MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure

Informatics Infrastructure

Vila Health recently evaluated the IT infrastructures (MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure) of two newly acquired hospitals, Valley City Regional Hospital and Delaware County Hospital. The objective of the infrastructure evaluation was to ensure that they were sufficient to fulfill the organization’s strategic goals. Vila Health did not share the strategy goals, thus an assumption must be formed about what the expectations are. The following executive assessment will look at the analytical methodologies and approaches used to assess health informatics systems. In addition to informatics nurses from St. Anthony Medical Center and Independence Medical Center, important stakeholders from each hospital were interviewed for the assessment MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure.a

Analytical Tools for Evaluating Health Information Systems

Integrated health information systems can enhance healthcare service delivery by organizing, collecting, processing, and exchanging electronic information inside the organization’s environment (SHAHMORADI & HABIBI-KOOLAEE, 2020). System integration is performed by connecting certain hardware, software, and networks.

Patient portals, local area networks (LAN), wide area networks (WAN), and wireless networks are examples of such systems. A well-implemented integrated health system (MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure) can be more efficient by reducing the time required to gather important information and make it available to healthcare professionals, reducing errors in the clinical setting, providing support to healthcare professionals, improving information management, and improving patient access to healthcare (Popescu et al., 2022).

However, if the systems are not used properly, they can cause system challenges and have a detrimental impact on healthcare companies. Meeting the increased demand for safe, cost-effective, and high-quality healthcare is a significant challenge for healthcare institutions. To satisfy these expectations, it is necessary to continuously evaluate and enhance current information systems, not only deploy them (Popescu et al., 2022).

Vila Health is concerned about the IT infrastructure at each of the newly purchased hospitals and will need to use specialized analytical techniques to assess the organization’s health information systems. Evaluation techniques can be sophisticated, single or mixed, and involve several factors (Odendaal et al., 2020). Vila Health should use analytical methods to analyze system performance, system design, organizational performance, and process analysis.

Analytics provides tools and strategies for extracting information from complicated and large amounts of data and converting it into information to aid healthcare decision-making (Batko & Ślęzak, 2022). This will enable Vila Health to see all important parts of the system and how they impact the organization. Other factors that can affect an evaluation are the context of the evaluation, the method of evaluation, the different users/stakeholders, and the purpose of the evaluation, as well as the investment in evidence-based assessment (Batko & Ślęzak, 2022).

Strategic planning, hospital dashboards, health system reporting, balanced scorecards, regulatory compliance checks, audit reviews, quality assurance reports, and database analysis are all examples of assessment tools (MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure). Vila Health’s most effective instrument would be a balanced scorecard. A balanced scorecard allows you to see an organization from four different viewpoints by creating standards and collecting and evaluating data based on those views (AHRQ, n.d). Balanced scorecards have several benefits, including concentrating strategy, allowing health organizations to choose the best approach to achieve any given objective, and matching the goal with the organization’s strategic vision.

 The inclusion of HIM indicators in a hospital-balanced scorecard would help leaders and managers stay focused and informed about their department’s success, as well as encourage evidence-based management (Nippak, P., Veracion, J.I., Ikeda-Douglas, C.J., and Isaac, W.W., 2016). A big teaching hospital in Canada has developed a balanced scorecard for its health information management (HIM) department to match with all other departments (Nippak et al., 2019). The decision to use a balanced scorecard stemmed from the organization’s three-year business vision to achieve excellence in the delivery of patient-centered care. 

The balanced scorecard assessment tool comprised ten questions generated and incorporated from Barnardo and Jivanni’s 2009 formative evaluation (17) (Nippak et al., 2019). The poll was divided into four sections, including questions on demographics, the usability of the scorecard as a management tool, and respondents’ thoughts on the scorecard’s advantages. The review of the HIM balanced scorecard revealed that HIM managers, staff, and analysts thought it was both a helpful performance-reporting tool and a valuable management tool (Nippak et al., 2019). 

As effective as evaluation tools are, if they are not used appropriately, the evaluation will not function properly and will eventually fail. Approaches to evaluation are frequently deemed positivist and based on assumptions. If a company believes this, then project goals, outcomes, and formal feedback may be clearly stated, with distinct aims. The first difficulty with these assumptions is that there are often several competing aims.

As a result, no single set of goals can be used as a stable reference point for comparison (von Rechenberg et al., 2019). Furthermore, goals are not fixed and can alter with time and organizational demands. Third, the causal relationship between process and outcome is frequently disrupted by several intervening factors, rendering it untrustworthy (von Rechenberg et al., 2019).

Furthermore, goals are not fixed and can alter with time and organizational demands. Third, the causal relationship between process and outcome is frequently disrupted by several intervening factors, rendering it untrustworthy. Any evaluation involves various factors, including training, permissions, interoperability, local regulations and standards, patient care, and so on. Furthermore, crucial elements of program performance may not be defined in outcome terminology and hence cannot be measured (von Rechenberg et al., 2019). Finally, learning based on objectives increases the risk of failure to achieve the desired results. Companies must be well-versed in what has to be done for a good review.

