+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com

You have to relate annotated bibliography directly to the research paperwhich is attached.  PFA

Your paper must be in correct APA format, and will need to include at least seven (7) resources,
ALL of which must:
1) Be current. Published within the last five years.
2) Be peer-reviewed.
I expect you to use your own words and follow the APA and use citation and references. Remember that an annotation is not the same as an abstract. Abstracts are descriptive. Your annotations are to be evaluative and critical. Give enough information for the reader to decide if the selection is interesting enough to read the paper, and also how you perceive the paper. Don't go skimpy on these annotations, but DO NOT write too much here. Quality is far more important than quantity. This exercise is for each of you to demonstrate that you can identify, categorize, and digest multiple research papers. Every resource you choose must be peer-reviewed. That means the paper must have undergone a formal peer review before being published in a journal or presented at a conference. You must ensure that your resources have undergone rigorous reviews. In most cases, you can find out the review process for a conference or journal by visiting the appropriate web site. Do not merely assume that a resource is peer-reviewed – check it out. I expect about three pages (Around half page for each article)

Here are a few URLs with additional information: (I strongly suggest that you look at these. Really.)

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/614/03/ (Please see the Sample APA Annotation)

https://sites.umuc.edu/library/libhow/bibliography_apa.cfm https://www.bethel.edu/library/research/apa-annobib-sixth.pdf http://libguides.enc.edu/writing_basics/annotatedbib/apa <<<< Check out the "Rules! rules! rules!" section http://guides.library.cornell.edu/annotatedbibliography

Running head: RESEARCH PAPER ON HOSPITAL SYSTEM 1

RESEARCH PAPER ON HOSPITAL SYSTEM 13

Research Paper on Hospital System

Name:

Institutional Affiliation:

Research Paper on Hospital System

Introduction

Mergers and acquisition are important in the development of any given organization. Having the merger of the 300-400 beds and four locations makes it possible for the development of quality services. It brings together both human and financial resources to initiate the needed services to the patients in the healthcare sector. This means that effective financial and productivity management resonates to improved efficiency. Risk management experts support implementation of the above strategies in the healthcare sector. Hospitals and healthcare systems employ enterprise risk management to boost their competitive advantage, improvement of market shares, deal with risks, and stabilize risk bottom lines. The alignment of risk management and the safety of patient through effective programs is instrumental in the above case. The above document serves as a foundation of ensuring the aspect of discussing the relationship between enterprise risk management and the development of hospital systems. The merger between the two inpatient hospital systems is important in ensuring an in-depth evaluation of the risks involved and developing the right framework in ensuring positive outcomes.

Presentation of Merger on the Two Hospital Systems

With the merger of the two health systems in different locations, it means that the outcomes will have to adopt to the dramatic change. This dramatic change will originate from the aspect of ensuring that there is a proper alignment of advanced technology, regulatory changes, and globalization among other factors. The operating environment for two hospitals will have to understand the rapid shifting in relation to the change experienced. The shifting is from a volume-based delivery model to one that is value-dependent (Zou, Kiviniemi, & Jones, 2017). A guideline for hospitals to transform from their current fee-for-service first model to pay-for-performance second curve system continue to take the center stage. It serves as the most significant high-priority strategy to initiate increase efficiency. It also improves the quality of standards in the operations of the healthcare industry. It aligns the hospitals, healthcare staff, and providers across the healthcare continuum. It also influences patient safety by improving quality via the utilization of medical practices that are evidence-based.

