(ANSWER) Case Study: Evaluating Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Clinical Practice 

Case Study: Evaluating Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Clinical Practice 

Harmony Health System, a large regional healthcare network, recently implemented an AI-powered clinical decision- making support tool in their emergency department (ED). The system uses machine learning, a type of AI, to analyze real-time electronic health record (EHR) data to identify clients at high risk for sepsis and alerts clinicians to act before symptoms become critical.

Initial Outcomes

Within the first three months of implementation, the tool flagged thirty-eight (38) patients showing early signs of sepsis by detecting patterns such as changes in heart rate, blood pressure, white blood cell count, and fever. Twenty-five (25) of those patients received earlier interventions than would have occurred through traditional workflows. As a result, the average length of stay decreased by 0.8 days for flagged patients.

 Staff Reactions

Clinical staff expressed mixed feelings about the tool. Some appreciated the additional safety net it provided, while others voiced concerns about over-reliance on AI at the expense of clinical judgment. Issues such as data privacy, given the system’s constant surveillance of EHRs, and disruptions to workflow during triage and patient handoffs were also raised.

 Concurrent Innovations at Harmony Health System

Alongside the sepsis tool, Harmony Health System is implementing other innovations. Remote patient monitoring using wearable devices is being introduced to support chronic disease management. Voice-assisted charting tools are being tested to reduce documentation burden and improve efficiency. In addition, a distributed digital ledger system (often referred to as blockchain) based patient identification system is being piloted to secure data exchange and enhance interoperability.

 The Chief Nursing Officer (CNO) is leading a task force to assess nurse readiness and training needs as these technologies roll out. Despite these advances, many patients remain unaware that AI plays a role in their care. Meanwhile, the IT department has reported minor integration issues between the new technologies and existing legacy systems.

Stakeholder Perspectives

 Stakeholders have highlighted both opportunities and challenges.

• An ED nurse commented, “It’s helpful, but I don’t want it to become a crutch. What happens when the alert doesn’t fire?”
• The CNO noted, “AI should enhance—not replace—nursing judgment. But further training is needed to ensure nurses are confident using it.”
• A patient advocate stressed, “Transparency matters. Clients should know AI is influencing their care decisions.”

    

After reviewing the case study, answer the following prompts:

1. Summarize the key innovations introduced at Harmony Health System. Briefly explain what each technology does and how it aims to improve healthcare delivery or outcomes.
2. Analyze the benefits and risks of implementing AI and other emerging technologies at a system level. Consider issues like safety, efficiency, equity, privacy, and ethical implications. Support your response with at least one scholarly or professional source
3. Discuss how these technologies affect nursing practice, including roles, workflows, collaboration, and patient care responsibilities. Reflect on potential shifts in how nurses work and advocate for their patients in tech-enhanced environments.
4. Reflect on one emerging trend in healthcare informatics (such as predictive analytics, wearables, or blockchain). Explain why you find it promising and how it might transform patient care over the next 5–10 years.

Universal Design Assignment Instructions

 Choose one format for your response:

• Written Essay (2-3 pages double spaced in APA format. The 2-3 pages does not include the cover page and the reference page.)
• attach a reference page which includes a minimum of 2 peer-reviewed scholarly journals within 5 years.

See rubric for additional details.

Suggested Resources

American Nurses Association (2022). Nursing Informatics: Scope and Standards of Practice.

Nashwan, A. J., Cabrega, J. C. A., Othman, M. I., Khedr, M. A., Osman, Y. M., El‑Ashry, A. M., Naif, R., & Mousa, A. A. (2025). The evolving role of nursing informatics in the era of artificial intelligence. International Nursing Review, 72(1), e13084. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.13084Links to an external site.

Hardy, L. R. (2024). Health informatics: An interprofessional approach. Elsevier.

LaBoone, P. A., & Marques, O. (2024). Overview of the future impact of wearables and artificial intelligence in healthcare workflows and technology. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 4(2), Article 100294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjimei.2024.100294Links to an external site.

Center for Connected Medicine. (2024, December 6). Early successes, untapped potential, lingering questions: AI adoption in healthcare report 2024. https://connectedmed.com/resources/ai-adoption-in-healthcare-report-2024/

Watson A.L. (2024). Ethical considerations for artificial intelligence use in nursing informatics. Nursing Ethics. 31(6):1031-1040. doi:10.1177/09697330241230515Links to an external site.

