Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

D156: Business Case Analysis for Healthcare Improvement

Healthcare Improvement Project: Introduction and Project Initiation

Organizational Problem

Low patient mobility in acute care settings is a prevalent issue with far-reaching consequences. At our organization, multiple factors contribute to this problem. The facility has seen a noticeable increase in the average patsient age, resulting in higher susceptibility to mobility impairment. Additionally, staff shortages and time constraints often prevent adequate patient mobilization. Staff members have reported a knowledge deficit regarding effective mobility interventions and a lack of coordinated effort among the multidisciplinary teams, leading to inconsistent practices. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

These factors have resulted in extended patient stays, contributing to bed shortages and operational inefficiencies. Patients experiencing immobility are at higher risk for hospital-acquired complications such as deep vein thrombosis, pressure ulcers, and muscle atrophy (Schafthuizen et al., 2024). This not only affects patient outcomes and recovery times but also places a financial strain on the hospital due to increased treatment costs and decreased patient turnover (Patel et al., 2023). This project aims to address these issues by implementing the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources, which will enable patients to ambulate safely and effectively during their hospitalization. Addressing this problem is crucial to improving patient outcomes, optimizing resource utilization, and reducing overall healthcare costs.

 

PLACE YOUR ORDER HERE NOW

Stakeholders

Stakeholder (s)	Interest	Power	Influence
Patients	Primary beneficiaries: improved mobility leads to better clinical outcomes and faster recovery. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting	Limited direct power but have a significant influence on the success of interventions through their engagement.	Their cooperation and feedback are vital for the project’s success. Their positive experiences can influence other patients.
Nurses and Nursing Assistants	Directly involved in patient care, adherence to mobility protocols is essential.	Moderate power within their scope of practice to implement and monitor mobility protocols.	High influence due to their direct, daily interactions with patients and ability to motivate patient participation.
Physiotherapists	Specialists in patient mobility provide hands-on interventions and staff support.	Significant power in designing and implementing mobility interventions.	High influence due to their expertise and ability to train and support nursing staff.
Physicians	Responsible for prescribing mobility interventions and evaluating patient readiness.	High power due to their authority to prescribe treatment plans and mobility protocols.	Strong influence as their medical recommendations directly impact patient care plans and staff actions.
Hospital Administrators	Focused on operational efficiency and reducing length of stay.	Very high power as they control resources, budget allocations, and policy changes.	High influence as they can champion the project and ensure organizational support and resource allocation.
Mobility Technicians	Assist in improving mobility outcomes by providing additional support for ambulation (Patel et al., 2023)	Limited power individually but collectively significant as a dedicated support team.	Moderate influence through their direct interactions with patients and ability to provide hands-on assistance and encouragement.

Project Team

Serving as the project lead (project manager), my skills, roles and responsibilities are as follows:

Project Manager Skills

• Effective Communication: As a project manager, I prioritize clear and open communication among team members and stakeholders. This skill is crucial for ensuring that everyone is informed about project goals, progress, and any challenges that may arise. By fostering an environment where team members feel comfortable sharing ideas and concerns, I can enhance collaboration and ensure that all voices are heard, ultimately contributing to the project’s success. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting
• Trust Building: Establishing trust within the project team is essential for fostering a supportive and productive working environment. By demonstrating reliability and consistency in my actions, I encourage team members to feel confident in their roles and the project objectives. Trust building also involves acknowledging team members’ contributions and providing constructive feedback, which helps to empower the team and enhances overall performance in implementing the mobility protocols.

Project Manager Roles:

• Coordinator: Overseeing and managing the project team (serving as the central point of contact) for all project-related activities, ensuring seamless communication and coordination among team members, and ensuring all members are aligned with the project goals and objectives.
• Facilitator: As the facilitator, I guide the project team through each phase of the project management lifecycle, communicating project goals, progress, and outcomes to stakeholders to ensure transparency and engagement, and that all tasks are completed on time and within scope

Project Manager Responsibilities:

• Project Planning and Execution: My role is to develop detailed project plans, including timelines, resource allocation, and task assignments. Additionally, I oversee the implementation of the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools, ensuring adherence to the project plan.
• Monitoring and Reporting: Regularly, I monitor project progress, track key performance indicators, and report findings to stakeholders. Furthermore, I am mandated to address any issues or obstacles promptly to keep the project on track.
• Develop Strategies and Set Targets: I formulate strategies to achieve project goals, set measurable targets, and ensure alignment with organizational objectives.
• Train and Mentor Team Members: Provide training and mentorship to team members, enhancing their skills and ensuring effective implementation of project activities.

