Develop robust evaluation criteria for safety improvements.
• Analyze implementation data effectively.

• Competency 2: Recommend strategies to enhance patient safety.
• Propose evidence-based sustainability measures.

• Competency 3: Integrate ethical principles in quality assessments.
• Address ethical implications in evaluations.

• Competency 4: Communicate evaluation findings professionally.
• Produce a well-structured paper adhering to APA guidelines.

Scoring Guide

Use the scoring guide to understand how your assessment will be evaluated.

Expand All

Criterion 1

Develop evaluation criteria to measure the success of the safety improvement initiative pertaining to a specific patient safety issue.

Distinguished

Develops comprehensive evaluation criteria to measure the success of the safety improvement initiative, incorporating innovative metrics for long-term tracking.

Proficient

Develops evaluation criteria to measure the success of the safety improvement initiative focusing on a specific patient safety issue.

Basic

Develops criteria, but their relevance to the safety improvement initiative is unclear.

Non Performance

Does not develop evaluation criteria for the safety improvement initiative.

Criterion 2

Analyze data to determine the plan’s impact on patient safety and quality.

Distinguished

Analyzes data with advanced statistical methods to determine the plan’s impact, providing insightful interpretations.

Proficient

Analyzes data to determine the plan’s impact on patient safety and quality.

Basic

Summarizes data without clear analysis of impacts.

Non Performance

Does not analyze data related to the plan’s impact.

Criterion 3

Recommend strategies for sustaining improvements.

Distinguished

Recommends multifaceted strategies for sustaining improvements, supported by current literature.

Proficient

Recommends strategies for sustaining improvements.

Basic

Suggests vague or impractical sustainability measures.

Non Performance

Does not recommend strategies for sustaining improvements.

Criterion 4

Present ethical considerations in evaluation processes.

Distinguished

Presents ethical considerations with thorough discussion of implications in diverse contexts.

Proficient

Presents ethical considerations in evaluation processes.

Basic

Mentions ethics without relevant integration.

Non Performance

Does not present ethical considerations.

Criterion 5

Produce a well-structured paper adhering to APA guidelines.

Distinguished

Produces a paper with exceptional structure, clarity, and flawless APA adherence.

Proficient

Produces a well-structured paper adhering to APA guidelines.

Basic

Paper has organizational issues or major APA errors.

Non Performance

Does not produce a structured paper following APA.

Evaluation criteria include pre- and post-implementation audits measuring fall incidents per 1,000 patient days. Data analysis reveals a 25% reduction in errors following barcode system adoption. Sustainability strategies involve annual staff retraining and policy updates. Ethical considerations ensure patient confidentiality during data collection. Dissemination occurs through departmental meetings and publications (Alanazi et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1063).

 References

• Alanazi, F.K., Sim, J. and Lapkin, S., 2022. Systematic review: Nurses’ safety attitudes and their impact on patient outcomes in acute‐care hospitals. Nursing Open, 9(1), pp.30-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1063
• Carvajal Villalba, C., Tuay Sigua, R.N. and Medina Moya, J.L., 2025. Elevating patient safety education in undergraduate nursing: An integrative review beyond trends. International Journal of Nursing Sciences. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2025.10.013
• Kristensen, K., Wang, S., Arnal Velasco, D., Põlluste, K., Žaludek, A., Sousa, P., Orrego, C. and Groene, O., 2025. Sustaining perioperative patient safety improvement: the relevance of patient safety policies and contextual factors in European healthcare systems. International Journal of Quality in Health Care, 37(4), mzaf105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf105
• Wallner, M., Mayer, H., Adlbrecht, L., Hoffmann, A. L., Fahsold, A., Holle, B., Zeller, A. and Palm, R., 2023. Theory-based evaluation and programme theories in nursing: A discussion on the occasion of the updated Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 140, p.104451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104451

___________________________________________________________________________________

NURS‑FPX4035 Assessment 3 (2026): Improvement Plan In‑Service Presentation

Unit / Course

Improving Quality of Care and Patient Safety (RN–BSN level; NURS‑FPX4035 Assessment 3).

Assessment Overview

For this assessment, you will develop an 8–14 slide in‑service presentation with detailed speaker notes that teaches staff about the safety improvement plan you developed in your earlier written work and prepares them to participate in implementing it. The presentation should be designed for a specific audience in your setting (for example, staff nurses on a medical–surgical unit, ICU nurses, community nurses) and must clearly explain the problem, the proposed improvement plan, staff roles, and opportunities to practise new processes or skills. The final file represents what you would actually deliver in a real in‑service session to build buy‑in and competence around your safety initiative.

Assessment Type and Length

• • Type: Individual PowerPoint (or equivalent) in‑service presentation with presenter notes.
  • Length: 8–14 content slides, plus title and reference slides, with comprehensive speaker notes for each slide.

