NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2

You are currently viewing NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2

Addressing underperformance in meeting benchmark metrics is crucial for ensuring high-quality patient care and organizational effectiveness in healthcare settings. NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 policy proposal focuses on improving foot examination practices for diabetic patients at Mercy Medical Center (MMC) to align with national benchmarks and best practices. By outlining clear policy guidelines and engaging stakeholders, MMC aims to enhance patient outcomes, maintain regulatory compliance, and strengthen organizational integrity.

 Need for Policy and Practice Guidelines to Address Benchmark Shortfall           

Creating policy and practice guidelines to address a shortfall in meeting a benchmark metric prescribed by local, state, or federal healthcare policies or laws is imperative for ensuring optimal patient care and organizational effectiveness. At Mercy Medical Center (MMC), the identified underperformance in foot examinations for diabetic patients highlights a critical gap in healthcare delivery. Foot examinations play a pivotal role in detecting early signs of complications in diabetic patients, such as infections and neuropathy, which, if left untreated, can lead to serious health consequences, including amputations (Baig et al., 2022). Failure to meet the prescribed benchmark compromises the quality of patient care and undermines the organization’s commitment to upholding regulatory standards and meeting patient needs.

The effects of benchmark underperformance are multifaceted and far-reaching. Inadequate foot examinations increase the risk of undetected complications, resulting in poorer health outcomes for diabetic patients and potentially higher healthcare costs associated with managing preventable conditions. The organization’s reputation may suffer, decreasing patient trust and engagement. As patients rely on healthcare facilities to meet established standards of care, failure to do so may boost confidence in MMC’s ability to provide quality services (Harry, 2022). Non-compliance with regulatory benchmarks can have legal and financial implications for the organization, including penalties, decreased reimbursement rates, and potential loss of accreditation.

NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 Policy Proposal

Inaction in addressing the underperformance of benchmark metrics poses significant risks to both patients and the organization. Without intervention, MMC may experience a decline in patient satisfaction and loyalty, hindering its ability to attract and retain patients (Liu et al., 2021). Additionally, continued non-compliance with regulatory standards could further deteriorate organizational performance, strained relationships with stakeholders, and diminished community trust. Therefore, developing and implementing policies and practice guidelines to address benchmark underperformance is crucial for safeguarding patient well-being, maintaining organizational integrity, and upholding regulatory compliance (Jay, 2023). In NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 process, engaging stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, administrators, and patient advocacy groups, is essential for garnering support, ensuring alignment with organizational goals, and facilitating the successful implementation of proposed interventions.

The proposed organizational policy and practice guidelines aim to standardize and improve foot examination practices for diabetic patients at Mercy Medical Center (MMC). The policy mandates annual foot examinations for all diabetic patients, aligning with national benchmarks and best practices in diabetic care (Cooksey, 2020). Practice guidelines will outline standardized protocols for conducting thorough foot examinations, including visual inspection, assessment of sensation, and evaluation for signs of infection or injury (Wang et al., 2020). These guidelines will be disseminated to all healthcare professionals involved in diabetic patient care, emphasizing the importance of early detection and prevention of foot complications.

Proposed Organizational Policy and Environmental Factors Analysis

Environmental factors, such as regulatory requirements, resource availability, and organizational culture, may influence the implementation of recommended practice guidelines. Regulatory considerations may include compliance with accreditation standards and reimbursement requirements, which may necessitate adjustments in workflow and documentation practices to ensure adherence to prescribed protocols (Due et al., 2019). Resource constraints, such as staffing levels and equipment availability, may impact the feasibility of conducting regular foot examinations for all diabetic patients. To mitigate these challenges, MMC will allocate resources for staff training, equipment procurement, and workflow enhancements, ensuring that healthcare professionals have the necessary tools and support to adhere to recommended practice guidelines.

Clear cause-and-effect relationships exist between environmental factors and specific recommendations outlined in NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 proposed policy and practice guidelines. For example, regulatory requirements mandating annual foot examinations for diabetic patients directly influence the policy’s inclusion of this practice as a standard of care (Zhao et al., 2023). Similarly, resource constraints may necessitate prioritizing staff training initiatives and allocating financial resources to procure essential equipment for conducting foot examinations (Flaubert et al., 2021). By addressing these environmental factors and aligning practice guidelines with organizational capabilities, MMC can effectively implement the proposed policy, improving the quality of diabetic care and promoting positive patient outcomes.

Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines on Stakeholder Group

To improve targeted benchmark performance in foot examinations for diabetic patients at Mercy Medical Center (MMC), ethical and evidence-based practice guidelines are essential. Comprehensive staff training programs should be implemented to ensure healthcare professionals possess the necessary knowledge and skills to conduct thorough foot examinations (Alshammari et al., 2022). Training should focus on recognizing early signs of complications, proper assessment techniques, and patient education strategies (Carmienke et al., 2021). Evidence suggests that well-trained healthcare professionals are more likely to adhere to best practices, leading to improved patient outcomes and compliance with benchmark metrics.

Standardizing protocols for conducting foot examinations can enhance consistency and reliability across healthcare teams. Protocols should outline the specific steps and assessments during each examination, ensuring that all essential aspects of care are addressed consistently (Dewi & Hinchliffe, 2020). By adhering to standardized protocols, MMC can minimize variations in practice and improve the reliability of foot examination results, thereby enhancing the quality of diabetic care.

 NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 Impact of Ethical

NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 patient education initiatives should be implemented to empower diabetic patients to participate in their care actively. Providing patients with information about the importance of foot examinations, signs of complications, and preventive measures can increase their understanding and engagement in self-care practices (American Diabetes Association, 2020). Evidence suggests that informed and engaged patients are more likely to adhere to recommended treatment regimens and seek timely medical attention when needed, leading to better health outcomes and reduced healthcare utilization.

An honest and accurate assessment of practice changes reveals their precise impact on stakeholders. Improved staff training and standardized protocols may initially require additional resources and time investment for implementation. However, the long-term benefits, such as reduced complications, improved patient satisfaction, and compliance with benchmark metrics, outweigh the initial costs (Ferreira et al., 2023). By prioritizing patient well-being and adhering to ethical principles, MMC demonstrates its commitment to providing high-quality, patient-centered care, enhancing stakeholder trust and confidence.

 Importance of Stakeholder Involvement in Policy and Practice Changes

The involvement of particular stakeholders and groups in further developing and implementing proposed policy and practice guidelines is crucial for several reasons. Engaging healthcare professionals in patient care ensures that the guidelines are practical, feasible, and aligned with clinical realities. Their input can provide valuable insights into workflow processes, resource availability, and potential barriers to implementation, thereby enhancing the relevance and effectiveness of the proposed changes (Sciberras et al., 2020). Moreover, involving frontline staff fosters a sense of ownership and accountability, increasing their commitment to adhering to the guidelines and driving sustainable improvements in practice.

Administrators and organizational leaders are pivotal in allocating resources, establishing priorities, and setting organizational goals. Their support and buy-in are essential for securing the resources needed, implementing structural changes, and fostering a culture of continuous improvement (Albright & Fleischer, 2021). By involving administrators in the development and implementation process, stakeholders can ensure that policy changes align with strategic objectives, budgetary constraints, and regulatory requirements, thereby maximizing the likelihood of successful implementation and sustainability.

 Importance of Stakeholder NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2

Patient advocacy groups represent the voice and perspective of the patient community, advocating for their needs, preferences, and rights. Involving patient advocacy groups in the policy development process ensures that the guidelines are patient-centered, culturally sensitive, and responsive to the diverse needs of the patient population (Ndjaboue et al., 2020). Their input can help identify areas for improvement, address disparities in care delivery, and promote patient empowerment and engagement. By NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 with patient advocacy groups, stakeholders can enhance the relevance, acceptability, and effectiveness of the proposed policy and practice guidelines, ultimately leading to improved quality outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Strategies for Collaborating with Stakeholder Group

To effectively collaborate with stakeholder groups in implementing proposed policy and practice guidelines, it is essential to prioritize communication, engagement, and transparency. Convening regular meetings or focus groups with representatives from each stakeholder group can facilitate open dialogue, information sharing, and collaboration (Nyumba et al., 2022). By actively involving stakeholders in the decision-making process, organizations can solicit feedback, address concerns, and foster a sense of ownership and commitment to the proposed changes (Kujala et al., 2022). Additionally, providing opportunities for stakeholders to contribute their expertise, perspectives, and ideas can enhance the guidelines’ relevance and effectiveness while fostering a culture of inclusivity and collaboration.