An overview of the roles and responsibilities of the other team members is included in the table below. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

Project Team	Roles	Responsibilities
Nursing Staff Representatives	Integrating mobility protocols into daily care routines.	– Implementing and reinforcing mobility protocols. – Educating and motivating patients for active participation.
Physiotherapist	Leading provision of specialized mobility interventions and training.	– Designing and overseeing individualized mobility plans. – Training nursing staff on mobility techniques.
Mobility Technician Team Lead	Overseeing mobility technicians.	– Ensuring technicians support patient mobility effectively. – Managing daily schedules and operations of the mobility team.
Data Analyst	Monitoring mobility-related data to track project success.	– Collecting and analyzing data on patient mobility outcomes. – Reporting findings to the project team and stakeholders.

 

Needs Assessment

The needs assessment for this project was conducted using the affinity analysis tool, which helped identify key barriers and themes related to patient mobility. This approach facilitated a thorough examination of our facility’s current patient mobility practices and challenges. Schafthuizen et al. (2024) reveal that 58.9% of physically able patients fail to achieve full mobility potential during hospitalization, remaining largely sedentary. Additionally, the assessment highlights the adverse clinical and financial consequences of low patient mobility, contributing to increased healthcare costs through prolonged hospital stays and additional medical interventions (Patel et al., 2023). Hospitals also face capacity constraints and financial strain due to delayed discharges stemming from this issue.

Several themes emerged during discussions with stakeholders, including patients, nurses, physiotherapists, physicians, and administrators. These included patient reluctance to mobilize due to pain or fear of injury, time constraints faced by staff, and a lack of coordinated effort among healthcare team members. These themes were captured through brainstorming sessions and organized into categories using affinity analysis, which allowed us to identify the most pressing issues and prioritize interventions. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

Findings:

• Patient-Related Barriers: Patients often expressed reluctance to mobilize due to pain, fear of injury, or lack of motivation. Addressing these psychological and physical barriers is crucial for improving mobility.
• Staff-Related Barriers: Nurses and other healthcare providers cited time constraints and workload as significant barriers to facilitating patient mobility. Enhancing staff training and reallocating resources to support mobility interventions were identified as necessary steps.

SWOT Analysis

Strengths:

The evidence-based Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools are designed to enhance patient outcomes.

The multidisciplinary team approach involves collaboration among nurses, physiotherapists, and mobility technicians.

Weaknesses:

1. Time Constraints for Nurses and Physical Therapists:

• Mitigation Plan: Implement time management training and use efficiency tools to help nurses and physical therapists manage their workload more effectively. Additionally, reallocate resources or hire additional staff to prioritize mobility interventions.

2. Patient Resistance to Mobility Activities:

• Mitigation Plan: Develop a patient education program that emphasizes the benefits of mobility. Engage motivational interviewing techniques to address individual patient concerns and barriers. Create personalized mobility plans that align with each patient’s comfort level and capabilities.

Opportunities:

1. Deployment of Mobility Technicians:

• Maximization Plan: Provide specialized training for mobility technicians to enhance their skills further. Recognize and reward their contributions to encourage continued excellence and support from the team. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

2. Potential for Cost Savings:

• Maximization Plan: Conduct a detailed cost-benefit analysis to demonstrate the financial advantages of the mobility program to stakeholders. Use this data to secure additional funding and resources for expanding the program.

Threats:

1. Inadequate Staff Support:

• Mitigation Plan: Foster a supportive work environment through regular team meetings, open communication channels, and providing necessary resources. Ensure that staff have access to ongoing training and professional development opportunities.

2. Unanticipated Patient Complications:

• Mitigation Plan: Develop a robust monitoring and evaluation system to identify and address complications as they arise quickly. Implement a flexible intervention strategy that can be adjusted to meet the needs of patients with comorbidities or unexpected complications.

