Analysis and Review of the Decisions made in the Simulation of the Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care (LHAC)

Analysis and Review of the Decisions made in the Simulation of the Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care (LHAC) Introduction Organizations in the society exist in an environment that requires comparison with other similar organizations for improvement purposes. Depending on the objectives of an organization, performance benchmarking has proved to be an effective way of ensuring that they maintain a competitive advantage in the industry.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Analysis and Review of the Decisions made in the Simulation of the Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care (LHAC) specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The health sector is not an exception. Through simulation, performance benchmarking is done to ensure that health organizations maintain quality service, the safety of the patients, staff and other people in the sector while fulfilling the standards of the regulators. The health sector is faced with various issues that require to be addressed. The online simulation process in the health sector is crucial in the trai ning of personnel, making their decision making process easier and ensuring the safety of the patients while making use of innovations in this case. This paper addresses the decisions made in the online simulation of Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care. Summary of the Simulation The simulation carried out on Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care was to address the increases in the nosocomial infections. These infections are a threat to the hospital due to its role in ensuring the safety of the patients and other personnel and people involved in the process (Jarvis, 2008). The increases proved to be unsustainable from a liability perspective since the personnel and other resources were concentrating more on them yet they originated from the hospital practices. The costs involved in their treatment and management proved to be inefficient. The infections also proved unsustainable from a quality perspective since LHAC was questioned on its quality maintenance and assurance in the process. Thi s was done through performance benchmarking to identify the root causes of the problem, the establishment of airway recommendations and identification of process improvement strategies. The simulation identified the root causes as the equipment practices that were rather inefficient in the hospital and offered recommendations based on effective sanitation and the incorporation of the functional strategy to the business strategy. Analysis of the Decisions Made in the Simulation This section addresses the decisions made from the simulation classified as the root cause, the airway recommendations established, the benchmarking partnership and the process improvement strategies.Advertising Looking for research paper on health medicine? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Identification of the root cause The Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care (LHAC) has experienced increases in the rates of nosocomial infections. Nosocomial in fections as Jarvis (2008) assert comes as a result of transmission of an infectious disease which could be contagious or caused by a pathogenic organism. The types of these nosocomial infections range from surgical related infections, central nervous system infections, skin infections, blood stream infections, gastrointestinal infections, urinary tract infections, and respiratory infections which all are facilitated by the conditions and practices at the hospital facilities (Health Grades Inc, 2010). The process of addressing nosocomial infections is critical due to the diagnosis that is sensitive and the fact that some of them turn out to be drug resistant. The identification of the root cause of the infections was the most prudent way of addressing the issue to avoid recurrences and reduce costs in management. The simulation on Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care (LHAC) identified the root cause of the nosocomial infections increase as the equipment practices in the hospital that we re inefficient. This cause was motivated by the exposures to diseases and environmental pollutants in the hospital (Health Grades Inc, 2010). The inefficient use of facilities was related to lack of homogeneity in the use of equipment in the various departments, sharing of the equipments among departments, poor sanitation of the equipment, the fact that the equipment was not enough while personal responsibility and proper use of the equipment was limited. The infections thus spread even as the number of patients in the departments increased. The infections were further encouraged by lack of coordination of equipment use. For example, two or more different departments could be using the same equipment in their diagnosis of conditions, which could lead to the easier transmission between patients due to exposure to contaminants. The hospital also lacked tracking systems to monitor the use and care of equipment (Thornton, De Rosa Craven, 2002). In addressing the root cause of the probl em of nosocomial infections, personally, I could include more monitoring systems and checks of the environmental pollutants and training process of personnel to be able to identify whether their lack of experience with the equipment caused them to be unable to use them or whether it was out of negligence and ignorance and provide the necessary recommendations accordingly. Establishment of Airway The identification of the root cause of the nosocomial infections being inefficient handling of equipment at Lenity Hospital, there was a need to offer recommendations that would seek to ensure proper management of the equipment and an environment of safety and caution.