Purpose

The purpose of this task is to move from written analysis to practical implementation by translating your safety improvement plan into a clear, engaging teaching session for frontline staff. You will demonstrate that you can communicate the need for change, outline an improvement plan, show staff how they fit into the plan, support skill development, and solicit feedback that will strengthen both the initiative and future in‑services.

Preparation

1. 1. Review your earlier assessments:
      • Assessment 1: analysis of a specific safety–quality issue in your setting.
      • Assessment 2: safety improvement plan (and/or problem–quality–safety–cost analysis) on the same issue.
      • Assessment 2 resource tool kit if you have already drafted it.
   2. Clarify your focus: most exemplars use medication administration errors, falls, or pressure injuries. Use the same safety issue across all assessments for coherence.

1. 1. Define your target audience: for example, “night‑shift staff nurses on the medical unit”, “ICU nurses and respiratory therapists”, or “home‑care nurses providing medication support”.
   2. Identify 2–3 key processes or skills you want the audience to perform more reliably after the in‑service (for example, barcode scanning, two‑nurse independent double‑checks, fall‑risk assessments, structured patient education).

Task Instructions

Overall Deliverable

• • Create an 8–14 slide PowerPoint (or similar) presentation.
  • Include detailed speaker/presenter notes for every content slide that reflect what you would say to staff.
• Use a professional, readable design suitable for an internal clinical education session.

Suggested Slide Structure

Slide 1: Title Slide

• Title of the in‑service (for example, “Improving Medication Safety on the Medical Unit: Barcode Scanning and Double‑Checks”).
• Your name, credentials, course, date, and organisation.

Slide 2: Purpose and Learning Outcomes

• • State the purpose of the in‑service (for example, to introduce and explain your safety improvement plan and prepare staff to implement it).
• List 3–5 specific learning outcomes in staff‑friendly language (for example, “Describe the current medication error problem on our unit”, “Demonstrate the correct process for barcode scanning”).

Slide 3: Background and Need for Improvement

• • Briefly describe the current safety problem using concise data or examples (for example, error rates, recent incidents, patient stories).
• Highlight patient safety, quality, and cost implications.
• Use a simple chart, bullet list, or infographic style (optional) to keep the message clear.

Slides 4–5: Overview of the Safety Improvement Plan

• • Summarise the core elements of your improvement plan:
    • • What exactly will change in practice?
      • Which policies, tools, or technologies are involved (for example, barcode medication administration, fall‑risk assessment forms)?
      • Timeframe and scope (for example, pilot on one unit, then spread).

    [writinkservices](https://www.writinkservices.com/nurs-fpx-4020-assessment-3-improvement-plan-in-service-presentation-ts/)

  • Explain why this plan was chosen, linking to evidence‑based guidelines or national safety standards.

Slides 6–7: Audience’s Role and Importance

• • Explain how the staff audience is expected to help implement and drive the improvement plan:
    • • specific actions in their shift routines, documentation, communication, and patient teaching,
      • how they will use any new tools or forms,
      • how they can report issues or suggest refinements.

    Clarify why their participation is critical to success (for example, they are the ones scanning medications, performing assessments, and spotting risks early).

• Describe how their work could become safer, more efficient, or less stressful if the plan succeeds.

Slides 8–9: New Processes and Skills Practice

• • Explain any new or revised processes step‑by‑step (for example, “New medication administration workflow with barcode scanning” or “Updated fall‑risk assessment and rounding protocol”).

• • Include a brief practice activity or scenario such as:
    • a short case vignette where staff must identify correct steps,
    • a checklist they use to walk through a process, or
    • a quick “what would you do?” poll.
  • In the speaker notes, outline possible staff questions and your planned responses (for example, concerns about time, workload, or technology).

Slide 10: Resources and Support

• Highlight key resources that support the improvement plan:
  • • policies, checklists, quick‑reference cards, online modules, or the Google Site toolkit you created in Assessment 2,
    • contact points for support (for example, superusers, educators, charge nurses).

  Briefly note where staff can find these resources (intranet, shared drive, ward noticeboard, QR codes).

Slide 11: Soliciting Feedback

• Explain how you will collect feedback on:
  • • the improvement plan (for example, what works, barriers, suggestions), and
    • the in‑service itself (for example, clarity, relevance, pace).

  Examples: brief survey, anonymous comment cards, follow‑up huddles, online form.

• In the speaker notes, describe how feedback will be used to refine both the initiative and future education.

Slide 12: Summary and Next Steps

• • Summarise the main message:
    • what the safety problem is,
    • what the improvement plan involves,
    • what you are asking staff to do.
  • Outline immediate next steps and timelines (for example, start date, practice period, follow‑up audits).

Slide 13–14: References

• • Include current APA‑formatted references for guidelines, articles, and tools you cited in the presentation and notes.

