Teaching Period 1, 2021
PUQ210: Contemporary Health Management
Assignment 2: Case study
Word limit: 3000 (+/- 10%)
Due date: 5pm AEST Friday 9 April 2021 (Exam Week)
After you have read this information, head over to the Assignment 2 Q&A discussion board to ask any questions and see what your peers are saying about this assignment.
In this assignment, you will evaluate relevant literature to inform the critical analysis of strategic management practices, organisational behaviour and factors in the implementation of change management of a given health case study.
This assignment supports unit learning outcomes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
A common and contemporary issue for health service managers are the constant changes due to the development of technology. This is seen in device, prosthesis, software and pharmaceutical products which can be expensive, disrupt current practices and lead to other flow on changes and costs.
In the contemporary health care environment there is often pressure on managers from clinicians wishing to have access to the most 'up-to-date' technology, from providers to equip sites with their version of this technology, and from insurers who are concerned at the rising costs associated with this technology. However, it is often the case that the evidence supporting the new technology is sparse, inconclusive, funded by those with vested interests, or lacking in cost-effectiveness analyses.
In this assignment you will review options and make a recommendation on improving patient care through technology by presenting a business case. This mirrors what will be expected of you as a manager/policy/planner in healthcare in the real world.
You are a senior manager in a private hospital setting, with specialist rooms attached. Your CEO has asked you to review available software for an Electronic Medical Record (EMR) package – specific to your organisation for the specialist rooms. Your hospital is a small regional one, with involvement from local stakeholders including the Visiting Medical Officers (VMO’s), some of whom are on your Board. Some of your VMO’s have preferences and may have financial interests in EMR packages.
With costs for both the technology and support for any EMR package and annual licensing costs post that time, cost is an issue, but getting the right version for your facility is also of prime importance. You have been asked to present a business case reviewing the key factors in acquiring any software to your board.
Your business case
You are required to develop a business case to use as a decision guide. Your business case should include the following (this is not an exclusive list):
1. Your investigation/findings:
Evidence that you have reviewed the issues clinically and from a procurement point of view particular to the technology (there will be a Collaborate session that will clarify this expectation).
The identification and rating of the risks and benefits in introducing any new technology of this type.
Clinical factors to review in the technology: safety, efficacy and suitability in your environment.
Financial impacts: costs, value for money, and funding.
Identify governance mechanisms to assist in any future implementation within the business case.
2. Your recommendations: Within the business case and supported by your investigations above, make a recommendation to your manager, based on the business case and risk assessment, on the technology itself.
3. Your change management plan: Include a brief change management process that you would use to introduce the new technology including identification and communication to the stakeholders.
As stated, this is not an exhaustive list, and it is up to you to decide what extra information might be needed based on your findings. You will find a number of different business case templates in the 'Supporting resources' section. It is up to you to select and modify the template you think is most relevant to your findings. You are also welcome to use a template not listed on this page, if it's relevant (e.g. you might have a business case template that is currently used in your workplace that you'd like to use).
The following resources will help you structure your business case and reference correctly:
PUQ210 Assignment 2 tips (PPT 2.4 MB) .
Business case templates:
Managing organisational change Queensland Health (PDF 102 KB). See the business case example at the end of the document).
Business case template (DOC 56 KB).
Business case template safety and quality (PDF 102 KB).
EPLC business case template (DOC 153 KB).
VAP business case (DOC 169 KB).
QUT cite|write: APA (https://www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/cite/qutcite.jsp#apa) .
The following readings might be a good starting point for your research into the case study topic:
Going digital: a checklist in preparing for hospital-wide electronic medical record implementation and digital transformation (https://qut.rl.talis.com/link?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fgateway.library.qut.edu.au%2Flogin%3Fqurl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%2 (Scott et al., 2018, pp. 302–313).
Are electronic medical records helpful for care coordination? Experiences of physician practices (https://qut.rl.talis.com/link?
009-1195-2&sig=f9d3cdb646e9839f66a2a6cb980796efd3881576a950dbc1ff1c17b571502061) (O'Malley et al., 2010, pp. 177–185).
Usability and safety in electronic medical records interface design: A review of recent literature and guideline formulation (https://rl.talis.com/3/qut/items/b6a28e7be8cb-4ed5-81aa-1513d18d2433.html?lang=en-US&login=1) (Zahabi et al., 2015, pp. 805– 834).
O’Malley, A., Grossman, J., Cohen, G., Kemper, N., & Pham, H. (2010). Are Electronic Medical Records Helpful for Care Coordination? Experiences of Physician Practices. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 25(3), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1195-2 Scott, I., Sullivan, C., & Staib, A. (2018). Going digital: a checklist in preparing for hospitalwide electronic medical record implementation and digital transformation. Australian Health
Review, 43(3), 302–313. https://doi.org/10.1071/AH17153
Zahabi, M., Kaber, D., & Swangnetr, M. (2015). Usability and Safety in Electronic Medical Records Interface Design: A Review of Recent Literature and Guideline Formulation. Human Factors: The Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(5), 805–834. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815576827
1. Demonstrated understanding of the regulatory, contemporary, risks, benefits, clinical factors, operational financial, governances and HR issues involved in introducing this new technology in healthcare and the ability to apply robust discussion.
2. Recommendation made to management in concise, clear and evaluative terminology, utilising and presenting pertinent options, information and outcomes.
3. Inclusion of a brief change management process that you would use to introduce and commence operations with the new technology including communication to the stakeholders.
4. A recommendation of any policies, procedures and training processes to occur to implement the recommendation or prepare for other decision-making.