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Analysis and Review of the Decisions made in the Simulation of the Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care (LHAC) specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The recommendations offered were on the basis of the risks they posed through contamination to patients, staff and visitors at the hospital. They were also based on the regulations requirements for health safety in the health sector as a way of improving the health care and quality health (Moller Sonntag, 1998). The recommendations offered include the effective training of personnel on the use of the equipment and increasing their awareness of the nosocomial infections (Lack, 1996). This recommendation is necessary since the equipment in the health care facilities do require knowledge in the use and maintenance. The skills on the use of the equipment would make the personnel aware of their contributions in nosocomial infections and provide ways of minimizing them. Another recommendation was the use of a tracking system. This system would serve to ensure the sanitation of the equipment. The sanitation would be necessary to ensure safety through avoidance of sharing of equipment that poses a high risk of infection (Cohen, 2006). Additionally, the system would require accountability of inventory. It is also recommendable that Lenity hospital ensures the availability of equipment and distribution through out the departments and also ensures reliability where the equipment would be available when needed to avoid the use of other equipment that would increase the risk of infection. Further, the equipment that is very risky would require being disposable to avoid contamination through reuse due to the sensitivity of the equipment (Moller Sonntag, 1998). For example the equipment dealing with the injections blood and so on. The outcome of the recommendation was impressive. Lenity management set up a tracking system for the sanitation of the equipment. They additionally, instituted inventory controls with the employment of inventory clerks. The clerks have the mandate of ensuring that the inventory bought meets the safety requirements and minimizes the risk of infections as much as possible. They also have the responsibility of ensuring that the equipment is supplied in the hospital in due time and track the stock levels to ensure that the equipment is bought in time. The hospital management also sought on reducing infection through the use of disposable equipment and the maintenance of a sterilizing department to oversee the safety after the cleaning of equipment before reuse.Advertising Looking for research paper on health medicine? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In doing of the simulation for another time, I could have followed the steps and measures I took in this current one since it was conclusive and the recommendations proved feasible and would not only ensure safety and reduce nosocomial infections, but would also improve the reputation of LHAC and reduce the costs of operation (Zulch Rinn, 1999). Benchmarking Partner The benchmarking partner chosen for this simulation was the information services department of the Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care. This was based on the reason that this was part of the LHAC and so would provide internal information regarding the safety. Additionally, the department would offer statistics to base the simulation on and provide the resources of the best practice in the sector (Cohen, 2006). The department proved reliable in providing the information needed on the safety levels, use of the equipment, data on nosocomial infections as well as the comparisons with the industry since LHAC covers a great sha re of market in the health sector. In doing the simulation again, I would incorporate the safety department to assess the levels of safety and comparisons with the safety expectations of the health sector. Process Improvement Strategies The functional strategy was chosen to be incorporated in the overall business strategy since the strategy is feasible and applicable in the reference area of ensuring the management of equipment. This strategy emphasizes resource productivity and uses specialized work force (Thornton et al., 2002). This is recommendable to ensure that the use of equipments at Lenity Hospital is by specialized people to avoid misuse and increase the sensitivity to safety. It was observed that there is need to incorporate the functional strategy to the overall business strategy (Jarillo, 1993). This would be by emphasizing the need for safety and proper management of equipment in every department and the endeavor to reduce the nosocomial infections from a departmental basis. Summary and Conclusion The simulation carried out on Lenity Hospital for Advanced Care revealed the root cause of the increasing nosocomial infections as the inefficient equipment practices. This scenario is common not to LHAC only, but in major health care facilities. The inefficient equipment practices are attributable to the strategies of safety and management, lack of awareness in the use of the equipment or lack of personal responsibility. The simulation recognized the need to address the nosocomial infections as a way of reducing the costs involved in the treatment and management, the improvement of the reputation of LHAC and the fulfillment of the industry safety and legal requirements. The recommendations provided were the establishment of a tracking system, effective training of personnel and the increase in sanitation practices. The benchmark partner used for the simulation was the information services department of Lenity Hospital while the functional strategy was emphasized with the need to ensure that the overall business strategy acts as the guide in this. The simulation was effectively done without the need for major changes in the approach although the benchmark partner would further incorporate the safety department of Lenity Hospital. Reference List Cohen, S. (2006). Virtual Decisions. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publications. Health Grades Inc. (2010). Nosocomial Infections. Web. Jarillo, C. (1993). Strategic Networks: Creating Borderless Organizations. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Jarvis, W. (2008). Bennett Brachmans Hospital Infections. London: A C Black Publishers Limited. Lack, R. (1996). Essentials of Health and Safety Management. New York: CRC Press. Moller, J., Sonntag, H. (1998). Systematic analysis and controlling of health care organizations lead to numerical health care improvements. Health Manpower Management, 24(5), 178-182. Thornton, D., De Rosa, F., Craven, D. (2002). Nosocomial pneumonia: emerging con cepts in diagnosis, management, and prophylaxis. Current Opinion in Critical Care, 8(5), 421-429. Zulch, G., Rinn, A. (1999). Simulation based performance analysis and benchmarking. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 1(2), 200-218.