Literature Review of Enterprise Risk Management and Hospital Systems

Zou, Kiviniemi, & Jones (2017) argue that enterprise risk management serves as a framework that allows the achievement of safe, reliable, and secure health care delivery. It can ensure that there is an opportunity of providing a structure with the capacity to fully integrate patient safety and risk management across different care settings. The situation creates a relationship between reactive and interactive approaches towards risk identification, evaluation, and treatment via principles of risk management. The above are entrenched into strategic planning and corporate operations. The research argues that it is important for any merger to ensure that it takes into consideration the aspect of understanding the concept of enterprise risk management before implementing a partnership (Fraser & Simkins, 2016). Managing risk is the concept of enterprise risk management in any given sector. The management of risks within the perspective of an enterprise allows a hospital to gain the capacity to employ cross-functional approaches in the assessment, evaluation, and measurement of risks. It assists in the provision of effective decision-making within an organization. The above approach occurs to promote tolerance for risk during the implementation of strategies under the reforms that motivate the merger.

Callahan & Soileau (2017) present recent trends, among them globalization of both business and financial markets, are instrumental in influencing the development of a merger. The market continues to integrate a hospital system with increase regulations, insurance provisions, and corporate governance among others. The situation creates a change in how the forces behind the mergers integrate with the development of the two hospital systems. It is important to focus on how the enterprise risk management should engage positively in the change process of the mergers. Modern day markets have somehow influenced the enterprise risk management to convert from traditional approaches to more diverse risk management strategies in the functioning of healthcare organizations.

Also, Morgan, Ensor, & Waters (2016) confirm the fact that an enterprise risk management is crucial in helping the management of any hospital system to focus on the delivery of effective and better management. It ensures that patients are able to enjoy treatments and diagnosis of their diseases. It provides effective outcomes of the procedures and processes used to deal with patients. This means that patients are able to experience security and safe risk management approaches placed on their treatment. On the other hand, it eliminates any financial and business risks. The value of the merger is enhanced through benefits such as financial loss prevention, brand reputation, and investments to support expansion (Riaz & Hunjra, 2015). The above benefits become diversified because of their intended outcome. They are used for the development of the community by providing better incentives to different members equally.

Concerning effective management, quality services, and increased product accessibility, it is crucial to focus on key performance indicators. Key performance indicators are always instrumental in ensuring that the healthcare system is able to receive the best outcomes. These outcomes are in turn of collaborative performance outcomes, effective decision-making, hiring of the needed skills/knowledge, and positive outcomes (Papanicolas, Woskie, & Jha, 2018). Health care key performance indicators are important for the two merging hospitals. Each of the hospitals are seen to contain about 300-400 bed spaces. They are also in two different locations. It means that they will be integrating a collaborative service framework focused on ensuring that different customers are handled within the shortest time frame possible. Health care key performance indicators, therefore, are important in the two hospitals and the healthcare sector in general. They are important because they track different areas of performance.

Studies show that public and private hospitals are always on the verge of experiencing tightening budgets. They are also highly influenced by the ever-evolving policies, regulatory frameworks, and processes that originate from the global markets. The above pressures are able to create real emphasis on hospitals and healthcare organizations to establish the best objectives. They are also able to promote the achievement of positive business outcomes (Rahimi, Kavosi, Shojaei, & Kharazmi, 2016). Concerning the above, how is it possible to promote effective business outcomes in the objectives of a merger? The question is dynamic in answering the aspect of business development in an organization in the healthcare sector. In the case of the merging hospitals, tracking and measurement are the right answers to the questions (Morgan, Ensor, & Waters, 2016). These are important processes in ensuring that the merger creates the right results in the healthcare setting and the community around it.

Si, You, Liu, & Huang (2017) state that it is important to note that financial studies have come with the proof that businesses that experience success are those that are able to measure their capacity to adapt to change. It serves as a rule that any business indicators that are able to be measured have a capacity of experiencing some improvements. To measure and track the objectives of a business, it would be crucial to bring on board some few key performance indicators. The market comprises of a number of key performance indicators that are instrumental in initiating growth and development of any healthcare industry. The key performing indicators tend to explain the objective that organizations can measure. It also creates a strong explanation of what needs to be changed in relation to developing a strategic move forward (Ellis & Thomas, 1993). Key performance indicators, evaluate the impact of strategies in ensuring that the healthcare sector is able to achieve the needed objectives in relation to the mergers and strategies employed in them.