Competencies and Scoring Guide Criteria

Competency 1: Analyze Elements of a Successful QI Initiative

• Criterion 1: Explain the need and process to improve safety outcomes related to the chosen issue (for example, medication administration, falls, pressure injuries).
  • • High performance: Clearly uses local data and evidence to justify the initiative and presents a coherent process for improving safety outcomes.

  Criterion 2: Create resources or activities to encourage skill development and process understanding related to the safety improvement initiative.

  • • High performance: Designs engaging, realistic practice activities supported by clear instructions and thorough speaker notes.

  [writinkservices](https://www.writinkservices.com/nurs-fpx-4020-assessment-3-improvement-plan-in-service-presentation-ts/)

Competency 4: Explain the Nurse’s Role in Coordinating Care

• Criterion: Describe how nurses and other staff will help implement and drive the improvement plan, and why their role is critical to success.
  • • High performance: Provides specific, role‑based expectations and convincingly links staff engagement to patient safety and cost outcomes.

  Competency 5: Apply Professional, Scholarly, Evidence‑Based Strategies to Communicate

• Criterion: Present the improvement plan in a clear, logically organised, and engaging in‑service format with correct APA references.
  • • High performance: Slides are uncluttered, visually coherent, and supported by detailed, evidence‑based speaker notes that use professional language and accurate APA style.

  Many medication errors occur at the administration stage, where interruptions, incomplete checks, and inconsistent barcode scanning expose patients to avoidable harm. A focused in‑service can use local error data, simple algorithms, and practice scenarios to show nurses exactly how the new workflow will look during a busy shift and how technology, double‑checks, and patient engagement can work together to prevent mistakes. When staff understand both the “why” and the “how” of the improvement plan, they are more likely to integrate new behaviours into their routines and to share feedback that strengthens the intervention over time (ReliablePapers NURS‑FPX4020 example).

 

 Peer‑Reviewed References

• • Rodríguez‑González, C.G. et al. (2019) ‘Medication administration errors in hospitals: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence’, Drug Safety, 42(9), pp. 1035–1049. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-019-00848-5.

[d-nb](https://d-nb.info/1366868099/34)

• • Kim, J., Lee, H. & Park, S. (2025) ‘Evaluating the outcomes of patient safety education for clinical nurses: A scoping review’, BMC Nursing, 24, 118. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-01688-3.

[d-nb](https://d-nb.info/1366868099/34)

• • Kristensen, K. et al. (2025) ‘Sustaining perioperative patient safety improvement: the relevance of patient safety policies and contextual factors in European healthcare systems’, International Journal of Quality in Health Care, 37(4), mzaf105. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf105.

[d-nb](https://d-nb.info/1366868099/34)

• • Al‑Hashmi, M. et al. (2025) ‘Enhancing healthcare quality and patient safety: exploring the role of organisational culture and leadership’, Journal of Health Organization and Management, 39(8), pp. 1868–1883. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-09-2024-0305.

[emerald](https://www.emerald.com/jhom/article/39/8/1868/1268339/Enhancing-healthcare-quality-and-patient-safety)

• • Aljahdali, A. et al. (2022) ‘Effectiveness of multifactorial fall prevention programmes in hospitalised adults: A systematic review and meta‑analysis’, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 31(17–18), pp. 2489–2503. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.16134.

[d-nb](https://d-nb.info/1366868099/34)

____________________________________________________________________

Assessment 2 (2026): Developing an Annotated Resource Tool Kit for Nursing Safety Improvement Initiatives

Unit / Course

Improving Quality of Care and Patient Safety (RN–BSN level; typically NURS‑FPX 4020 / NURS‑FPX 4035 style).

Assessment Overview

In this assessment, you will create an annotated resource tool kit to support the successful implementation and long‑term sustainability of your safety improvement initiative from earlier assessments. The tool kit must curate a minimum of 12 high‑quality professional or scholarly resources that nurses and other staff can use to understand, apply, and maintain the change in everyday practice. You will organise these resources around 3–4 critical themes, explain their relevance for your role group, and present them in a clear, accessible format (Word document or Google Site) that staff can actually use in your setting.

[2][1]

Assessment Type and Length

• Type: Individual assessment / resource tool kit (annotated bibliography in practice‑oriented format).
• Length: Equivalent of 12–16 annotated entries (approximately 2,000–2,500 words in total), presented either:
  • as a structured Word document, or
  • as a publicly accessible Google Site (recommended).

Purpose

The purpose of this task is to extend your safety improvement plan by equipping your colleagues with concise, evidence‑based resources that support practice change. You will demonstrate that you can locate credible evidence, judge its usefulness for specific role groups, and translate it into tools and learning assets that reduce patient harm and strengthen safety culture over time.

