NURS4035: Improving Quality of Care and Patient Safety
Assessment 2: Root-Cause Analysis and Safety Improvement Plan
School of Nursing and Health Sciences Department: NURS4035: Improving Quality of Care and Patient Safety Assessment Overview In this assessment, you will conduct a root-cause analysis (RCA) of a sentinel event in a healthcare setting, drawing on evidence-based strategies to develop a comprehensive safety improvement plan. This assignment aligns with the BSN program’s emphasis on quality improvement and patient-centered care, preparing you to apply systems thinking to real-world nursing challenges.
Learning Objectives By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your ability to:
- Analyze sentinel events using structured RCA methodologies to identify root causes and contributing factors.
- Apply evidence-based best practices to mitigate safety risks and enhance interdisciplinary collaboration.
- Develop actionable safety improvement plans with clear goals, timelines, and resource considerations.
- Evaluate organizational resources and policies to support sustainable patient safety initiatives.
Instructions Select a sentinel event scenario from the provided case studies (e.g., medication error leading to adverse reaction, patient fall with injury, or communication breakdown during handoff). Use the template below to organize your analysis. Your submission should be 4-6 pages (excluding references), double-spaced, in APA 7th edition format. Include at least three peer-reviewed sources from 2019-2025 to support your evidence-based strategies.
Grading Rubric
| Criterion | Description | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Understanding What Happened (Sections 1-12) | Thorough description of the event sequence, factors, and deviations; clear identification of involved parties and communication breakdowns. | 30 |
| Root Cause(s) Identification | Explicitly states 1-3 root causes with categorization (e.g., human factors, environment); supported by analysis. | 20 |
| Application of Evidence-Based Strategies | Identifies 2-3 strategies from literature; explains application with specific data/examples tied to the event. | 20 |
| Safety Improvement Plan | Lists actions for each root cause (E/C/A); describes processes/policies, goals, outcomes, and timeline (e.g., 3-6 months for implementation). | 15 |
| Existing Organizational Resources | Identifies 2-4 resources (existing or needed); discusses leverage for plan success. | 10 |
| Scholarship and APA Formatting | Clear writing, logical flow, APA citations (3+ sources); no errors in grammar/mechanics. | 5 |
| Total | 100 |
Submission Guidelines
- Submit via the course portal by [insert due date, e.g., Week 6].
- Use the template below as your primary structure; expand with narrative where needed.
- Plagiarism check required; consult Capella’s academic integrity policy.
Root-Cause Analysis and Safety Improvement Plan Template
Completed by: (Student Name) Organization: School of Nursing and Health Sciences, Capella University Department: NURS4035: Improving Quality of Care and Patient Safety Reported to: (Instructor Name) Date Completed: (Date)
This template aids in organizing the steps of a root-cause analysis (RCA). Not all questions will apply to every case, but consider them fully to identify root causes and reduce risks. A sentinel event is an unexpected patient safety incident not due to the patient’s underlying condition, aiming to foster learning, system improvements, and harm prevention.
Understanding What Happened
- What happened? Describe the sequence of events leading to the sentinel event, including timeline, involved parties, and context.
- Who did the problem/event affect, and how?
- Why did it happen?
- Human Factors: Communication breakdowns, staff fatigue, or training gaps?
- System Factors: Workflow issues, equipment failures, or environmental elements?
- Organizational Culture: Safety culture deficits or leadership gaps?
- Society/Culture: Cultural biases or assumptions?
- Was there a deviation from protocols or standards?
- Procedures and Policies: Were protocols followed, or were deviations noted?
- Were any steps omitted or unintended?
- Documentation: Review records, notes, and logs for inconsistencies.
- Who was involved?
- Staff: Roles of direct participants.
- Supervisors and Managers: Oversight contributions.
- Was there a breakdown in communication?
- Interdisciplinary Communication: Team coordination effectiveness?
- Patient-Provider Communication: Patient education and understanding?
- What were the contributing factors?
- Physical Environment: Layout, equipment access, or workspace design?
- Staffing Levels: Adequacy of personnel?
- Training and Competency: Staff knowledge and skills assessment?
- Did organizational policies or procedures play a role?
- Policy Compliance: Adherence levels?
- Policy Clarity: Accessibility and understandability?
- Was there a failure in monitoring or surveillance?
- Vital Signs Monitoring: Missed indicators?
- Alarm Fatigue: Overlooked alerts?
- What can be learned to prevent recurrence?
- Lessons Learned: Systemic changes or training opportunities?
- Quality Improvement: Preventive measures?
- How can patient safety be enhanced?