Additionally, traditional risk management centers are important in controlling different activities relating to better management of medical service and product outcomes. There are different means of control, avoidance, and avoidance of challenges that are instrumental to consider. An enterprise risk management systematic in relation to key performance indicators look at the real aspect of evaluating the risk as an asset (Callahan & Soileau, 2017). It also enables a hospital system to focus on the potential gain. This means evaluating the risk-producing activities to establish a risk-free environment (Kothari, Hovanec, Hastie, & Sibbald, 2011). For a merger to occur, it is crucial to focus on the capacity and benefits created via enterprise risk management approaches. The merger has an opportunity of choosing to use an ERM as a logical framework for the identification, measurement, and undertakings of the broad scope of potential risks affecting operational outcomes.

The benefits associated with an ERM and Key performance indicators are instrumental in the avoidance of financial losses. It also ensures legal entanglements and enhancement of different effectiveness of management processes. The merging hospital systems have the capacity to value stakeholders. Among them comprise of the community around them, members of staff, patients, and suppliers. They create stability for the merger, protect brand reputation, and increase confidence among stakeholders to enhance positive development (Sodhi, Son, & Tang, 2012). Instead of ensuring that risks are handled independently in the merger and the healthcare setting, the use of an enterprise risk management approach recognizes the interrelation of risks and their management.

Beguine (2018) presents different types of operational risks in the market. Among the most significant comprise of operational, financial, human, strategic, legal, and technological risks. Operational risks in the situation of the merger focus on the core businesses of the two hospitals and the formulated new organization formed in terms of healthcare service provision. Financial risks have a connection to the ability of the newly created merged to maintain access to different benefits and resources in the market. It ensures that there are issues such as supplier support evaluation, contracting factors, and capital handled amicably. Risks are handled through better performance created by financial techniques. Human capital risks, ensure that the organization is able to identify the relationship between leadership and the employment circle. Epstein, Fiscella, Lesser, & Stange (2010) argue that the staffing methodologies and processes are significant in developing the needed outcome in terms of decision-making. The process comprises of proper recruitment, management, and retention of the needed workforce.

An organization should be able to benefit from compensation and better incentives. The situation influences occupational hazards, violence in the workplace, discrimination, and harassment among others. Strategic risks are at the center of an enterprise risk management approach. They are able to ensure growth is experienced in the environment of an organization. The main reason is because it encourages mergers and acquisitions. It also encourages joint ventures to become successful. The resources that are allocated to the two hospitals are merged to create a more pronounced outcome in terms of the position of the hospital. It also eliminates the possibility of the merger possessing reputational risks relating to performance expectations and community relations (Nowotny, 2016). Legal and regulatory risks have a better connection to the existing complex regulations, rules, and standards in the market. They ensure that there is an in-depth evaluation of licensure and accreditation.

This is to identify the relationship it has with the professional environment. For any merger to occur, Morgan, Ensor, & Waters (2016) argues that the need to evaluate technological risks is crucial. Technological risks, in this case, focus on the proper use of information systems and electronic medicine to enhance a better service outcome among patients. There are also issues related to electronic health records among patients that need to be evaluated at all times when two merging organizations come together.

Strategic Risk Analysis and Strategic Risk Factors Identification

As presented in the literature segment, there are a number of issues that need to be considered when dealing with a merger at all times. Strategic risk analysis and the identification of strategic risk factors are at the center of ensuring effective development of the merger (Si, You, Liu, & Huang, 2017). The two hospitals have different resources at their disposal. Without proper management of the merger processes and strategies, it becomes difficult to manage the resources, stakeholders, and the decisions that found the mission and vision of the two hospitals.