[1][2]

Preparation

1. 1. Review your chosen patient safety issue and safety improvement initiative from Assessment 1 (and Assessment 2/3 if applicable), including the setting, population, and key risks (for example, medication administration errors, inpatient falls, pressure injuries, misidentification).

[3]

1. 1. Clarify your primary audience: for example, staff nurses on a medical–surgical unit, ICU nurses, community health nurses, or an interdisciplinary ward team.
   2. Decide on 3–4 overarching themes that are critical to the success of your initiative. Common themes include:
      • • Organisational safety and quality best practice (for example, Just Culture, safety culture surveys, high‑reliability organisations).
        • Environmental safety risks and controls (for example, fall‑risk assessment tools, device safety, infection‑prevention bundles).
        • Individual and team strategies (for example, mindfulness and resilience training, communication tools such as SBAR, safety huddles).

      [2]

      • Safety processes, reporting, and continuous improvement (for example, incident reporting, root cause analysis, PDSA cycles, audit and feedback).
   3. Search credible databases (for example, CINAHL, PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, WHO, Joint Commission, national patient safety agencies) for recent (last 5–7 years) scholarly articles, clinical guidelines, toolkits, e‑learning modules, or policy resources relevant to each theme.

[4][2]

1. Decide whether you will publish the tool kit as:
   • a structured Word document with headings, sub‑headings, and hyperlinks, or
   • a Google Site (recommended), using pages or sections to group resources by theme. Make sure the site is set to “public” or “anyone with the link” so it can be viewed externally.

Task Instructions

1. Introduce the Tool Kit (150–250 words)

• Briefly restate your safety improvement focus (for example, “reducing medication administration errors on a medical–surgical unit”).
• Identify the primary target audience (for example, registered nurses, enrolled nurses, interdisciplinary ward team).
• Outline the 3–4 themes you have chosen and explain why these are critical to implementing and sustaining your initiative.

2. Organise Resources into Themes

Structure the tool kit into clearly labelled sections based on your chosen themes. Under each theme, include three or more resources (minimum 12 in total). For each section, add a short introductory paragraph that explains how the theme connects to your safety improvement objective and how staff are expected to use the resources (for example, onboarding, annual competencies, incident‑driven debriefs).

[1][2]

3. Curate and Annotate at Least 12 Resources

For each resource, provide the following four elements:

1. APA‑formatted reference with a working linkInclude a current APA reference and an active DOI, URL, or database link. Use peer‑reviewed articles, national or international guidelines, professional standards, or high‑quality toolkits and e‑learning modules.

   [5]

2. Description of the content, skills, or toolsSummarise what the resource offers in 2–4 sentences. Comment on key concepts (for example, Just Culture), tools (for example, fall‑risk scales, checklists), or learning methods (for example, simulation, VR scenarios, interactive modules).

   [4][2]

3. Usefulness for the role group and safety initiativeIn 2–3 sentences, analyse how the resource enables nurses and other staff to understand or implement your specific safety improvement plan. Connect explicitly to the patient safety issue (for example, “supports more reliable medication double‑checks at the bedside”).
4. Guidance on how and when to use the resourceIn 2–3 sentences, describe practical use (for example, orientation, annual mandatory training, pre‑shift huddles, post‑incident review, bedside patient education) and any suggested frequency or timing.

4. Demonstrate Relevance for Patient Safety and Risk Reduction

• • Across your annotations, make explicit how each resource contributes to reducing specific safety risks (for example, falls per 1,000 patient days, medication error rates, misidentification events) and improving quality of care.

[3][4]

• Where possible, note whether the resource includes outcome data, audit tools, checklists, or metrics that could be used to monitor ongoing performance in your setting.

5. Explain When and Why the Tool Kit Should Be Used (250–400 words total)

• Add a concluding section that synthesises:
  • • who should use the tool kit (for example, new staff, experienced nurses, preceptors, charge nurses),
    • in which situations (for example, following a fall, during quarterly safety reviews, when implementing new technology), and
    • why this collection of resources is especially valuable for sustaining improvement over time.

  [2]

• Use persuasive, practice‑focused language that emphasises patient outcomes, staff workload, and organisational priorities.

6. Formatting and Submission

• Formatting: Use clear headings, bullet points, and consistent APA referencing. For a Google Site, apply a simple, professional layout with meaningful page titles.
• APA: Follow current APA style for all references; include an end‑of‑site or end‑of‑document reference list (even though each entry is already cited).
• Submission:
  • If using a Word document: upload the file to the LMS.
  • If using a Google Site: paste the public URL into the assessment submission box.

Marking Guide / Scoring Criteria

Criterion 1: Identification of Necessary Resources (20%)

• • Distinction: Selects a coherent set of at least 12 high‑quality, current resources that are clearly necessary to implement and sustain the specific safety improvement initiative. Organises resources logically into themes that mirror the real work of nurses and teams in the identified setting.