Organizations should tailor their communication strategies to each stakeholder group’s specific needs and preferences, ensuring that information is clear, accessible, and culturally sensitive. Utilizing various communication channels, such as emails, newsletters, intranet portals, and in-person meetings, can help reach NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 stakeholders and facilitate ongoing dialogue and engagement (Grossman, 2023). Furthermore, organizations should proactively address potential objections or concerns from stakeholders, demonstrating empathy, understanding, and a willingness to address their needs and priorities. Organizations can build trust, credibility, and support for the proposed policy and practice guidelines by actively listening to stakeholder perspectives and addressing their concerns.


NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 proposed policy and practice guidelines represent a proactive approach to addressing underperformance in meeting benchmark metrics at MMC. By standardizing foot examination practices, enhancing staff training, and engaging stakeholders, MMC is poised to improve patient care, uphold regulatory standards, and foster a culture of continuous quality improvement. Through collaborative efforts, MMC demonstrates its commitment to delivering patient-centered care and achieving excellence in healthcare delivery.


Alshammari, L., O’Halloran, P., McSorley, O., Doherty, J., & Noble, H. (2022). Health education programmes to improve foot self-care knowledge and behaviour among older people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) receiving haemodialysis (A systematic review). Healthcare, 10(6), 1143. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10061143

Baig, M. S., Banu, A., Zehravi, M., Rana, R., Burle, S. S., Khan, S. L., Islam, F., Siddiqui, F. A., Massoud, E. E. S., Rahman, Md. H., & Cavalu, S. (2022). An overview of diabetic foot ulcers and associated problems with special emphasis on treatments with antimicrobials. Life, 12(7), 1054. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12071054

Cooksey, C. (2020). Strategies to improve annual diabetic foot screening compliance at a family clinic. Clinical Diabetes, 38(4), 386–389. https://doi.org/10.2337/cd20-0030

Due, T. D., Thorsen, T., & Kousgaard, M. B. (2019). Understanding accreditation standards in general practice – a qualitative study. BMC(MedBio Central) Family Practice, 20(1), 45–78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-0910-2

Ferreira, D. C., Vieira, I., Pedro, M. I., Caldas, P., & Varela, M. (2023). Patient satisfaction with healthcare services and the techniques used for its assessment: A systematic literature review and a bibliometric analysis. Healthcare, 11(5), 639. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11050639

Flaubert, J. L., Menestrel, S. L., Williams, D. R., & Wakefield, M. K. (2021). NHS FPX6004 Assessment 2 Supporting the health and professional well-being of nurses. In www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. National Academies Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK573902/

Grossman, D. (2023, May 1). 17 communication channels for engaging busy employees. Www.yourthoughtpartner.com. https://www.yourthoughtpartner.com/blog/communication-channels

harry, R. (2022). Mammography services quality assurance: BASELINE STANDARDS FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN (pp. 1–95). https://iris.paho.org/bitstream/handle/10665.2/31402/9789275119266-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Jay. (2023, August 8). Remotedesk | compliance management: A guide to regulations & risk mitigation. Remotedesk. https://remotedesk.com/blog/article/compliance-management-guide-regulations-risk-mitigation

Kujala, J., Sachs, S., Leinonen, H., Heikkinen, A., & Laude, D. (2022). Stakeholder engagement: Past, present, and future. Business & Society, 61(5), 1136–1196. Sagepub. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503211066595

Liu, S., Li, G., Liu, N., & Hongwei, W. (2021). The impact of patient satisfaction on patient loyalty with the mediating effect of patient trust. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing, 58(6), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/00469580211007221

Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2022). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860

Wang, A., Lv, G., Cheng, X., Ma, X., Wang, W., Gui, J., Hu, J., Lu, M., Chu, G., Chen, J., Zhang, H., Jiang, Y., Chen, Y., Yang, W., Jiang, L., Geng, H., Zheng, R., Li, Y., Feng, W., & Johnson, B. (2020). Guidelines on multidisciplinary approaches for the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (2020 edition). Burns & Trauma, 8(3), 25–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkaa017

Zhao, N., Xu, J., Zhou, Q., Hu, J., Luo, W., Li, X., Ye, Y., Han, H., Dai, W., & Chen, Q. (2023). Screening behaviors for diabetic foot risk and their influencing factors among general practitioners: A cross-sectional study in Changsha, china. BMC Primary Care, 24(1), 143–198. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-023-02027-3

Leave a Reply