Dealing with the Objectives of the Merger

The results and objectives of a merger are quantifiable and measurable. They focus on the newly intended goals of an organization. For the two hospitals, it is important in creating stable performance outcomes. It means focusing on the progress of the newly created organization. It is crucial to collect data on how the two hospitals work (Aven, 2011). Data on the customers they handle and their performance indicators is instrumental to identify the possibility of the merger (Nowotny, 2016). It also makes it possible to identify the impact it has on the operational development of the two hospitals as one entity. Despite the significant contribution to positive health care outcomes, it is important to ensure that proper management is crucial for the merger to bear the right results.

Risks evaluation associated with Technology

Risk evaluation in the type of technology that needs to be used in the merger is important. Information technology critical for the business of the merging hospitals. The issue is about the processes associated with decision-making and outcomes of health services. The risks, in this case, revolves around systems and data. It means creating a response plan to the risks that may affect proper operations of systems, hardware, and software. Since the merger occurs, it is important to not that the two hospitals will have to merge their information systems.

Merging of information systems may develop risks such as human error, malicious attacks, viruses, and spam. Human errors may originate from the fact that the management may fail to align customer relationship management information with the newly formed vision of the merger. Also, the electronic health system may also require a lot of work in terms of recording and merging the data about services (Callahan & Soileau, 2017). Viruses, spam, and malicious attacks originate from hackers who may try as much as possible to launch attacks if the system of the hospitals is vulnerable.

Viruses, spams, and malicious attacks, manipulate data and may lead to failure of systems. Realignment of the systems, data, security, and processing capabilities is crucial in ensuring that there are proper ways of encouraging robust operations. Other problems comprise of floods, cyclones, and fires (Si, You, Liu, & Huang, 2017). Despite the two hospitals being in different locations, it is crucial to note that their systems will be able to serve their needs simultaneously. Natural disasters may damage their operations, if not properly checked. The establishment of a business continuity plan ensures the recovery of the systems in case of any damages.

Average Patient Wait Time, Treatment Charge, Bed Occupancy Rate, and Average Hospital Stay

The average patient waits time measures and tracks business objectives associated with the satisfaction of patients. It also looks at the capacity management in ensuring that the patients do not wait for long periods when receiving diagnosis and treatment. Since the merger creates a double number of the resources held by each hospital, it should be able to reduce the waiting time for serving individuals. This means that all employees and resources have to be placed collaboratively to support effective outcomes (Callahan & Soileau, 2017). Concerning bed occupancy rate, it is important for the merger to focus on increasing the number of beds to service the needs of patients in the community and national levels. Bed occupancy serves as a good indication to ensure that the hospitals are able to provide effective and safe treatment to patients in the market (Fraser & Simkins, 2016).

Bed occupancy means that operational and capacity of the hospitals is able to meet the objectives of the patients in the market. Lastly, the average hospital stay should be conducted by ensuring that there is proper management of treatment services among patients. It is crucial to note that different incentives are made possible to reduce the hospital stays in the healthcare facility created by the merger. The Average Patient Wait Time, Treatment Charge, Bed Occupancy Rate, and Average Hospital Stay scores should be above the scale of 5 out of ten when it comes to ensuring that the merger is satisfactory to the stakeholders and managers in the newly created hospitals.

Staff-to-Patient Ratio

The staff is comprised of the medical and non-medical employees in an institution. They comprise of the skill and manpower surrounding the development of an institution. Ackman (2012) argues that it is important to ensure that an organization has enough staff to deal with the issues surrounding the needs of patients. Staff ratio involves equality when it comes to the development of services provided to customers. The merger should have a capacity of ensuring that it serves the needs of customers by allowing the right number to eliminate risks of waiting time. Staff-to-patient ratio indicates that the business objectives of the merger improves the quality of health care provided to patients in the market.