AI Case Study: Final Exam Rubric
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
Identification & Summary of Innovations view longer description	20 to >13 pts Excellent Provides a comprehensive, accurate summary of all key innovations introduced. Each technology is clearly explained with its function and intended impact on healthcare delivery or outcomes. Information is concise, precise, and well-organized, showing strong understanding of the innovations 13 to >6 pts Good Provides a clear summary of most innovations, though it may have minor omissions or limited explanation of a few technologies. Explains purpose and impact in general terms but may lack some depth or clarity. 6 to >3 Note: Full answer to this question is available after purchase. pts Satisfactory Summarizes only some innovations, with limited detail or clarity. Explanations of purpose or impact are vague, incomplete, or partially inaccurate. 3 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory Provides a minimal or inaccurate summary of innovations. Key technologies are missing, misrepresented, or not explained.	/ 20 pts
Analysis of Benefits and Risks view longer description	25 to >18 pts Excellent Provides a comprehensive, balanced analysis of both benefits and risks across multiple domains (safety, efficiency, equity, privacy, ethics). Integrates multiple, recent scholarly/sources that strongly support claims. Demonstrates critical thinking by acknowledging complexity and potential unintended consequences. Clear, well-organized discussion shows strong understanding of system-level issues. 18 to >12 pts Good Provides a solid analysis of benefits and risks, though it may be stronger in one area than the other. Supported with at least one scholarly source, though integration may be limited. Demonstrates understanding of issues, but analysis may lack the depth, nuance, or balance of higher-level work. 12 to >5 pts Satisfactory Provides a basic discussion with limited depth or detail. Mentions benefits and/or risks but does not explore them fully. Support may be minimal or not well connected. 5 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory Discussion is superficial or unclear. Lacks meaningful analysis of benefits and risks. Sources are absent, outdated, or not scholarly.	/ 25 pts
Impact on Nursing & Patient Care view longer description	25 to >17 pts Excellent Provides a comprehensive discussion of how technologies affect nursing practice, workflows, collaboration, and patient care. Strongly supported with multiple, recent scholarly/professional sources that are well-integrated. Explores both opportunities and challenges for nurses in tech-enhanced environments, including advocacy roles. Demonstrates insight into evolving nursing responsibilities and patient-centered care. 17 to >12 pts Good Provides a thoughtful discussion of impacts, covering most relevant areas (roles, workflows, collaboration, patient care). Supported with at least one scholarly/professional source, though analysis may lack depth or balance. Reflection on advocacy and shifts in practice is present but not deeply developed. 12 to >5 pts Satisfactory Provides a limited discussion with minimal detail or clarity. Mentions some impacts on nursing or care, but treatment is narrow or incomplete. Support is weak or missing. 5 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory Provides little to no discussion of impact on nursing or patient care. Missing scholarly support.	/ 25 pts
Reflection on Emerging Trend view longer description	20 to >13 pts Excellent Provides original, critical insight into the chosen trend, going beyond surface description. Strongly supported with multiple, recent scholarly or professional sources that are well-integrated into the reflection. Explicitly addresses how the trend could transform patient care, nursing roles, and healthcare systems over the next 5–10 years. Reflection is nuanced, innovative, and demonstrates deep engagement 13 to >6 pts Good Provides a thoughtful but more descriptive discussion of the trend, explaining its current relevance. Supported with at least one scholarly or professional source, though connections may be limited or less developed. Mentions future potential but in more general terms, without detailed exploration of long-term impact. Reflection is clear and accurate but lacks originality or depth. 6 to >3 pts Satisfactory Provides only a basic reflection with limited detail or application. May reference a trend but with minimal explanation of relevance or future implications. Support is weak or missing. 3 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory Reflection is vague, off-topic, or missing.	/ 20 pts
Grammar, Use of Sources & APA Formatting view longer description	10 to >7 pts Excellent Well organized paper, video, audio, or infographic, mostly uses headers to organize if paper submitted, free of errors, follows APA format correctly. A minimum of 2 peer-reviewed, scholarly journals within 5 years provided. 7 to >4 pts Good Organized paper, video, audio, or infographic, mostly uses headers to organize if paper submitted, few errors, mostly follows APA format. 1-2 peer-reviewed, scholarly journals within 5 years provided. 4 to >0 pts Satisfactory Some organization issues on paper, video, audio, or infographic,, minimal use of headers to organize if paper submitted, several errors, partially follows APA format. Only 1 peer-reviewed, scholarly journals within 5 years provided. 0 pts Unsatisfactory Poorly organized paper, video, audio, or infographic, many errors, no headers used, does not follow APA format	/ 10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompetency 8.1 Describe the various information and communication technology tools used in the care of patients, communities, and populations. threshold: 1.85	2 pts Developed 1 pts Developing 0 pts No Evidence
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompetency 8.2 Use information and communication technology to gather data, create information, and generate knowledge. threshold: 1.85	2 pts Developed 1 pts Developing 0 pts No Evidence
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompetency 8.3 Use information and communication technologies and informatics processes to deliver safe nursing care to diverse populations in a variety of settings. threshold: 1.85	2 pts Developed 1 pts Developing 0 pts No Evidence
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompetency 8.5 Use information and communication technologies in accordance with ethical, legal, professional, and regulatory standards, and workplace policies in the delivery of care. threshold: 1.85	2 pts Developed 1 pts Developing 0 pts No Evidence

Related: MAM1 — MAM1 TASK 2: ORGANIZATION AND LEADERSHIP EVALUATION

Order This Paper