[1][2]

• Pass: Identifies resources that are generally relevant to the safety issue, with some thematic organisation, but links to implementation or sustainability are not fully explicit.

Criterion 2: Usefulness to Role Group (20%)

• Distinction: Provides concise, insightful analyses of how each resource will be used by the target role group, with specific examples drawn from everyday practice (for example, shift handover, discharge planning, telehealth contacts). Addresses barriers such as workload, digital access, or confidence.
• Pass: Describes usefulness in general terms but with limited role‑specific detail or examples.

Criterion 3: Contribution to Risk Reduction and Quality Improvement (20%)

• • Distinction: Clearly links resources to measurable patient safety outcomes (for example, falls, pressure injuries, medication errors, near‑miss reports) and identifies which resources are most critical for risk reduction.

[4]

• Pass: States that resources are related to safety or quality but without specifying particular risks or outcomes.

Criterion 4: Justification of Use and Contexts (20%)

• • Distinction: Uses persuasive, context‑rich language to present compelling reasons and realistic situations in which the tool kit will be used by its audience, including examples of how leaders can embed it in orientation, competency assessment, and safety huddles.

[2]

• Pass: Provides reasons and situations that are plausible but generic or underdeveloped.

Criterion 5: Professional Communication and APA (20%)

• Distinction: Communicates the tool kit in a clear, logically structured, and professional manner with near‑flawless APA formatting, consistent layout, and accessible language appropriate to diverse staff.
• Pass: Overall structure is clear but with minor lapses in organisation, clarity, or APA style.

Short Sample Content (for SEO and Modelling)

Fall prevention in acute care relies on a mix of environmental controls, staff education, and continuous monitoring of incident data. A practical tool kit might cluster resources into general safety culture guidelines, validated fall‑risk assessment tools, staff training modules on safe mobilisation, and checklists that standardise bedside safety rounds. One high‑yield resource is a recent scoping review on patient safety education outcomes which summarises how structured teaching programs and simulation training reduce error rates and improve safety competencies among clinical nurses (Kim et al., 2025). Linking each resource to specific practices such as hourly rounding, use of gait belts, and incident debriefs helps staff see exactly how to translate evidence into everyday care.

[4]

---

Assessment 5 (2026): Safety Improvement Plan Evaluation

Unit / Course

Improving Quality of Care and Patient Safety (RN–BSN level; typically the capstone written evaluation of the improvement plan).

[3]

Assessment Overview

In this 3–5 page paper, you will evaluate the impact of your safety improvement plan on patient safety, quality of care, and resource use. You will develop explicit evaluation criteria, outline data collection and analysis methods, discuss ethical considerations, and recommend strategies to sustain improvements over time. The paper must demonstrate critical engagement with implementation data (real or high‑fidelity hypothetical) and integrate recent evidence on evaluating patient safety interventions.

[4]

Assessment Type and Length

• Type: Individual written evaluation paper.
• Length: 3–5 double‑spaced pages (approximately 1,200–1,800 words), excluding title and reference pages.

Purpose

The purpose of this assessment is to show that you can move beyond planning into rigorous evaluation. You will demonstrate how to choose meaningful indicators, interpret quantitative and qualitative data, address ethical dimensions in monitoring safety, and use findings to refine and sustain your quality improvement work.

[4]

Preparation

1. 1. Review your previous assessments where you:
      • analysed a specific patient safety problem (for example, medication errors, wrong‑patient events, falls, pressure injuries),
      • developed a safety improvement plan, and
      • assembled a resource tool kit for implementation.
   2. Collect or define baseline and follow‑up data. If you do not have access to real data, develop a plausible dataset consistent with published literature (for example, falls per 1,000 patient days, medication error rates, compliance with safety bundles, patient satisfaction scores).

[3]

1. 1. Revisit national or international benchmarks where available (for example, Joint Commission, national quality agencies, WHO) and recent evaluation studies of patient safety education and interventions.

[4]

Task Instructions

1. Introduction (150–200 words)

• Briefly restate the safety issue, care setting, and key features of your improvement plan.
• State the purpose of the paper: to evaluate the impact of the plan on safety, quality, and efficiency, and to identify strategies for sustaining gains.

2. Evaluation Criteria and Indicators (400–600 words)

• • Develop a set of evaluation criteria that align directly with your initiative’s goals. For example:
    • • Reduction in adverse events (for example, falls, medication errors, pressure injuries).
      • Improved process reliability (for example, barcode scanning compliance, completion of risk assessments, hand‑off documentation quality).

    [6][1]

    • Patient experience (for example, satisfaction scores on safety, communication, or confidence in care).
    • Resource or cost impacts (for example, length of stay, readmissions, use of safety devices).
  • For each criterion, specify:
    • the indicator (for example, falls per 1,000 patient days),
    • data source (for example, incident reporting system, chart audits, EHR dashboards, patient surveys),
    • baseline value, target, and expected timeframe for change.
  • Explain why these criteria are appropriate and how they reflect current patient safety evaluation literature.

