Running head: PYXIS MEDICATION DISPENSING SYSTEM 1 PYXIS MEDICATION DISPENSING SYSTEM 4 Pyxis Medication Dispensing System (PMDS) PMDS Adoption Over the last few decades, the world has witnessed a tremendous growth in technology that is being applied across all sectors of the economy to aid its daily operations. Notably, one of the most significant healthcare technologies adopted by most healthcare providers is the Pyxis Medication Dispensing System (PMDS). PMDS is a “sophisticated automated medication dispensing system that uses technology to help healthcare practitioners to store medications, dispense them, and also track the medication records” (Mackert et al., 2016). PMDS is fitted with an enhanced technology comprising of a bar-code scan that helps clinicians to get the right medication for a particular patient. Medical practitioners and nurses can also use this system to ensure they issue the right dosage to a patient while at the same evading errors that may occur when prescribing drugs to the patient. This inbuilt scanner also helps to ensure that the right medications are put into the cabinet during the process of restocking. The system has also the capability of warning the users from taking more than the prescribed drugs in order to avoid waste (Tsao et al., 2014). Advantages The adoption of Pyxis Medication Dispensing System can be advantageous to both the patients and the healthcare providers. First, it helps to enhance and improve the efficiency during the process of dispensing drugs since the system offers a single and central point of drug dispensation. This is because it reduces the manual way of counting medication to ensure that they are in their right doses hence saving labor and time (de-Carvalho, Alvim-Borges & Toscano, 2017). Secondly, the system helps to ensure that the patient safety is enhanced. By using the inbuilt scanner, the clinician can ensure that right medication is issued to the patient in the appropriate dosage. Thirdly, the system can be used to minimize the costs linked to carrying out the inventory process manually since the PMDS helps the organization to order the pharmaceuticals according to the current demand and supply (de-Carvalho, Alvim-Borges & Toscano, 2017). Disadvantages Despite the advantages associated with the adoption of Pyxis Medication Dispensing System by any healthcare facility, the system has got a number of shortcomings. The first disadvantage is costs linked to the installation and maintenance of the system is very high. Secondly, is the security and system failure can lead to the administration of wrong medication –something that can be dangerous to patients or end users (de-Carvalho, Alvim-Borges & Toscano, 2017). Legal and Ethical Issues There are several legal and ethical issues linked to the adoption and utilization of PMDS to dispense drugs in the hospitals. One of the most significant legal and ethical issues is the confidentiality and privacy of the patient data captu.

1. Running head: PYXIS MEDICATION DISPENSING SYSTEM
1
PYXIS MEDICATION DISPENSING SYSTEM 4
Pyxis Medication Dispensing System (PMDS)
PMDS Adoption
Over the last few decades, the world has witnessed a
tremendous growth in technology that is being applied across all
sectors of the economy to aid its daily operations. Notably, one
of the most significant healthcare technologies adopted by most
healthcare providers is the Pyxis Medication Dispensing System
(PMDS). PMDS is a “sophisticated automated medication
dispensing system that uses technology to help healthcare
practitioners to store medications, dispense them, and also track
the medication records” (Mackert et al., 2016). PMDS is fitted
with an enhanced technology comprising of a bar-code scan that
helps clinicians to get the right medication for a particular
patient. Medical practitioners and nurses can also use this
system to ensure they issue the right dosage to a patient while at
the same evading errors that may occur when prescribing drugs
to the patient. This inbuilt scanner also helps to ensure that the
right medications are put into the cabinet during the process of
restocking. The system has also the capability of warning the
users from taking more than the prescribed drugs in order to
avoid waste (Tsao et al., 2014).
Advantages
The adoption of Pyxis Medication Dispensing System can be
advantageous to both the patients and the healthcare providers.
First, it helps to enhance and improve the efficiency during the
process of dispensing drugs since the system offers a single and
central point of drug dispensation. This is because it reduces the
manual way of counting medication to ensure that they are in
their right doses hence saving labor and time (de-Carvalho,