Nietzsches The Use And Abuse Of History

Nietzsches The Use And Abuse Of History Between 1873 and 1876 Nietzsche published four â€Å"Untimely Meditations.†Ã‚   The second of these is the essay often referred to as â€Å"The Use and Abuse of History for Life.† (1874)   A more accurate translation of the title, though, is â€Å"On the Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life.† The Meaning of History and Life The two key terms in the title, â€Å"history† and â€Å"life† are used in a very broad way.   By â€Å"history,† Nietzsche mainly means historical knowledge of previous cultures (e.g. Greece, Rome, the Renaissance), which includes knowledge of past philosophy, literature, art, music, and so on.   But he also has in mind scholarship in general, including a commitment to strict principles of scholarly or scientific methods, and also a general historical self-awareness which continually places one’s own time and culture in relation to others that have come before. The term â€Å"life† is not clearly defined anywhere in the essay.   In one place Nietzsche describes it as â€Å"a dark driving insatiably self-desiring power,† but that doesn’t tell us much.   What he seems to have in mind most of the time, when he speaks of â€Å"life,† is something like a deep, rich, creative engagement with the world one is living in.   Here, as in all his writings, the creation of an impressive culture is of prime importance to Nietzsche.   What Nietzsche Is Opposing In the early 19th century, Hegel (1770-1831) had constructed a philosophy of history which saw the history of civilization as both the expansion of human freedom and the development of greater self-consciousness regarding the nature and meaning of history.   Hegel’s own philosophy represents the highest stage yet achieved in humanity’s self-understanding.   After Hegel, it was generally accepted that a knowledge of the past is a good thing.   In fact, the nineteenth century prided itself on being more historically informed than any previous age.   Nietzsche, however, as he loves to do, calls this widespread belief into question.   He identifies 3 approaches to history: the monumental, the antiquarian, and the critical.   Each can be used in a good way, but each has its dangers. Monumental History Monumental history focuses on examples of human greatness, individuals who â€Å"magnify the concept of man†¦.giving it a more beautiful content.†Ã‚   Nietzsche doesn’t name names, but he presumably means people like Moses, Jesus, Pericles, Socrates, Caesar, Leonardo, Goethe, Beethoven, and Napoleon.   One thing that all great individuals have in common is a cavalier willingness to risk their life and material well-being.     Such individuals can inspire us to reach for greatness ourselves.   They are an antidote to world-weariness.   But monumental history carries certain dangers.   When we view these past figures as inspirational, we may distort history by overlooking the unique circumstances that gave rise to them.   It is quite likely that no such figure could arise again since those circumstances will never occur again.   Another danger lies in the way some people treat the great achievements of the past (e.g. Greek tragedy, Renaissance painting) as canonical.   They are viewed as providing a paradigm that contemporary art should not challenge or deviate from.   When used in this way, monumental history can block the path to new and original cultural achievements. Antiquarian History Antiquarian history refers to the scholarly immersion in some past period or past culture.   This is the approach to history especially typical of academics.   It can be valuable when it helps to enhance our sense of cultural identity.   E.g. When contemporary poets acquire a deep understanding of the poetic tradition to which they belong, this enriches their own work.   They experience â€Å"the contentment of a tree with its roots.† But this approach also has potential drawbacks.   Too much immersion in the past easily leads to an undiscriminating fascination with and reverence for anything that is old, regardless of whether it is genuinely admirable or interesting.   Antiquarian history easily degenerates into mere scholarliness, where the purpose of doing history has long been forgotten.   And the reverence for the past it encourages can inhibit originality.   