Impact Analysis

Improvement Project Benefits:

Category	Benefits	Rating
Organization	– Better staff retention	3
	– Improved knowledge transfer process	2
Staff	– Improved job satisfaction	3
	– Faster career growth for existing employees	1
Total Benefits Sore		9

 

Improvement Project Risks

Category	Risks	Rating
Organization	– Project may not work, leading to loss of investment –	2 Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting
	– Time spent on mentorship reduces performance in existing duties	1
Staff	– Managing duties for mentorship may overwhelm staff	2
	– Mismatch expectations between mentor and mentee	1
Total Risks Score		6

 

Calculated Impact Ratio:

Impact Ratio = Total Benefits Score / Total Risks Score = 9 / 6 = 1.5

Benefits and Risks Discussion: The benefits score of 9 and the risks score of 6 result in a calculated impact ratio of 1.5. This ratio, being greater than 1, illustrates that the benefits outweigh the risks, indicating that the project is feasible. The high benefits score represents a significant positive impact on the organization, including better staff retention, improved knowledge transfer, and enhanced job satisfaction and career growth for employees. The risks, while present, are manageable and mitigable, making the project viable and beneficial for the organization.

Justification and Project Purpose

Project Purpose

This project aims to address the prevalent issue of patient immobility in acute healthcare settings by implementing the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources. The identified problem of low patient mobility is caused by various factors, including patient reluctance, staff time limitations, and a lack of coordinated efforts among healthcare team members. The project plan involves assessing current mobility practices, identifying barriers and facilitators, and deploying targeted interventions. The interventions include staff training, patient education, and the deployment of mobility technicians. This comprehensive approach will enable patients to ambulate safely and effectively during their hospitalization, leading to faster discharges, improved health outcomes, and reduced healthcare costs.

Project Justification

This project is justified based on findings from the needs assessment, SWOT analysis, and impact analysis:

Needs Assessment: The needs assessment revealed that 58.9% of physically able patients fail to achieve full mobility during hospitalization, resulting in longer stays and higher healthcare costs. Barriers identified include patient reluctance, staff time limitations, and lack of coordination among healthcare team members. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

SWOT Analysis:

• Strengths: Evidence-based Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and a multidisciplinary team approach.
• Weaknesses: Time constraints for staff and patient resistance to mobility activities.
• Opportunities: Deployment of mobility technicians and potential cost savings.
• Threats: Inadequate staff support and unanticipated patient complications.

Impact Analysis:

• Benefits: The total benefits score is 9, indicating significant improvements in staff retention, knowledge transfer, job satisfaction, and career growth.
• Risks: The total risks score is 6, indicating manageable risks related to project feasibility and staff workload.
• Impact Ratio: The calculated impact ratio of 1.5 indicates that the benefits outweigh the risks, making the project feasible.

Summarizing these findings, the project addresses the critical need for improved patient mobility, provides substantial benefits that outweigh the risks, and aligns with organizational readiness and resources. The implementation of the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources is expected to enhance clinical outcomes, optimize resource utilization, and improve patient satisfaction.

Review of Relevant Scholarly Sources

Improving patient mobility in acute care settings has been extensively studied, revealing multiple barriers and interventions. This synthesis reviews five relevant, peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last five years to support solutions to the identified problem of low patient mobility.

Herzog et al. (2024) conducted a qualitative study on older patient mobility, identifying key barriers such as privacy concerns and the perceived roles of staff. Their study emphasizes the importance of addressing both human and structural factors to enhance mobility, suggesting that many issues can be mitigated without additional staff resources.

Mani et al. (2022) systematically reviewed barriers and facilitators to patient mobility in acute care settings. They identified themes including patient characteristics, staff prioritization, and environmental factors. Their findings highlight the importance of interdisciplinary approaches and clear role definitions to improve mobility outcomes.

Patel et al. (2023) explored the impact of mobility technicians on discharge rates and hospital length of stay. Their study demonstrated that employing mobility technicians significantly increased discharge-to-home rates and reduced hospital stays, leading to considerable cost savings. This supports the integration of specialized staff to improve patient mobility.

Schafthuizen et al. (2024) examined factors affecting mobility in single-occupancy rooms, finding that wearing pajamas during the day, experiencing pain, and the use of multiple medical devices were associated with reduced mobility. Their study underscores the need for comprehensive strategies addressing patient comfort and practical barriers to mobility. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

McLaughlin et al. (2023) described the Johns Hopkins Activity and Mobility Promotion (JH-AMP) program, outlining its eight core components aimed at increasing patient mobility and improving clinical outcomes. Their findings suggest that systematic approaches involving organizational prioritization, interdisciplinary roles, and continuous education and training are essential for successful implementation.