2. Alvim-Borges & Toscano, 2017). Secondly, the system helps to
ensure that the patient safety is enhanced. By using the inbuilt
scanner, the clinician can ensure that right medication is issued
to the patient in the appropriate dosage. Thirdly, the system can
be used to minimize the costs linked to carrying out the
inventory process manually since the PMDS helps the
organization to order the pharmaceuticals according to the
current demand and supply (de-Carvalho, Alvim-Borges &
Toscano, 2017).
Disadvantages
Despite the advantages associated with the adoption of Pyxis
Medication Dispensing System by any healthcare facility, the
system has got a number of shortcomings. The first
disadvantage is costs linked to the installation and maintenance
of the system is very high. Secondly, is the security and system
failure can lead to the administration of wrong medication –
something that can be dangerous to patients or end users (de-
Carvalho, Alvim-Borges & Toscano, 2017).
Legal and Ethical Issues
There are several legal and ethical issues linked to the adoption
and utilization of PMDS to dispense drugs in the hospitals. One
of the most significant legal and ethical issues is the
confidentiality and privacy of the patient data captured and
stored within the system. Moreover, autonomy is another issue
since unauthorized people like researchers and other non-
healthcare people can access patient’s private data. In such
cases, the patient can sue the healthcare provider for leaking
such confidential data, which should remain private (Anyanwu
& Egwim, 2016). Hence, under all circumstances, healthcare
providers should strive as much as possible to ensure that
patient’s data captured and stored within the system does not
get into the wrong hands. Moreover, the clinicians and systems
administrators should strive to ensure that medical errors
associated with system failure are minimized. If that is not
taken care of, errors may lead to the administration of unsafe
medication, which can also lead to adverse effects on the

3. patient, this can be a very serious ethical issue to the healthcare
professionals.
References
Anyanwu, C., & Egwim, O. (2016). The prevalence and
determinants of controlled substance discrepancies in a Level I
trauma hospital. American health & drug benefits, 9(3), 128.
de-Carvalho, D., Alvim-Borges, J. L., & Toscano, C. M. (2017).
Impact assessment of an automated drug-dispensing system in a
tertiary hospital. Clinics, 72(10), 629-636.
Mackert, M., Mabry-Flynn, A., Champlin, S., Donovan, E. E., &
Pounders, K. (2016). Health literacy and health information
technology adoption: the potential for a new digital divide.
Journal of medical Internet research, 18(10), e264.
Tsao, N. W., Lo, C., Babich, M., Shah, K., & Bansback, N. J.
(2014). Decentralized automated dispensing devices: systematic
review of clinical and economic impacts in hospitals. The
Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy, 67(2), 138.
Phase 2: Review the literature (individual assessment)
For this phase, you will complete a systematic literature review
as an exploratoryresearch technique. The systematic literature
review is your first assignment and will besubmitted
individually.
Systematic literature review
1500 words (30%)
Individual submission

4. The main purpose of the literature review is to determine what
has already been written about your topic. Reviewing the
literature is an important part of the research process. If we are
to research a topic systematically, we need to build upon what
others have already learned. We need to know the current state
of knowledge, critically engage with the literature and identify
gaps in knowledge in order shed light on the management
dilemma being faced by the client.
You will use this assignment to help you to design your
research project and to analyse and interpret your data later in
the trimester. If you are unsure of what you should be focusing
on regarding the research agenda, you should read through the
information in the previous sections again. You have been given
a consultancy brief, and you should use this to direct your
engagement with the literature.
A systematic literature review is a particular style of a literature
review. The systematic review process, as the name suggests, is
methodical in nature, with the reviewer following a prescribed
set of steps to search the literature and identify relevant
material for review. These steps are made explicit in the write-
up of the review. Due to limitations regarding time and scope,
for this assessment, the systematic review process has been
simplified.
Learning activities designed to address the purpose and
importance of the literature review should be referred to when
completing this section of the project. A marking guide for the
systematic review is also available on LMS and in this
document.
It is crucial that your search process is systematic and
replicable and that your review includes all the elements
specified in these instructions.
The steps that you need to complete are outlined below.

5. 1. Read an example systematic review
Read the following publication for an example of a systematic
literature review. Pay particular attention to how the sections
which outline the approach followed (pp. 135-7) and the themes
found in the literature (pp. 140-4) are written. Remember that
your systematic review will be a simplified and much shortened
version of a complete review such as this.
Riebe, L. Girardi, A. and Whitsed, C. (2017). “Teaching
Teamwork in Australian University Business Disciplines:
Evidence from a Systematic Literature Review.” Issues in
EducationalResearch. 27(1): 134-150.
2. Review learning materials relating to literature reviews
Read, watch and complete any readings, videos or learning
activities that have been provided to help you to complete your
systematic literature review.
3. Generate search terms
Develop a list of search terms (including different combinations
of words) to use when completing your systematic search for
literature. Make sure to keep a record of the searches you
complete once you begin looking for literature to include.
Remember that this process needs to be systematic and
replicable.
4. Begin searching for articles
Begin to search for literature using your search terms and the
following inclusion andexclusion criteria below. Download all
articles which seem relevant and store these in afolder on your
computer (refer to the flowchart on page 137 of the Riebe et al.