5. Organisation, structure and written presentation: clear, logical and evident structure for the organisation and presentation of the information in the paper. Demonstrates acceptable standards of written work.
6. Use of literature: Quality of and use of supporting literature and references.
The marking guide outlines the criteria against which you will be assessed.
Your work will be assessed using the following marking guide:
Assignment 2 marking guide
Assignment 2 marking guide
Demonstrated understanding of the regulatory, contemporary,
risks, benefits, clinical factors, operational, financial,
governances and HR issues involved in introducing this new technology in health care, and the ability to apply robust discussion.
(36%) Evidence of a thorough analysis of factors involved
in the introduction of new health technology in the quoted environment. Informed and
evidenced and articulately and convincingly discussed. Use of frameworks
and mechanisms of review in risks and benefits. Evidence of a good
all factors involved in the introduction of new health technology in the quoted environment. Informed and supported by literature and generally discussed. Use of frame works of use in risks and benefits. Evidence of a sound understanding of most of the factors involved
in the introduction of this new health technology in healthcare, informed by the
literature. A discussion from the literature in risks and benefits. Evidence of a satisfactory understanding of some of the factors involved
in the introduction of this new health technology in healthcare, informed by the literature. Limited understanding or consideration of the factors involved in the introduction of new health technology in healthcare. Has not demonstrated understanding or consideration of the factors involved in the introduction of new health technology in healthcare.
Recommendation made to management in concise, clear and evaluative terminology, utilising and presenting pertinent options, information and outcomes.
(16%) Detailed recommendation that underscores
and critical analysis of the benefits and risks (with acts in mitigation of the latter) on this new technology. Key arguments supported with examples from relevant case studies and supported by the literature. Clear recommendation supported by a description and evaluation of the benefits and risks associated with introducing new technology
evident in a wellconsidered response with support from the literature. Many of the key issues from the
are identified in
recommendation to management and evidence is given to support opinions provided. Some of the key issues are
identified in the
recommendation to management. Some factors in the consideration
are used in the recommendation and evidence is given to support opinions provided. Incomplete/limited recommendation to management. Incomplete description of benefits and risks and other factors associated with introducing new technology with limited reference evidence in support. No/inadequate recommendation to management. No/inadequate description of benefits and risks or other factors associated with introducing new technology.
Inclusion of a brief change management
process that you would use to introduce and commence
operations with the new technology including communication to the stakeholders.
(16%) All key terms, findings and
concepts in change
are clearly defined and explained with support from theoretical change models. Communication is addressed
within a change management
which identifies all stakeholder groups. All key terms, findings and concepts are defined and
explained in a change
support from change management methodologies. Key terms, findings and concepts are clearly defined and explained to in respect to
most aspects of change management and communication. Some key
and concepts in change
are defined and explained in a
general change manage discussion. Key terms, findings and concepts are poorly defined and explained regarding both change and communication. No /limited evidence of communication of key terms, findings and concepts regarding change, communication
Organisation, structure and written presentation:
clear, logical and evident structure for the organisation and presentation of the information in the paper.
Demonstrates acceptable standards of written work.
(16%) The paper is well-organised with a logical, clear, evident structure and progression of ideas/argument.
Carefully edited with no errors.
Accurate referencing. Appropriate length. The paper is appropriately organised with a logical structure.
Carefully edited with few errors.
Accurate referencing and appropriate length. The paper shows evidence of acceptable organisation and structure.
Well-edited but with some errors that may hinder readability.
Appropriate referencing and length. The paper has a satisfactory structure with mostly logical presentation.
Satisfactory editing, but with a few errors that may hinder readability.
Appropriate referencing and length. The paper is poorly organised and lacks clear structure. Errors that hinder readability. Referencing incomplete or inappropriate. Length too long or too short. The paper is disorganised with no clear structure. Multiple errors hinder readability. Referencing incomplete and/or inappropriate. Length – too long or too short.
Use of literature: Quality of and use of supporting literature and references.
(16%) Excellent use of a wide variety of academically appropriate literature.
References used in an integrated manner that substantiates the assertions. Very good use of academically appropriate literature.
appropriately to support assertions. Good use of
literature to support discussion and assertions. Adequate use of
literature to support discussion and assertions. Limited use of
literature to support discussion and assertions. Poor or no use of literature to support discussion and assertions.
Assessment declaration and statement of authorship
In submitting this work I confirm that:
It is my responsibility to check that I have submitted the correct assignment file before the due date.
I am aware that any submission after the due date is considered to be late and is subject to the Late Assessment Policy. (See Syllabus for further details.)
This work represents my individual effort and does not contain plagiarised material. I am aware that the University rule that a student must maintain academic integrity as stated and explained in Academic integrity (http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/C/C_05_03.jsp)
I am aware that my assignment may be stored in the Turnitin reference database, becoming part of the bank of material that assignments will be checked against in the future.
This assignment will be submitted through Canvas. When you are ready to submit your assignment, select the 'Submit Assignment' button at the top of this page. You will be taken to the 'File Upload' tab where you can choose your file or submit your URL.
If your assignment has multiple files, select 'Add Another File' for each subsequent file before ticking the 'Agree' checkbox and 'Submit Assignment'.
Please note: When you submit your assignment through Canvas, you are also submitting the assignment through Turnitin, which is a text-matching service that compares your work with an international database of information sources. You will need to agree to using it.
Don't forget that in addition to your OLAs who provide discipline-specific content advice, you can access the 24/7 draft writing service from Studiosity.
If you need assistance with academic feedback on a draft of your assignment, see Assignment support: Studiosity.