- Risk Mitigation: Risk-reduction strategies?
- Education and Training: Staff development needs?
- Reporting and Feedback: Promoting error disclosure?
Root Cause(s) to the Issue or Sentinel Event
State 1-3 root causes explicitly, referencing the analysis above. Categorize each (select all that apply):
| Root Cause – Basic Reason | Contributing Factors – Additional Influences | HF-C (Human Factor-Communication) | HF-T (Human Factor-Training) | HF-F/S (Human Factor-Fatigue/Scheduling) | E (Environment/Equipment) | R (Rules/Policies/Procedures) | B (Barriers) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 2. | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 3. | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
Application of Evidence-Based Strategies
Identify 2-3 evidence-based best practices to address the safety issue (e.g., SBAR for communication).
- Describe literature findings on contributing factors (e.g., “Studies show interruptions during medication administration increase errors by 20-30% [cite source]”).
- Explain application to your identified event (e.g., “Implementing checklists could reduce alarm fatigue by standardizing responses”).
Safety Improvement Plan
List future actions to prevent recurrence, one per root cause/contributing factor.
| Action Plan | E/C/A (Eliminate/Control/Accept) |
|---|---|
| 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. |
- E = Eliminate (e.g., replace faulty equipment).
- C = Control (e.g., add safeguards or retrain staff).
- A = Accept (e.g., informal reminders; use sparingly).
Describe new processes/policies or professional development to address root causes. Provide goals/outcomes (e.g., “Reduce similar events by 50%”) and timeline (e.g., “Develop in 1 month; implement in 3 months”).
Existing Organizational Resources
Identify resources needed or leverageable (e.g., existing simulation labs for training, EHR upgrades). Discuss how they support the plan (e.g., “Utilize interprofessional committees for policy review”).
References [To be completed by student; see suggested references below for guidance.]
Peer-Reviewed References
These references align with root-cause analysis, sentinel events, and patient safety in nursing contexts, sourced from reputable databases like PubMed, Google Scholar, and journals (2019-2025).
Peer, G. F., Marco, L. A., & Hempel, S. (2020). How much of root cause analysis translates into improved patient safety: A systematic review. Medical Principles and Practice, 29(6), 524–531. https://doi.org/10.1159/000508677
Ricci-Cabello, I., Pons-Vigués, M., Berenguera, A., Pujol-Ribera, E., Slight, S. P., & Bellón, J. A. (2022). Root cause analysis using the prevention and recovery information system for monitoring and analysis tool on a patient safety ward-round: A pilot study. Journal of Patient Safety, 18(4), e590–e595. https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000950
Mitchell, N. (2023). Understanding the root cause analysis process to increase safety event reporting. AORN Journal, 117(6), 647–654. https://doi.org/10.1002/aorn.13935
Albutt, A. K., O’Hara, J., Glidewell, L., Thomson, R. G., Foy, R., & Walshe, K. (2024). Root causes behind patient safety incidents in the emergency department: A retrospective observational study. BMC Emergency Medicine, 24(1), 180. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-024-01120-9
🇦🇺 Writing for Australian Universities
- AGLC4 (law), APA 7th, Harvard (Business), Vancouver (Health Sciences)
- Grading: HD (85-100%), D (75-84%), C (65-74%), P (50-64%)
- UniMelb, UNSW, ANU, Monash, UQ, UWA standards covered
- Australia uses British English spelling conventions
- Turnitin is widely used — all work is checked before delivery
Australia Pricing Guide
How It Works — 3 Simple Steps
Fill In Your Order Form
Provide your topic, academic level, deadline, referencing style, and any specific instructions or rubric criteria.
Get Matched with a Writer
We assign the best-qualified expert in your subject, familiar with Australia university requirements.
Receive & Review
Download your plagiarism-free paper, review it, and request any free revisions within 14 days if needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is this service plagiarism-free?
Yes. Every paper is written from scratch by a human expert to your specific instructions. We run all papers through professional plagiarism detection software and can include a Turnitin-equivalent report on request.
Do your writers know Australia academic standards?
Yes. Our writers are familiar with Australia's university systems, citation styles, and marking conventions. You'll get a paper that meets your institution's exact expectations.
What citation styles do you support for Australia?
We support all major citation styles required by Australia universities, including APA 7th, Harvard, Chicago/Turabian, MLA, OSCOLA, Vancouver, and IEEE.
Can you write just one chapter of my dissertation?
Yes. We write individual dissertation chapters — literature reviews, methodology, data analysis, introductions, conclusions — or the full manuscript from proposal to defence-ready submission.