6. (2017) articlefor an example of the literature selection process).
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
a) Limit your search to the database ProQuest.
b) Limit your search to articles published between 2017 and
2018. If you cannot find relevant literature within this
timeframe, you should expand your search backwards by one
year at a time.
c) Articles must be empirical, peer-reviewed and written in
English.
5. Screen articles
Scan the articles titles and abstracts and discard those articles
you deem irrelevant or unsuitable for your review.
6. Read and assess articles for suitability
Read the remaining articles and exclude any additional articles
that you find to be irrelevant or unsuitable for your review.
Your final review should include at least ten articles in total.
7. Prepare a summary table
Take extensive notes and prepare a summary table of the
articles you have decided to include. See Table 1 on page 138 of
Riebe et al. (2017) as an example. In addition to the categories
included by Riebe et al. (2017), include columns for
results/findings, argument and any other information you think
will be useful. Information in the summary table should be
paraphrased wherever possible, with any direct quotes indicated
with quotation marks and page numbers.
Note that this step will take time, so make sure to get started as

7. soon as possible. If done well, a good summary table and notes
will be invaluable when you are writing up your review, and
later in the teaching period when you are analysing your data
and writing the final report.
8. Write your systematic review
You are now ready to write up your systematic literature
review. Use your summary table to help you to write up a
critical analysis of the articles you have chosen.
Your literature review must contain the following:
Introduction: A succinct introduction which includes your
project aim, objectives andresearch questions and outlines the
purpose and focus of the review.
Description of search process: A clear description of the search
process used to conductyour systematic review. Your search
process should be clear and replicable. If appropriate, use
diagrams to illustrate your search process.
Critical analysis of the literature: This section should be
organised by themes (see Riebeet al. 2017 to see how this
should be written). This should make up most of your word
count. Do not discuss each article individually (this is not an
annotated bibliography) but rather synthesise the literature by
comparing and contrasting the different articles, critically
assessing their content, interpreting meaning and implications
and drawing conclusions. A literature review is more than just
description.
Implications and Conclusion: A succinct conclusion which
identifies gaps in the literature.

8. A reference list: Include full bibliographic detail of the articles
you have included in yourreview. This is not included in your
word count.
A summary table: This is not included in your word count.
See Appendix F Marking Guide for Systematic Literature
Review for the marking criteria for the systematic literature
review.
Resources to assist you in completing your systematic literature
review
Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. and Schindler, P. (2014). “Literature
Review.” In BusinessResearch Methods. 4thed. 88-119. London:
McGraw-Hill Education.
Creswell, J. (2014). “Review of Literature.” In Research
Design. 4th ed. 25-50. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Jackson, P. (2015).
“Reviewing the Literature.” In Management and Business
Research. 5thed. 13-44. Thousand Oaks: SagePublications.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Jackson, P. (2015).
“Writing up the Literature Review.” In Management and
Business Research. 5th ed. 305-308.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Meriam Library (2010). Evaluating Information–Applying the
CRAAP Test. Chico:
California State University.
Appendix F - Marking Guide for Systematic Literature Review

9. 80-100
70-79 Very
50-59
Excellent
60-69 Good (C)
Acceptable (P)
49 Fail (N)
good (D)
(HD)

10. Outstanding
Evidence of
Evidence of
Incomplete and
Fails to identify
evidence of
very careful
some systematic
not systematic,
appropriate
systematic
reviewing, most

11. reviewing,
but adequate to
literature, little or
review process,
steps fulfilled,
possibly
identify useful
no evidence of
all steps fulfilled,
clearly
incomplete but
and appropriate
systematic
clearly replicable
replicable
using
literature.
approach,
Technical
process,
process,
appropriate
incomplete

12. evidence of
evidence of
approaches.
review.
approach to
multiple searches
multiple
systematic
across the
searches across

13. review
databases
databases,
specified,
good selection

14. excellent search
of search terms
terms with
and search
thoughtful search
combinations.

