System Selection Processes, Term Paper Example

Abstract

Health Information Technology has emerged as a very useful intervention in twenty-first century health care services delivery. To date there are numerous HIT systems operating in hospitals across the country to meet specific needs in health care management.

Introduction

This document presents a scenario whereby HIT intervention is needed in a complicated management situation to tract admissions and discharges hourly; send out notices to auxiliarystaff in preparation of admissions and data collection mechanisms to control administrative cost of care.

Selection of 3 vendors

The very first step in the vendor selection process of any health information technology implementation in a health care facility is assessment of needs. From the foregoing scenario there seems to be chaotic management in trying to manually operate a system, which obviously can be efficiently executed by applying an electronic health record system.Vendors required to provide improvement management in this organization would be ones that are efficient in planning electronic systems (National Learning Consortium, 2012).

This means a technician who can plan based on assessment of needs.The next important person is a vendor who has the expertise for implementing the process through training and education. Thirdly the other expert is a vendor who can service and evaluate how the HIT system functions within the organization. It makes no sense having a system, which cannot be operated by employees and dysfunctions frequently.

Essentially, the priority needs lay in monitoring admissions and discharges on an hourly basis. This vendor is expected to design a system  that will facilitate this process. Also there is a problem with billing. As such, an efficient billing component must be installed within the system. Next in the chaos line of activities is coordination of staff functioning as cleaners.  Thirdly, this process must be done to reduce cost in the organization. Therefore, while allocation and billing schedules are be engraved within the system, these three vendors must be aware of  the requirement of reducing costs in the systemic process.

There could be an alternative pattern in the vendor selection typology suggested above. It is by selecting a vendor to install a system for billing; another for coordinating staffing activities and another to look at reducing costs. However, the writer is convinced that with specializations in planning; implementation and evaluation the HIT system can function more efficirntly, rather than when vendors are recruited in isolation.

Contemporary specialists in the vendorselection HIT industry strongly suggest that it would be beneficial to design and issue a Request for Information (RFI); compare vendor profiles; narrow the desired expertise; allow vendors to demonstrate their expertise and create EHR objectives to guide the selection process(National Learning Consortium, 2012).

Further vendor selection criteria relates to gathering data from vendors regarding softwarepreferences. This would encompass standards and certification of the expert as well as software. Also, adherence to standardizations within the health care HIT protocol is an important criterion. It includes health related and non-health related standards. An assessment of current customers and how they interact with the vendor is taken into consideration too prior to selection (National Learning Consortium, 2012).

Demonstrate interaction among HIT, vendors and the intervention process

The three vendors selected from my paradigm of improving Health Information Technology services in the organization embody anEHR planner; EHR interventionists and an EHR evaluation service technician. Ford (2012) and his counterparts conducted studies assessing

HIT vendor selection strategies as it relates to factor productivity to say that despite utilizingthe best strategies discrepancies can occur during intervention phase of the process (Ford et.al, 2012)

They contended that higher levels in technological change experienced by hospitals using the best HIT vendor selection strategies may show initial improvement. However, in the long term they may prove ineffective (Ford et.al, 2012). Therefore, coordination of activities by these three vendors is of utmost importance to my organization.

Precisely, after the selection process is completed the three experts will meet to first assess the situation based on concerns expressed by administration. The panning expert will suggest changes, which ought to be validated by the intervention expert. These two technicians must work together for efficiency. At the same time the service  evaluator will offer his expertise regarding durability and maintenance of software selected to manage the HIT system for tracking admissions and discharges as well as duties allocation processing. This begins the first phase.

The second phase relates to implementing the systems. Prior and during this process the planner will initiate/organize staff training; EHR interventionists will conduct demonstrations concerning use of the equipment and service evaluator will teach on equipment maintenance. Thirdly, the final phase will be solely the responsibility of service maintenance management, which will conduct monthlyevaluations and report to the planner and interventionist for upgrading when necessary.

With further reference to Ford ‘s (2012) contention from their findings, it was revealed that interventionbenefits ofwere not immediately apparent because they could not have identified any significant improvement in technological efficiency nor productivity. This meant that it did not reduce costs. They suggest, however, that maybe vendor selection strategies may need to be modified to effect more valuable outcomes (Ford et.al, 2012)

Conclusion

In the foregoing document offered perspectives concerning HIT vendor selection strategies. There vendors were selected to address admissions and discharges monitoring; staffcoordinationand financial analysis at reducing operation costs.

References

Ford, W. Huerta, R. Menachemi, N. Thompson, M., & Yu, F. (2012).Health information technology vendor selection strategies and total factor productivity.Health Care Manage Rev.

National Learning Consortium.(2012). Contracting Guidelines and Checklist for Electronic

Health Record (EHR) Vendor Selection.  Health Information Technology Research. I