The cultural products of the past are seen as so wonderful that we can simply rest content with them and not try to create anything new. Critical History Critical history is almost the opposite of antiquarian history.   Instead of revering the past, one rejects it as part of the process of creating something new.   E.g. Original artistic movements are often very critical of the styles they replace (the way Romantic poets rejected the artificial diction of 18th-century poets).   The danger here, though, is that we will be unfair to the past.   In particular, we will fail to see how those very elements in past cultures that we despise were necessary; that they were among the elements that gave birth to us.   The Problems Caused by Too Much Historical Knowledge In Nietzsche’s view, his culture (and he would probably say ours too) has become bloated with too much knowledge.   And this explosion of knowledge is not serving â€Å"life†Ã¢â‚¬â€œthat is, it is not leading to a richer, more vibrant, contemporary culture.   On the contrary. Scholars obsess over methodology and sophisticated analysis.   In doing so, they lose sight of the real purpose of their work.   Always, what matters most isn’t whether their methodology is sound, but whether what they are doing serves to enrich contemporary life and culture. Very often, instead of trying to be creative and original, educated people simply immerse themselves in relatively dry scholarly activity.   The result is that instead of having a living culture, we have merely a knowledge of culture.   Instead of really experiencing things, we take up a detached, scholarly attitude to them.   One might think here, for instance, of the difference between being transported by a painting or a musical composition, and noticing how it reflects certain influences from previous artists or composers. Halfway through the essay, Nietzsche identifies five specific disadvantages of having too much historical knowledge.   The rest of the essay is mainly an elaboration on these points.   The five drawbacks are: It creates too much of a contrast between what’s going on people’s minds and the way they live.   E.g. philosophers who immerse themselves in Stoicism no longer live like Stoics; they just live like everyone else.   The philosophy is purely theoretical. Not something to be lived.It makes us think we are more just than previous ages.   We tend to look back on previous periods as inferior to us in various ways, especially, perhaps, in the area of morality.   Modern historians pride themselves on their objectivity.   But the best kind of history isn’t the kind that is scrupulously objective in a dry scholarly sense.   The best historians work like artists to bring a previous age to life.It disrupts the instincts and hinders mature development.   In supporting this idea, Nietzsche especially complains at the way modern scholars cram themselves too quickly with too much knowledge.   The result is that they lose profundity.   Extreme specialization, a nother feature of modern scholarship, leads them away from wisdom, which requires a broader view of things. It makes us think of ourselves as inferior imitators of our predecessorsIt leads to irony and to cynicism. In explaining points 4 and 5, Nietzsche embarks on a sustained critique of Hegelianism.   The essay concludes with him expressing a hope in â€Å"youth†, by which he seems to mean those who have not yet been deformed by too much education. In the Background – Richard Wagner Nietzsche does not mention in this essay his friend at the time, the composer Richard Wagner.   But in drawing the contrast between those who merely know about culture and those who are creatively engaged with culture, he almost certainly had Wagner in mind as an exemplar of the latter type.   Nietzsche was working as a professor at the time at the University of Basle in Switzerland.  Ã‚   Basle represented historical scholarship.   Whenever he could, he would take the train to Lucerne to visit Wagner, who at the time was composing his four-opera Ring Cycle.   Wagner’s house at Tribschen represented life.   For Wagner, the creative genius who was also a man of action, fully engaged in the world, and working hard to regenerate German culture through his operas, exemplified how one could use the past (Greek tragedy, Nordic legends, Romantic classical music) in a healthy way to create something new.