15. term
combinations.
Literature well
Literature well
Some attempt to
Limited
Literature not

16. synthesised.
synthesised.
synthesise
synthesis of the
synthesised.
Excellent level of
Evidence of
literature.
literature.
Little or no
critical evaluation
good analysis
Some evidence
Literature is
evidence of
and critical
of critical
developed and

17. presented
having read
evaluation of
evaluation of the
Synthesis and
justified own
uncritically, in a
papers cited
literature.
literature.
ideas, drawing
purely
completely.

18. evaluation of
Some evidence
from the literature
descriptive way.
literature

19. of developing
to make
Limited
own ideas and
conclusions.
understanding

20. drawing from
is evident.
the literature to

21. make
conclusions.

22. Evidence of
Evidence of
Evidence of a
Evidence of
Lacks evidence
comprehensive
very good level
good level of
limited
of knowledge
and detailed
of
factual and
knowledge of
relevant to the
Level of
understanding of
understanding
conceptual
the topic. Some
topic and
topic presented
of the topic and
knowledge and
use of

23. significantly
understanding
with depth and
an awareness of
use of
appropriate
misuses
rigour.
a variety of
appropriate
terminology.
terminology.

24. ideas and
terminology.
perspectives.
Fluent and
Language is
Language is
Meaning
Persistent writing
sophisticated
fluent.
mainly fluent.
apparent, but
problems. Needs

25. writing style
Grammar and
May have
language not
significant
appropriate to
spelling errors
occasional
always fluent.
proofreading.
Written
document.
are minimal. The
grammar or
Makes some
Frequent
expression
Writing concise
author often
spelling errors.
spelling or
ungrammatical
and direct.
presents ideas in
grammatical

26. Although some
sentences,
Grammar and
clear,
errors, but
parts of the
spelling errors,
spelling errors
lucid fashion,
writing readable.

27. review are clear
rare or absent.
making
and

28. The author
difficult ideas
persuasive,
Needs better
or convoluted
presents ideas in
accessible and
some may be
proofreading.
writing. Over
an accessible
explaining
hard to follow or
Over relies on
relies on
way with a sense
concepts and
convoluted.
quotation.
quotation.
of reader's need
arguments

29. for variety,
effectively.
examples, and
explanation.
Polished and
Very good
Good
Shows some
Shows no

30. imaginative
presentation.
presentation.
attempt at
attempt to
presentation.
Minor errors in
Some errors in
presentation, but
present
Clear, logical &
consistency or
consistency and
generally poor
appropriately.
formatting.
formatting.
presentation.
Significant
engaging

31. Clear, logical
Shows
Shows some
errors and
structure
structure
organisation
attempt to
inconsistencies
throughout the
throughout the
and coherence.
organise
in presentation.
review, with

32. review that is
Introduction and
logically.
Disorganised
effective
effectively
conclusion used
Review does
and incoherent.
introduction &
initiated in the

33. effectively,
have basic
Movement
Presentation and
conclusion.
introduction and
including
sense of logic,
between topics is
structure
Clever or
drawn to a
signalling the
but may have
random.
effective use of
conclusion.
primary contents
problem with
Significant
structure, such
Effective use of
of review, but

34. cohesion or
material is off
as cumulative
paragraphs,
may be overly
organization.
topic or
points, creative
sentence
plodding.
Introduction and
irrelevant.
structure and
development, or
conclusion not
Paragraphs
overall outline.

35. other effective
used effectively
poorly structured.
writing strategy.
or well
Strong, intriguing
organized.
introduction.

36. Author embeds
Author embeds
Quoted material
Quoted material
Quoted
quotations well
quotations well in
advances the
generally
material not
in his or her
his or her own
discussion and
appropriate
integrated or
own prose,
prose, integrating
author leads
although may be
poorly

37. effectively
concepts into the
into and out of
some lack of
integrated into
fit with
integrating
review. Cited
quoted material
review. Quotes
Integration of
discussion.
concepts. Cited
concepts are well
effectively.
do not say
cited material

38. concepts used
understood and
Author uses
Quoted material
what author
effectively and
used correctly.
concepts or
not well
suggests.
integrated into
creatively.
ideas correctly
Material not
the surrounding

39. from sources.
embedded or
text.
depended upon
too heavily.