Strategic Plan to Achieve Hospital Goals

Strategic planning is a comprehensive long-term strategy that establishes an organization’s direction and how resources are allocated to achieve goals over time (Martins, 2024). Implementing information system strategies can provide healthcare businesses with a competitive edge and help them survive in the marketplace. Given market constraints and customer requirements, firms cannot rely only on a business strategy plan.

Organizations must also have information systems strategic plans that are in line with their goal, vision, and business strategy plan. Organizations cannot rely solely on the technological or commercial components of strategic strategies. The proper technique to get a strategic advantage from information systems/technology is to concentrate or rethink business processes by examining present challenges, studying changing environments, and using information technology as a solution (Dr Mohsin Altaf, 2020).

Many businesses have used formulation frameworks to evaluate information systems strategy planning. One of the most commonly used frameworks is the Ward and Preppard model combined with the IT Balanced Scorecard. IT BSC offers executive management a complete framework in which the IS/IT vision and strategy are fitted to the organization’s vision, purpose, and strategy (Awan Setiawan, & Erwin Yulianto, 2020). Unlike typical balanced scorecards, the IT balanced scorecard emphasizes company contribution, user orientation, operational excellence, and future orientation.

The formulation framework process, based on the Ward and Preppard Model, is divided into three stages: input, output, and evaluation (Merit Biyanti & Yalina, 2021). The input phases involve external and internal organizational and information system analyses using a PEST or SWOT model. Output phases include both organizational information system strategies and information system management methods. Finally, the evaluation phases make use of the balancing scorecard IT, which incorporates organizational viewpoint, user orientation, operational excellence, and future orientation.

Aside from information system implementation, implementing information system strategic planning has various benefits. First, the deployment of information systems will be consistent with previously established corporate plans and objectives (Bourdeau et al., 2019). This allows the firm to connect the established systems across departments or merge them with newly acquired health companies. Additionally, information system strategic planning may help firms prevent present or future difficulties. Planning and thinking forward will assist companies in obtaining resources, and capabilities, and better serving the community (Bourdeau et al., 2019).

Ethical and Legal Considerations

The need to secure personal health information has grown since patients may now quickly access health information via mobile devices, EHRs, telemedicine, and personal health devices. With the increased use of health information technology, enterprises are responsible for ensuring that all healthcare data adheres to current ethical and regulatory requirements. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009 are the most well-recognized legislative requirements. A quality payment scheme (QPP) was also implemented by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA). Under MACRA, the Medicare EHR Incentive Program, also known as meaningful use, was transformed into one of MIPS’ four components. 

Conclusion – MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure

Assessing and integrating the IT infrastructures of Valley City Regional Hospital and Delaware County Hospital is critical for Vila Health to achieve its strategic objectives. Strong analytical methodology and strategic planning tools, such as the balanced scorecard, may help improve system performance and organizational efficiency. By aligning information systems with corporate objectives and adhering to ethical and legal standards, Vila Health can ensure that these hospitals are successfully integrated into its network, thereby enhancing healthcare delivery and patient outcomes.

Related Assessment:
MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 2 Effective Leadership and Communication


MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Awan Setiawan, & Erwin Yulianto. (2020, July). IJET Abstract.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Batko, K., & Ślęzak, A. (2022). The Use of Big Data Analytics in Healthcare. Journal of Big Data, 9(1). ncbi.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Bourdeau, S., Hadaya, P., & Lussier, J.-E. (2019). Assessing the Strategic Alignment of Information Systems Projects: A Design Science Approach. Projectics / Proyéctica / Projectique, n°20(2), 115.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Dr Mohsin Altaf. (2020). (PDF) Strategic Information System: A source of Competitive Advantage. ResearchGate.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Martins, J. (2024). Strategic Planning Process, Tips, and Benefits • Asana. Asana.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Merit Biyanti, P., & Yalina, N. (2021). Information System Strategic Planning using Ward and Peppard Method at Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Ampel Surabaya. Information System Strategic Planning Using Ward and Preppard.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Nippak, P. M., Veracion, J. I., Muia, M., Ikeda-Douglas, C. J., & Isaac, W. W. (2019). Designing and evaluating a balanced scorecard for a health information management department in a Canadian urban non-teaching hospital. Health Informatics Journal, 22(2), 120–139.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Odendaal, W., Atkins, S., & Lewin, S. (2020). Multiple and mixed methods in formative evaluation: Is more better? Reflections from a South African study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16(1).

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: Popescu, C., Chaarani, H. E., Abiad, Z. E., & Gigauri, I. (2022). Implementation of health information systems to improve patient identification. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(22), 15236.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: SHAHMORADI, L., & HABIBI-KOOLAEE, M. (2020). Integration of Health Information Systems to Promote Health. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 45(8), 1096–1097.

MHA FPX 5068 Assessment 3 Informatics Infrastructure: von Rechenberg, T., Gutt, D., & Kundisch, D. (2019). Goals as Reference Points: Empirical Evidence from a Virtual Reward System. Decision Analysis, 13(2), 153–171.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please Fill The Following to Resume Reading

    Please Enter Active Contact Information For OTP

    Verification is necessary to avoid bots.
    Please Fill The Following to Resume Reading

      Please Enter Active Contact Information For OTP

      Verification is necessary to avoid bots.
      Scroll to Top
      × How can I help you?