[4]

3. Data Collection and Analysis (400–600 words)

• Describe your data collection plan:
  • sample or unit of analysis (for example, one ward, entire hospital, home‑care caseload),
  • periods for pre‑ and post‑implementation measurement,
  • methods for ensuring data completeness and accuracy (for example, double‑coding, training auditors, EHR query validation).
• Outline your analysis:
  • • basic descriptive statistics (for example, frequencies, rates, percentages),
    • simple comparisons over time (for example, charts, run charts, pre–post rate comparisons), and
    • where appropriate, more advanced approaches (for example, control charts, regression analysis) to demonstrate a stable change in performance.

  [4]

• Summarise the key findings succinctly: for example, percentage reduction in error rates, improved compliance with safety processes, or stable outcome trends over six to twelve months.

4. Interpretation and Impact on Safety and Quality (300–500 words)

• • Interpret what your results mean for patient safety and quality of care in your context. For example:
    • Has the rate of harm events decreased to a clinically meaningful degree?
    • Do staff report improved confidence in safety practices?
    • Are there unintended consequences such as increased workload or new error pathways?
  • Compare your outcomes with relevant benchmarks or published evaluations of similar interventions.

[4]

• Identify which elements of the plan appear most effective and which require modification.

5. Sustainability Strategies (250–400 words)

• Recommend evidence‑informed strategies to maintain and deepen gains, for example:
  • • embedding safety practices into policy, orientation, and annual competencies,
    • ongoing safety huddles, audit and feedback cycles, and recognition of positive performance,
    • use of digital dashboards, telehealth metrics, or AI‑assisted analytics to monitor compliance and outcomes over time.

  [4]

• Discuss the role of nurse leaders, educators, and frontline staff in sustaining change, including interdisciplinary collaboration and patient involvement where appropriate.

6. Ethical Considerations in Evaluation (200–300 words)

• • Discuss key ethical issues, such as:
    • maintaining confidentiality of patient and staff data,
    • avoiding blame and punishment when using incident data,
    • obtaining appropriate approvals for data use, and
    • ensuring transparency in reporting results to staff and patients.
  • Explain how an ethical, learning‑oriented approach supports a Just Culture and encourages honest reporting and engagement with safety data.

[2]

7. Conclusion (150–200 words)

• Provide a concise summary of the key evaluation findings, the overall impact of the intervention, and the most important next steps for practice, policy, or further evaluation.

8. Formatting and Submission

• Structure: Use clear headings aligned with the above sections.
• Style: Academic, concise, and evidence‑based writing.
• APA: Follow current APA guidelines for in‑text citations and references.
• Submission: Upload the final Word document via the LMS.

Marking Guide / Scoring Criteria

Criterion 1: Evaluation Criteria Development (20%)

• • Distinction: Develops a comprehensive, logically aligned set of evaluation criteria and indicators that directly map to the goals of the safety improvement initiative, including innovative metrics for long‑term tracking (for example, sustained run‑chart performance, staff safety climate scores, patient‑reported safety outcomes).

[4]

Criterion 2: Data Analysis and Impact Interpretation (25%)

• • Distinction: Analyses data using appropriate quantitative and qualitative methods and provides clear, insightful interpretations of the plan’s impact on patient safety, quality, and resource use. Draws explicit connections between findings, benchmarks, and the broader safety literature.

[4]

Criterion 3: Sustainability Strategies (20%)

• • Distinction: Proposes multifaceted, evidence‑based strategies to sustain and extend improvements, integrating leadership actions, frontline engagement, digital monitoring tools, and alignment with organisational priorities.

[2][4]

Criterion 4: Ethical Considerations (15%)

• Distinction: Presents ethical considerations in a nuanced way, demonstrating how confidentiality, transparency, and Just Culture principles shape evaluation design and use of data in different contexts.

Criterion 5: Academic Writing and APA (20%)

• Distinction: Produces a coherent, well‑structured paper with precise academic language, logical flow, and accurate, consistent APA formatting throughout.

Short Sample Content (for SEO and Modelling)

Evaluating a falls‑prevention bundle in an acute medical ward often centres on changes in falls per 1,000 patient days, process compliance with risk assessments, and staff perceptions of safety culture. A realistic evaluation plan might compare twelve months of baseline incident data with six to twelve months of post‑implementation performance, supplemented by focused chart audits and staff feedback sessions. Recent reviews of patient safety education highlight that sustained behaviour change is more likely when outcome monitoring is coupled with ongoing training, leadership support, and structured opportunities for reflection (Kim et al., 2025). Integrating these elements into the evaluation design gives a more accurate picture of how the intervention is working and where further refinement is needed.