40. Referencing
Referencing
Referencing
References
Little or no
consistently
mostly accurate
mostly accurate
meet minimal
referencing.
accurate.
but some minor
but some minor
standards,
Errors or
In-text citations
errors in
errors in
include
oversights in
& Reference List

41. consistency or
consistency or
complete
citations and
complete &
formatting. In-
formatting. In-
information,
Reference List.
appropriate.
text citations &
text citations &
and Reference
Incomplete
Author
Reference List
Reference List
List is complete.
reference
efficiently
complete &
complete &
Author includes
information. Use
Referencing
integrates
appropriate.

42. appropriate.
too much
of inappropriate
acknowledging
Author
Author
information in
sources.
efficiently
efficiently
paraphrase.
sources with
integrates
integrates
paraphrased as

43. acknowledging
acknowledging
well as quoted
sources with
the sources of
material.
paraphrased as
material.

44. well as quoted
material.
BBS301: Systematic literature review marking guide

45. 80-100 Excellent (HD) 70-79 Very good (D) 60-69 Good (C)
50-59 Acceptable (P) 49 Fail (N)
Technical approach to
systematic review
Outstanding evidence of
systematic review process,
all steps fulfilled, clearly
replicable process, evidence
of multiple searches across
the databases specified,
excellent search terms with
thoughtful search term
combinations.
Evidence of very careful
reviewing, most steps
fulfilled, clearly replicable
process, evidence of
multiple searches across
databases, good selection of
search terms and search
combinations.
Evidence of some
systematic reviewing,
possibly incomplete but
using appropriate
approaches.
Incomplete and not
systematic, but adequate
to identify useful and
appropriate literature.

46. Fails to identify
appropriate literature, little
or no evidence of systematic
approach, incomplete
review.
Synthesis and evaluation
of literature
Literature well synthesised.
Excellent level of critical
evaluation developed and
justified own ideas, drawing
from the literature to make
conclusions.
Literature well
synthesised.
Evidence of good analysis
and critical evaluation of
literature.
Some evidence of
developing own ideas and
drawing from the literature
to make conclusions.
Some attempt to
synthesise literature.
Some evidence of critical
evaluation of the
literature.
Limited synthesis of the
literature.
Literature is presented
uncritically, in a purely

47. descriptive way. Limited
understanding is evident.
Literature not synthesised.
Little or no evidence of
having read papers cited
completely.
Level of understanding
Evidence of comprehensive
and detailed understanding
of topic presented with
depth and rigour.
Evidence of very good level
of understanding of the
topic and an awareness of a
variety of ideas and
perspectives.
Evidence of a good level of
factual and conceptual
knowledge and use of
appropriate terminology.
Evidence of limited
knowledge of the topic.
Some use of appropriate
terminology.
Lacks evidence of
knowledge relevant to the
topic and significantly
misuses terminology.

48. Written expression
Fluent and sophisticated
writing style appropriate to
document.
Writing concise and direct.
Grammar and spelling
errors rare or absent.
The author presents ideas in
an accessible way with a
sense of reader's need for
variety, examples, and
explanation.
Language is fluent.
Grammar and spelling
errors are minimal.
The author often presents
ideas in clear, lucid fashion,
making difficult ideas
accessible and explaining
concepts and arguments
effectively.
Language is mainly fluent.
May have occasional
grammar or spelling
errors.
Although some parts of the
review are clear and
persuasive, some may be
hard to follow or
convoluted.
Meaning apparent, but
language not always

49. fluent. Makes some
spelling or grammatical
errors, but writing
readable. Needs better
proofreading.
Over relies on quotation.
Persistent writing
problems.
Needs significant
proofreading.
Frequent ungrammatical
sentences, spelling errors,
or convoluted writing.
Over relies on quotation.
Presentation and
structure
Polished and imaginative
presentation.
Clear, logical & engaging
structure throughout the
review, with effective
introduction & conclusion.
Clever or effective use of
structure, such as
Very good presentation.
Minor errors in consistency
or formatting.
Clear, logical structure
throughout the review that
is effectively initiated in
the introduction and drawn
to a conclusion.