These studies collectively emphasize the need for a multifaceted approach to improve patient mobility, incorporating patient education, specialized roles, and structured mobility protocols.

Best Practices:

Two best practices identified from the literature review that support the planned solution to the problem are the integration of specialized mobility technicians and the implementation of structured mobility promotion programs like JH-AMP.

• Integration of Specialized Mobility Technicians: Patel et al. (2023) demonstrated that mobility technicians significantly increased discharge-to-home rates and reduced hospital length of stay. This best practice supports employing trained personnel dedicated to improving patient mobility, which can lead to better clinical and financial outcomes.
• Implementation of Structured Mobility Promotion Programs: McLaughlin et al. (2023) emphasized the effectiveness of the JH-AMP program, which includes organizational prioritization, systematic measurement, and interdisciplinary collaboration. This structured approach ensures that mobility initiatives are integrated into daily practice, promoting sustained improvements in patient mobility.

Project Environment

This project will be implemented in an acute care hospital setting, specifically targeting general medical wards. A key policy impacting the project is the Mobility Protocol endorsed by The Joint Commission, which aims to enhance patient outcomes through systematic mobility interventions.

Mobility Protocol Impact:

• Facilitation: The protocol mandates routine mobility assessments and interventions, aligning perfectly with the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources used in this project. It emphasizes early and consistent mobilization, ensuring that staff are already familiar with the importance of patient mobility and are required to incorporate it into their daily routines. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting
• Implementation: The policy supports the allocation of necessary resources, such as mobility aids and training for staff, facilitating the project’s smooth integration. The existing framework provided by The Joint Commission’s Mobility Protocol aids in overcoming barriers related to staff training and patient reluctance, as it sets a standardized approach and clear expectations for patient care.

By leveraging this established protocol, the project can effectively address the identified problem of low patient mobility, ensuring better health outcomes and operational efficiency.

SMART Goal

Process KPIs:

1. Staff Training Completion Rate:
   • Description: The percentage of nursing staff and mobility technicians who have completed the training on the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources.
   • Target: Achieve a 90% training completion rate within the first two months of the project (by November 30, 2024).
   • Justification: Staff training is essential to ensure that all team members are proficient in using the mobility tools and implementing the protocols effectively. High training completion rates will help achieve the project’s SMART goal by ensuring staff can facilitate patient mobility interventions.
2. Patient Mobility Assessment Frequency:

• Description: Each patient’s frequency of mobility assessments conducted using the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility Scale (JH-HLM).
• Target: Ensure that 95% of patients have their mobility levels assessed daily throughout the project duration (from October 1, 2024, to March 31, 2025).
• Justification: Regular assessments are crucial to monitor progress and adjust interventions as needed. Consistent documentation of mobility levels will provide data to track improvements and identify areas needing additional support, contributing to achieving the overall project goals.

SMART Goal

SMART Project Goal: To improve patient mobility in acute care settings by implementing Johns-Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources, aiming for a 20% improvement in mobility levels, a 15% increase in discharge-to-home rates, and a 10% reduction in length of stay within six months, starting from October 1, 2024, to March 31, 2025.

Stakeholder/Project Team Perspectives

The ideas and perspectives of the entire team played a crucial role in shaping the SMART goal for our patient mobility project. We conducted a series of weekly face-to-face meetings where all stakeholders, including patients, nurses, physiotherapists, physicians, hospital administrators, and mobility technicians, shared their insights and feedback. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

During these meetings, we gathered valuable input on the key challenges and potential solutions to improve patient mobility. For instance, nurses highlighted the need for efficient time management tools to address time constraints, while physiotherapists emphasized the importance of specialized training for mobility technicians. Patients shared their concerns about pain and fear of injury, which informed our approach to patient education and motivational strategies.

We synthesized these diverse perspectives into a coherent SMART goal that addresses the identified problems. The goal is to implement the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources, aiming for a 20% improvement in mobility levels, a 15% increase in discharge-to-home rates, and a 10% reduction in length of stay within six months. This goal reflects the collective input of all team members and aligns with the overall objectives of enhancing patient outcomes, optimizing resource utilization, and reducing healthcare costs.