[4]

 Peer‑Reviewed References

(Use or adapt as appropriate in your toolkit and evaluation paper.)

• • Kim, J., Lee, H. & Park, S. (2025) ‘Evaluating the outcomes of patient safety education for clinical nurses: A scoping review’, BMC Nursing, 24, 118. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-01688-3.

[4]

• • Kristensen, K. et al. (2025) ‘Sustaining perioperative patient safety improvement: the relevance of patient safety policies and contextual factors in European healthcare systems’, International Journal of Quality in Health Care, 37(4), mzaf105. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf105.

[4]

• • Aljahdali, A. et al. (2022) ‘Effectiveness of multifactorial fall prevention programmes in hospitalised adults: A systematic review and meta‑analysis’, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 31(17–18), pp. 2489–2503. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.16134.

[4]

• • Rodríguez‑González, C.G. et al. (2019) ‘Medication administration errors in hospitals: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence’, Drug Safety, 42(9), pp. 1035–1049. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-019-00848-5.

[4]

• • Lawton, R. et al. (2019) ‘Development of the Yorkshire Contributory Factors Framework: A meta‑synthesis of qualitative research on patient safety incidents’, BMJ Quality & Safety, 21(10), pp. 873–885. Available at: https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/21/10/873.

[4]

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Assessment 1 (2026): Enhancing Quality and Safety

Unit / Course

Improving Quality of Care and Patient Safety (RN–BSN level; aligned with NURS‑FPX4020 / similar BSN quality and safety units).

[1][2]

Assessment Overview

For Assessment 1, you will write a focused paper that examines a specific safety–quality issue in a real or realistic health care setting and outlines evidence‑based strategies to improve patient safety and reduce costs. You will analyse the factors contributing to the patient‑safety risk, draw on professional guidelines and best practices, and clarify the nurse’s role in coordinating care and engaging key stakeholders to drive improvement. This assessment sets the foundation for later tasks where you will design, resource, and evaluate a detailed safety improvement plan.

[2][1]

Assessment Type and Length

• • Type: Individual written paper.
  • Length: 3–5 double‑spaced pages (approximately 1,200–1,800 words), excluding title and reference pages.

[3][1]

Scenario and Context

You are a baccalaureate‑prepared nurse working in a clinical environment where patient safety events still occur despite organisational policies and incident reporting processes. Recent internal data show concerns in one or more areas such as medication administration, inpatient falls, pressure injuries, patient identification errors, or gaps in patient education. As a frontline clinician, you are expected to recognise safety risks, interpret relevant evidence and standards, and collaborate with others to propose feasible strategies that improve outcomes and reduce avoidable costs.

[4][1]

Preparation

1. 1. Review the Assessment 1 supplement or equivalent course resource outlining example safety‑quality issues (for example, medication administration errors, falls, pressure ulcers, patient identification, inadequate discharge teaching).

[2][3]

1. 1. Select one safety‑quality issue that is relevant to your practice setting or an organisation you know well. You may use de‑identified data or a composite scenario if needed.
   2. Consult professional guidelines and best‑practice resources from organisations such as QSEN, IOM/NAM, WHO, The Joint Commission, or national safety and quality bodies that address your chosen issue.

[5][6]

1. 1. Search recent scholarly literature (last 5–7 years) for evidence‑based strategies that improve safety and reduce costs for the selected issue.

[1][2]

Task Instructions

1. Introduction (approximately 150–200 words)

• • Identify your chosen safety‑quality issue (for example, medication administration errors in an acute medical ward, falls among older inpatients, misidentification in perioperative care).

[4][1]

• Briefly describe the setting and why this issue is a priority for patient safety, quality, and cost containment.
• State the purpose of the paper: to analyse factors contributing to the risk and to outline evidence‑based, nurse‑led strategies to improve safety and reduce costs.

2. Explain Factors Leading to the Patient‑Safety Risk (approximately 400–600 words)

• • Describe the nature and scope of the problem in your setting, drawing on:
    • • local or organisational data where available (for example, incident reports, internal audits, quality dashboards), and
      • published evidence on incidence, harm, and common contributing factors.

    [1][2][4]

  • Analyse key factors that contribute to the risk, such as:
    • • system issues (for example, staffing, workload, interruptions, technology design),
      • process issues (for example, incomplete checks, poor handovers, documentation gaps), and
      • human factors (for example, knowledge deficits, communication problems, fatigue).

    [5][4]

  • Connect these factors to relevant safety and quality frameworks (for example, Swiss cheese model, Just Culture, high‑reliability principles) where appropriate.

[6][5]

3. Explain Evidence‑Based and Best‑Practice Solutions (approximately 400–600 words)

• • Summarise professional guidelines, standards, and key research findings that address your safety issue:
    • • for example, use of barcode medication administration, medication reconciliation, fall‑risk assessments, pressure‑injury prevention bundles, or standardised patient identification protocols.