50. Good presentation. Some
errors in consistency and
formatting.
Shows organisation and
coherence.
Introduction and
conclusion used effectively,
including signalling the
Shows some attempt at
presentation, but
generally poor
presentation.
Shows some attempt to
organise logically.
Review does have basic
sense of logic, but may
Shows no attempt to
present appropriately.
Significant errors and
inconsistencies in
presentation.
Disorganised and
incoherent.
cumulative points, creative
development, or other
effective writing strategy.
Strong, intriguing
introduction.
Effective use of paragraphs,

51. sentence structure and
overall outline.
primary contents of review,
but may be overly
plodding.
have problem with
cohesion or organization.
Introduction and
conclusion not used
effectively or well
organized.
Movement between topics
is random.
Significant material is off
topic or irrelevant.
Paragraphs poorly
structured.
Integration of cited
material
Author embeds quotations
well in his or her own prose,
effectively integrating
concepts.
Cited concepts used
effectively and creatively.
Author embeds quotations
well in his or her own
prose, integrating concepts

52. into the review.
Cited concepts are well
understood and used
correctly.
Quoted material advances
the discussion and author
leads into and out of
quoted material effectively.
Author uses concepts or
ideas correctly from
sources.
Quoted material generally
appropriate although may
be some lack of fit with
discussion.
Quoted material not well
integrated into the
surrounding text.
Quoted material not
integrated or poorly
integrated into review.
Quotes do not say what
author suggests.
Material not embedded or
depended upon too heavily.
Referencing
Referencing consistently
accurate.
In-text citations & Reference
List complete & appropriate.

53. Author efficiently integrates
acknowledging sources with
paraphrased as well as
quoted material.
Referencing mostly
accurate but some minor
errors in consistency or
formatting.
In-text citations &
Reference List complete &
appropriate.
Author efficiently
integrates acknowledging
sources with paraphrased
as well as quoted material.
Referencing mostly
accurate but some minor
errors in consistency or
formatting.
In-text citations &
Reference List complete &
appropriate.
Author efficiently
integrates acknowledging
the sources of material.
References meet minimal
standards, include
complete information, and
Reference List is complete.
Author includes too much
information in paraphrase.

54. Little or no referencing.
Errors or oversights in
citations and Reference
List.
Incomplete reference
information.
Use of inappropriate
sources.
Running head: FINAL PROJECT MILESTONE
1
FINAL PROJECT MILESTONE: PYXIS MEDICATION
DISPENSING SYSTEM 3
FINAL PROJECT MILESTONE: PYXIS MEDICATION
DISPENSING SYSTEM
Pyxis medstation system is a designed automated dispensing
machine that facilitates accurate medication distribution.
Medication management is decentralized and has features that
help reduce cases and incidences of loading the wrong
medication. It also alerts medical providers on the medication to
be administered which acts as a cushion for safety precautions
for risks that may be encountered, (Utech, et.al., 2017). I chose
the topic to facilitate awareness in healthcare facilities to
incorporate the program into their operations to enhance patient
safety. The machine helps in the reduction of the risks of
medication diversion. It literally helps in enhancing safety in
healthcare. Previous times drugs were dispensed into patient
units using the hybrid model and medication was supplied by
the central pharmacy. Peripheral stock located in each care unit
has overseen the dispensing of drugs to each patient
successfully. Incorporation of the Pyxis has reduced the fatigue

55. the healthcare personnel used to record the drugs dispensed
manually.
The machine is very crucial in all medical care centers because
it has been recommended to be the best mechanism in improving
efficiency at work and patient's safety. Patients’ safety has
been guaranteed because of the barcode verification included in
the machine. The machine has positive impacts and outcomes to
healthcare centers as it has helped minimize the time spent by
nurses in inventory management of drugs. This was to enhance
efficiency and improve the performance of urgent care needed
by the patients. It also provided pharmacists with a humble time
and had time to perform other activities at the health care
facility, (Dobson, et.al., 2018). It has also reduced drug storage
errors and efficiency in resource management. It has been used
in handling the health-related errors that occur from time to
time in healthcare. This machine facilitates patient care and
safety as it saves lives because it is accurate in the
administration of medications to patients. Therefore, it is
important to assert that these machines have high standards of
ensuring patients are safe from any harm.
References
Dobson, G., Sullivan, S., Tilson, V., & Webster, D. (2018).
Reducing Costs of Managing Medication Inventory in