By integrating the feedback and suggestions from all stakeholders, we ensured that our SMART goal is comprehensive, achievable, and directly addresses the challenges identified in the project environment.

Project Management Lifecycle

This project will adhere to the Project Management Lifecycle framework, which consists of the following key phases:

Initiation: Identifying the issue of limited patient mobility in acute care settings, obtaining endorsement from stakeholders, and assembling the project team.

Planning: Crafting a comprehensive project plan encompassing timelines, resource allocation, and strategies for stakeholder communication.

Execution: Implementing the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources, involving staff training, patient engagement, and the deployment of mobility specialists.

Monitoring and Control: Regularly evaluating mobility levels, discharge rates, and duration of stay, and making necessary adaptations to the project.

Closing: Comprehensive analysis of project outcomes, including enhancements in mobility, discharge rates, and duration of stay. Dissemination of findings to stakeholders and incorporation into standard practice. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

PLACE YOUR ORDER HERE NOW

 

 

References

Herzog, P. J., Herzog-Zibi, R. D. L., Mattmann, M., Möri, C., Mooser, B., Inauen, J., & Aubert, C. E. (2023). Perspectives of patients and clinicians on older patient mobility on acute medical wards: A qualitative study. BMC Geriatrics, 23(1), 558. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-023-04226-0

Mani, H., Möri, C., Mattmann, M., Liechti, F., Inauen, J., Aujesky, D., Donzé, J., & Aubert, C. E. (2022). Barriers and facilitators to mobility of patients hospitalized on an acute medical ward: A systematic review. Age and Ageing, 51(7). https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afac159

McLaughlin, K. H., Friedman, M., Hoyer, E. H., Kudchadkar, S., Flanagan, E., Klein, L., Daley, K., Lavezza, A., Schechter, N., & Young, D. (2023). The Johns Hopkins Activity and Mobility Promotion program: A framework to increase activity and mobility among hospitalized patients. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 38(2), 164–170. https://doi.org/10.1097/ncq.0000000000000678

Patel, S. V., Imburgio, S., Johal, A. S., Ramirez, C., DiSandro, K., Mathur, D., Walch, B., Buccellato, V., Hossain, M. A., & Asif, A. (2023). Improving discharge rates to home with the help of mobility technicians: A step in the right direction. Cureus, 15(11), e48298. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.48298

Schafthuizen, L., van Dijk, M., van Rosmalen, J., & Ista, E. (2024). Mobility level and factors affecting mobility status in hospitalized patients admitted in single-occupancy patient rooms. BMC Nursing, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01648-4 Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting

 

 

 

Appendix A

SMART Goal Worksheet (D156)

Work with your stakeholders, project team members, or both to create a SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound) goal and two process KPIs for your healthcare improvement project (HIP). Answer the following SMART questions about your project. Next, synthesize your answers into a SMART goal for your project and enter it into the SMART Project Goal box.

