Running head: QUALITY STANDARDS 1

Healthcare Quality Standards

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation
QUALITY STANDARDS 2

Healthcare Services Quality Standards

Ms. Martinez received safe care. The healthcare system conformed to the principle of

safety by minimizing the risk of harm to patients as well as providers. The system was effective

in responding to health concerns from the patient. The individual healthcare providers performed

well to ensure Ms. Martinez received safe care. The system was designed to assign responsibility

such that all personnel remain accountable. This reduces the prevalence of active and latent

failure, which would result in harm to the patient (Baily, Bottrell, Lynn & Jennings, 2006).

System-wide best practices are also in place to prevent technical and organizational system

failure. For example, the records of previous mammograms were accessible to the patient. The

safety standards in the healthcare system reduced the risk of adverse events such as those related

to exposure to medical care. With appropriate safety measures in place, a patient recovers from

morbidity and is removed from the risk of mortality (Sherwood & Zomorodi, 2014).

Ms. Martinez received effective care. The effective aspect of quality relies on providing

services based on scientific knowledge. It also implies employing evidence-based guidelines in

the provision of care services. The personal physician recommended a mammogram as a regular

check for Ms. Martinez. The results from the mammogram were used in making further

decisions. Ms. Martinez encountered various healthcare, including a surgeon, an oncologist, and

a radiologist. All these professionals employed scientific methods and evidence-based practices

to recommend the best course of action for her. The healthcare personnel used procedures and

tests that had been established as effective for cancer patients in the past. For instance, Ms.

Martinez had abdominal scans before her surgery to identify possible metastasis to her liver or

bones.
QUALITY STANDARDS 3

Ms. Martinez did not receive timely care. After moving to a new location, the process of

selecting a care pan and personal physician was lengthy. After acquiring a primary care

physician, she called to book an appointment. She was informed to wait for two months if she

did not have an emergency. This delay in receiving services placed her at risk of running out of

blood pressure drugs before the appointment. After her physician told her she was due for a

mammogram, she had to wait six more weeks for the procedure. Her physician recommended a

visit to a surgeon after examining the results of the mammogram. The first opportunity to meet

the surgeon was nine weeks later. Furthermore, she tracked down mammograms from a year

earlier. This mammogram indicated an abnormal finding that was not notified to her or her

primary care physician.

Ms. Martinez care was, to some degree, patient-centered care. Her primary care physician

informed her of the situation and allowed her to make crucial decisions. She had a rare form of

cancer where the form of surgery to be administered required a difficult decision. She was

informed on the two types of surgery, namely lumpectomy, and mastectomy, and decided on

mastectomy. This showed that her care providers respected her preferences. However, Ms.

Martinez experienced physical discomfort when she went to receive care. The chairs were

uncomfortable, and the walls drab. Furthermore, she had to wait for hours before being attended.

These are traits of a healthcare system that is non-responsive to a patient’s needs (Ulrich & Kear,

2014).

Ms. Martinez care was not efficient. There were significant forms of wastage during the

delivery process. Her old mammograms were not located in the appropriate location. This

represents information inefficiency. If the mammogram had been used to inform the right

decision a year earlier, it is possible that her cancer would not have advanced the way it had.
QUALITY STANDARDS 4

Furthermore, Ms. Martinez found another lump under her arm. This implies that previously,

resources were not exhausted to find where cancer had spread. The system was also inefficient

by not relying on past medical records. Ms. Martinez was asked to complete a patient history

form, and she had difficulty remembering dates and associating them with significant health

events.

Ms. Martinez received equitable care. She did not encounter personnel who attempted to

vary the quality of care because of personal attributes such as race, gender, or socioeconomic

status. Although she experienced various disappointments in the healthcare system, it is most

likely that system flaws, which affected all persons accessing care from the healthcare system,

caused these setbacks. Ms. Martinez did not cite any form of discrimination being used as a

factor to deny her services. An equitable health care system offers high-quality services to all

people regardless of any differences (Reynolds, 2004).

It is considerably easier to handle cancer in its early stages (Schoenbaum, Audet & Davis,

2003). Ms. Martinez had an insurance plan in her former place of residence. However, her

service providers did not apply the appropriate resources in the early detection of cancer cells.

This came at a great cost to her later. After diagnosis, it was established that cancer had

metastasized and was in the lymphatic system. She had to undergo more demanding procedures,

including surgery and chemotherapy. These procedures had significant impacts on her work,

emotional state, as well as overall health. Appropriate coordination among various parties in the

delivery system would have also improved the likelihood of early detection. Her mammogram

could have been used to detect cancerous growth before it had worsened.
QUALITY STANDARDS 5

References

Baily, M. A., Bottrell, M. M., Lynn, J., & Jennings, B. (2006). Special report: the ethics of using

qi methods to improve health care quality and safety. Hastings Center Report, 36(4), S1-

S40.

Reynolds, D. (2004). Improving care and interactions with racially and ethnically diverse

populations in healthcare organizations. Journal of Healthcare Management, 49(4).

Schoenbaum, S. C., Audet, A. M. J., & Davis, K. (2003). Obtaining greater value from health

care: the roles of the US Government. Health Affairs, 22(6), 183-190.

Sherwood, G., & Zomorodi, M. (2014). A new mindset for quality and safety: The QSEN

competencies redefine nurses’ roles in practice. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 41(1), 15-

22.

Ulrich, B., & Kear, T. (2014). Patient Safety and Patient Safety Culture: Foundations of

Excellent Health Care Delivery. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 41(5).