56. Automated Dispensing System in Hospital Units.
Utech, T., Davis, K. E., & Jaskela, M. C. (2017). U.S. Patent
No. 9,842,196. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office.
NUR 305 Final Project Milestone Three Guidelines and Rubric
For Milestone Three of your final project, you will assess the
impact of your chosen information technology and management
strategy in two parts. First, you will
consider the effects the strategy has on the practice of
professional nursing. Second, you will assess the impact of your
strategy on promoting patient safety.
Your submission for these two parts must address the following
elements:
Part I:
A. Assess the impact of your chosen topic on the practice of
professional nursing. In other words, what effect will use of
your chosen topic have on nursing
practice in general? Be sure to substantiate your claims with
research and examples.
B. Explain the implications of your chosen topic for vulnerable
populations with regard to professional nursing practice.
C. Discuss the implications of practicing professional nursing in
a healthcare setting that already employs your chosen topic. For
example, does it improve
patient safety and/or quality outcomes in that healthcare
setting? What effect would your chosen topic have on your

57. nursing practice in that specific
setting? Be sure to substantiate your claims with specific
scholarly evidence.
Part II:
A. Summarize the evidence you reviewed that discusses the role
your chosen topic plays in promoting patient safety and quality
outcomes.
B. Identify specific patient or quality outcomes from the
literature you reviewed regarding the use of your chosen topic.
C. Assess the extent to which patient outcomes are, or could be,
improved through the use of your chosen topic. Be sure to
substantiate your claims with
research and examples.
Guidelines for Submission: Your assessment of the impact
should be 2–4 pages in length. Formatting should be 12-point
Times New Roman font, double-spaced,
and one-inch margins. References and in-text citations should
use proper APA formatting.
Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (88%) Needs
Improvement (75%) Not Evident (0%) Value
Patient Safety:
Evidence
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
evidence cited is rich and provides

58. compelling support
Summarizes evidence that
discusses the role the chosen
topic plays in promoting patient
safety and quality outcomes
Summarizes evidence, but does
not discuss, or only cursorily
discusses, the role the chosen
topic plays in promoting patient
safety and quality outcomes, or
does not address promotion of
patient safety and quality
outcomes
Does not summarize evidence 15
Patient Safety:
Outcomes
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
draws nuanced connections
between the chosen topic and
patient outcomes
Identifies specific patient or
quality outcomes from the
literature regarding use of the
chosen topic
Identifies specific patient or
quality outcomes from the
literature, but they are not in

59. regard to use of chosen topic
Does not identify patient or
quality outcomes
15
Patient Safety:
Improved
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
draws nuanced connections
between the chosen topic and
patient outcomes
Accurately assesses the extent to
which patient outcomes are, or
could be, improved through use
of chosen topic, and substantiates
claims with research and
examples
Assesses the extent to which
patient outcomes are, or could
be, improved through use of
chosen topic, but with gaps in
accuracy, or does not substantiate
claims with research and
examples
Does not assess the extent to

60. which patient outcomes are or
could be improved through use of
chosen topic
15
Impact: Assess
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
draws nuanced connections
between the topic and
professional nursing practice
Accurately assesses the impact of
the chosen topic on professional
nursing practice, and
substantiates claims with research
and examples
Assesses the impact of the chosen
topic on professional nursing
practice, but with gaps in
accuracy, or does not substantiate
claims with research and
examples
Does not assess the impact of the
chosen topic on professional
nursing practice
15
Impact: Explain

61. Meets “Proficient” criteria and
demonstrates keen insight into
the plight of vulnerable
populations, with regard to
healthcare
Explains the implications of the
chosen topic for vulnerable
populations with regard to
professional nursing practice
Explains the implications of the
chosen topic for vulnerable
populations, but without regard
to professional nursing practice
Does not explain the implications
of the chosen topic for vulnerable
populations with regard to
professional nursing practice
15
Impact: Discuss
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
demonstrates keen insight into
the practice of professional
nursing
Comprehensively discusses the
implications of practicing in a
healthcare setting that already
employs chosen topic, and
substantiates claims with specific

62. scholarly evidence
Discusses the implications of
practicing in a healthcare setting
that already employs chosen
topic, but with gaps in detail, or
does not substantiate claims with
specific scholarly evidence
Does not discuss the implications
of practicing in a healthcare
setting that already employs
chosen topic
15
Articulation of
Response
Submission is free of errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, and organization
and is presented in a professional
and easy-to-read format
Submission has no major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that negatively impact readability
and articulation of main ideas

63. Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that prevent understanding of
ideas
10
Earned Total 100%
NUR 305 Final Project Milestone Three Guidelines and Rubric