    [2][4][1]

  • Explain how these solutions improve patient safety and reduce costs (for example, fewer adverse events, shorter length of stay, reduced readmissions, less waste).

[5][1]

• Prioritise 2–3 realistic strategies that could be implemented in your chosen setting, considering resources, culture, and workflow.

4. Explain the Nurse’s Role in Coordinating Care (approximately 300–450 words)

• Describe how nurses at the point of care and in leadership roles can coordinate care to increase patient safety and reduce costs for the chosen issue, for example:
  • • conducting assessments and applying risk tools consistently,
    • using structured communication methods (for example, SBAR) with medical staff and pharmacists,
    • teaching patients and families, and
    • participating in safety huddles and audits.

  [1][2]

• Identify key stakeholders with whom nurses must coordinate to drive safety enhancements, such as:
  • • nurse managers, physicians, pharmacists, allied health, quality and risk teams, health informatics staff, and patient or family representatives.

  [2][1]

• Explain how interprofessional collaboration and clear role expectations support successful implementation of safety initiatives.

5. Conclusion (approximately 150–200 words)

• • Summarise the main factors contributing to the safety‑quality issue and the most important evidence‑based strategies you have identified.
  • Reinforce the central role of nurses and key stakeholders in implementing and sustaining improvements.
  • Briefly foreshadow how this analysis prepares the ground for more detailed planning and evaluation in later assessments.

[2]

6. Formatting and Submission

• • Structure: Use clear headings that align with the instructions above.
  • Style: Academic, concise, and practice‑oriented writing.
  • APA: Use current APA formatting for title page, in‑text citations, and reference list.

[2]

• Submission: Upload the completed paper as a Word document through the LMS by the due date.

Competencies and Scoring Guide Criteria

Competency 1: Analyze the Elements of a Successful Quality Improvement Initiative

• • Criterion: Explain evidence‑based and best‑practice solutions to improve patient safety and reduce costs.
  • High performance: Integrates multiple current, high‑quality sources and professional guidelines, clearly linking recommended strategies to improved outcomes and resource use in the specified setting.

[1][2]

Competency 2: Analyze Factors that Lead to Patient Safety Risks

• • Criterion: Explain factors leading to a specific patient‑safety risk in a health care setting.
  • High performance: Provides a nuanced analysis that connects local data, human factors, system processes, and organisational context to the chosen safety issue.

[4][5]

Competency 4: Explain the Nurse’s Role in Coordinating Care to Enhance Quality and Reduce Costs

• • Criterion 1: Explain how nurses can help coordinate care to increase patient safety and reduce costs.
  • Criterion 2: Identify stakeholders with whom nurses would coordinate to drive safety enhancements with a specific safety‑quality issue.

[1][2]

Competency 5: Apply Professional, Scholarly, Evidence‑Based Strategies to Communicate

• • Criterion: Communicate using writing that is clear, logical, and professional, with correct grammar and spelling, using current APA style.

[2]

Short Sample Content (for SEO and Modelling)

Medication administration errors in acute care continue to threaten patient safety and consume substantial resources through extended hospital stays and avoidable complications. In many organisations, underlying contributors include heavy workloads, frequent interruptions during drug preparation, limited access to clinical decision support, and inconsistent use of independent double‑checks. Evidence points to multimodal interventions such as barcode medication administration, standardised medication reconciliation, and targeted nurse education as effective strategies for reducing error rates and associated costs (NURS‑FPX4020 Assessment 1 sample). When frontline nurses work closely with pharmacists, prescribers, and informatics teams, these changes can be integrated into routine workflows rather than perceived as extra tasks.

 Peer‑Reviewed References

• • Rodríguez‑González, C.G. et al. (2019) ‘Medication administration errors in hospitals: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence’, Drug Safety, 42(9), pp. 1035–1049. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-019-00848-5.

[7]

• • Aljahdali, A. et al. (2022) ‘Effectiveness of multifactorial fall prevention programmes in hospitalised adults: A systematic review and meta‑analysis’, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 31(17–18), pp. 2489–2503. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.16134.

[7]

• • Kim, J., Lee, H. & Park, S. (2025) ‘Evaluating the outcomes of patient safety education for clinical nurses: A scoping review’, BMC Nursing, 24, 118. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-01688-3.

[7]

• • Kristensen, K. et al. (2025) ‘Sustaining perioperative patient safety improvement: the relevance of patient safety policies and contextual factors in European healthcare systems’, International Journal of Quality in Health Care, 37(4), mzaf105. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf105.

[7]

• • Al‑Hashmi, M. et al. (2025) ‘Enhancing healthcare quality and patient safety: exploring the role of organisational culture and leadership’, Journal of Health Organization and Management, 39(8), pp. 1868–1883. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-09-2024-0305.

[5]

_________________________________________________