SMART Questions		SMART Answers
Specific: ·         What is your project? (Be specific) ·         How will you accomplish this? (interventions)		What is your project? The project aims to improve patient mobility in acute care settings using Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources. This involves assessing current mobility levels, identifying barriers and facilitators, and implementing targeted interventions to enhance patient mobility. How will you accomplish this? The project will be implemented through: ·         Assessment: Evaluating current mobility levels and identifying barriers based on existing literature and data. ·         Intervention: Introducing Johns-Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources, including mobility protocols and staff training. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting ·         Evaluation: Monitoring mobility improvements through regular assessments and patient feedback.
Measurable: ·         What will you measure to determine your project’s success? (Indicators or metrics) ·         How will you know that change has occurred? ·         What percentage of the outcome will you accomplish by date? (Numbers and quantities provide means of measurement and comparison). Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting		What will you measure to determine your project’s success? Success will be measured using: ·         Mobility Levels: Improvement in patient mobility levels, assessed through the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility Scale (JH-HLM) and EQ-5D-3L. ·         Patient Discharge Rates: Increased percentage of patients discharged to home. ·         Length of Stay: Reduction in hospital length of stay. ·         Patient Satisfaction: Enhanced patient satisfaction scores related to mobility and overall care. How will you know that change has occurred? Changes will be identified by: ·         Comparative Analysis: Comparing pre- and post-intervention mobility levels, discharge rates, and length of stay. ·         Statistical Significance: Analyzing data for statistically significant improvements. What percentage of the outcome will you accomplish, by date? ·         Mobility Levels: Aim for a 20% improvement in patient mobility scores within 6 months. ·         Discharge Rates: Increase discharge-to-home rates by 15% over 6 months. ·         Length of Stay: Achieve a 10% reduction in length of stay within 6 months.
Achievable: ·         Based on your impact analysis and SWOT analysis, what support, resources, and justification exist for your project?		Support, Resources, and Justification: ·         Barriers and Facilitators: Studies have identified barriers such as patient characteristics, lack of time, and environmental factors (Mani et al., 2022). Facilitators include knowledge of mobility importance and interdisciplinary support (Herzog et al., 2023). By addressing these factors, the project can realistically achieve its objectives. ·         Resources: The project will utilize Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools, staff training programs, and patient engagement strategies.
Relevant: ·         Is your project worthwhile? ·         Why does your project matter to the target population, the organization, and nursing practice?		Is your project worthwhile? Improving patient mobility is crucial for reducing hospital-acquired complications and optimizing resource use. Studies show that early ambulation improves clinical outcomes and reduces hospital length of stay (Patel et al., 2023; Schafthuizen et al., 2024). The project aligns with these findings, demonstrating its relevance to patient care and organizational efficiency. Why does your project matter to the target population, the organization, and nursing practice? ·         Target Population: Enhances patient outcomes and quality of life by improving mobility. ·         Organization: Reduces hospital length of stay and associated costs, improving operational efficiency. ·         Nursing Practice: Empowers nursing staff with tools and protocols to better support patient mobility, aligning with best practices. The SWOT Analysis revealed strengths such as strong interdisciplinary support and staff enthusiasm for improving patient care, while weaknesses included time constraints and varying levels of staff experience with mobility protocols. The Impact Analysis indicated that successful implementation of this project could lead to significant reductions in adverse events related to immobility and an overall enhancement in patient satisfaction and outcomes. These insights underscore the relevance of the project to improve both clinical practice and patient experiences in acute care settings.
Time-Bound: Include these dates: ·         Health Placement Approval date ·         D156 course start date ·         project start date ·         project end date ·         expected graduation date Your project start date must be after the health placement approval date and D156 start dates.  For an implementation project, your project end date must be before your expected graduation date.  For an approved modified clinical activity project your end date must be after your graduation date. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting		Time-Bound: ·         Health Placement Approval Date: March 4, 2024 ·         D156 Course Start Date: August 5, 2024 ·         Project Start Date: October 1, 2024 ·         Project End Date: March 31, 2025 ·         Expected Graduation Date: July 31, 2025
SMART Project Goal: Synthesize your SMART answers from above into a statement that includes the specific, measurable, and time-bound elements.
To improve patient mobility in acute care settings by implementing Johns-Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources, aiming for a 20% improvement in mobility levels, a 15% increase in discharge-to-home rates, and a 10% reduction in length of stay within 6 months, starting from October 1, 2024, to March 31, 2025.
Process Key Performance Indicators KPI # 1 KPI #1: Staff Training Completion Rate Description: The percentage of nursing staff and mobility technicians who have completed the training on the Johns Hopkins Mobility Tools and Resources. Target: Achieve a 90% training completion rate within the first two months of the project (by November 30, 2024). Justification: Staff training is essential to ensure that all team members are proficient in using the mobility tools and implementing the protocols effectively. High training completion rates will help achieve the project’s SMART goal by ensuring staff can facilitate patient mobility interventions.
KPI # 2	KPI #2: Patient Mobility Assessment Frequency Description: The frequency of mobility assessments conducted using the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility Scale (JH-HLM) for each patient. Target: Ensure that 95% of patients have their mobility levels assessed daily throughout the project duration (from October 1, 2024, to March 31, 2025). Justification: Regular assessments are crucial to monitor progress and adjust interventions as needed. Consistent documentation of mobility levels will provide data to track improvements and identify areas needing additional support, contributing to achieving the overall project goals. Utilizing Johns Hopkins Mobility Program to Improve Health Outcomes in Acute Care Setting