Concerning the ratio scaling, it is important for the scale to be over five out of ten to show above average results. In relation to the above, the ratio may be obtained by merging the employees of the two hospitals under one single entity and remuneration framework. It means that employee's wages may have to be increased to meet their needs and boost their morale (Adams, 2017). The human resource department should be able to initiate growth by balancing costs of operations with generated revenues. It is through the above that it becomes easier to benefit employees and ensure that they are satisfied to undertake their roles in the professional environment. The rate for the employees, strategic outcome should be approximately 8 out of 10 to ensure positive developments are undertaken.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the paper shows that mergers have to be evaluated through a key performance indicator and the enterprise risk management approaches. The two approaches are instrumental in ensuring that the two hospitals are able to mitigate any financial, human resource-based, logistical, and demand/supply issues. The elimination of the above issues is crucial to create an environment that is highly flexible in dealing with different issues faced by the newly created healthcare organization. Mergers should balance financial and decision-making approaches with the legal, human resource, logistical risks among others for positive outcomes. It is through the above that it becomes positive to focus on evaluating growth and ensuring that an organization achieves the best outcomes. Mergers have and will always exist in the market to initiate growth for the intended entities. They are meant to create the possibility of having benefits for clients who are supported by the healthcare sector. Therefore, mergers should be managed properly for effective outcomes.

References

Ackman, P. (2012). Helping the Helpers: Consultation to Childcare Staff Using Psychoanalytically Informed Developmental Concepts. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 32(2), 186-204.

Adams, H. (2017). Sovereignty, safety, and security: Tribal governments under the Stafford and homeland security acts. American Indian Law Journal, 1(1), 5.

Aven, T. (2011). On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(4), 515-522.

Begeneu, J. (2018, March 6th). Capital requirements, risk choice, and liquidity provision in a business cycle model. Risk Choice, and Liquidity Provision in a Business Cycle Model. Retrieved from www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj48JjArcviAhVEzIUKHQnUCEwQFjABegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gsb.stanford.edu%2Fgsb-cmis%2Fgsb-cmis-download-auth%2F436436&usg=AOvVaw1vAivn5qGk21G2tfbcpXNh

Callahan, C., & Soileau, J. (2017). Does enterprise risk management enhance operating performance? Advances in accounting, 37, 122-139.

Ellis, R., & Thomas , G. (1993). Supply-Side and Demand-Side Cost Sharing in Health Care. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7 (4), 135-151.

Epstein, R., Fiscella, K., Lesser, C., & Stange, K. (2010). Why the nation needs a policy push on patient-centered health care. Health affairs, 29(8), 1489-1495.

Fraser, J., & Simkins, B. (2016). The challenges of and solutions for implementing enterprise risk management. Business horizons, 59(6), 689-698.

Kothari, A., Hovanec, N., Hastie, R., & Sibbald, S. (2011). Lessons from the business sector for successful knowledge management in health care: a systematic review. BMC health services research, 11(1), 173. Retrieved from bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1472-6963-11-173

Morgan, R., Ensor, T., & Waters, H. (2016). Performance of private sector health care: implications for universal health coverage. The Lancet, 388(10044), 606-612.

Nowotny, K. (2016). Social factors related to the utilization of health care among prison inmates. Journal of Correctional Health Care, 22(2), 129-138.

Papanicolas, I., Woskie, L., & Jha, A. (2018). Health care spending in the United States and other high-income countries. Jama, 319(10), 1024-1039.

Rahimi, H., Kavosi, Z., Shojaei, P., & Kharazmi, E. (2016). Key performance indicators in hospital based on balanced scorecard model. Journal of Health Management and Informatics, 4(1), 17-24.

Riaz, L., & Hunjra, A. (2015). Relationship between psychological factors and investment decision making: The mediating role of risk perception. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 9(3), 968-981.

Si, S., You, X., Liu, H., & Huang, J. (2017). Identifying key performance indicators for holistic hospital management with a modified DEMATEL approach. International journal of environmental research and public health, 14(8), 934.

Sodhi, M., Son, B., & Tang, C. (2012). Researchers' perspectives on supply chain risk management. Production and operations management, 21(1), 1-13.

Zou, Y., Kiviniemi, A., & Jones, S. (2017). A review of risk management through BIM and BIM-related technologies. Safety science, 97, 88-98.