This document discusses the process and outcome evaluation of a self-management project for chronic disease management. It also justifies the allocation of resources to different medical personnel.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running head: PROGRAM PLAN DESIGN AND EVALUATION PROGRAM PLAN DESIGN AND EVALUATION Name of the Student: Name of the University: Author note:
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
1PROGRAM PLAN DESIGN AND EVALUATION Question 1 Process evaluation evaluates the rates of efficiency underlying intended implementations and outcome achievement in a project. Process evaluation of the self management project of common chronic disease management among Pike County residents in Kentucky, would involve: assessment of the basic project administration details such as time and venue, the credentials of the personnel directed with project execution and an understanding of the possible factors which may acts as barriers or facilitators underlying the administration of this project (Breuer et al., 2015). Question 2 Outcome evaluation encompasses measurement of the effects or outcomes estimated to befulfilledbytheproject.Theselfmanagementprojectioncommonchronicdisease management among Pike County residents in Kentucky estimated outcomes in terms of adoption of lifestyle and risk management strategies, enhancement of treatment awareness and knowledge and minimization of population affected by chronic illnesses. Hence outcome evaluation of the same would involve follow up assessment of knowledge, attitude and practices concerning chronic disease managementamong participants,obtainingfeedback and identificationof unintended consequences after project evaluation (Sligo et al., 2017). Question 3 Considering the estimated outcome of lifestyle and medication changes for chronic illnessmanagementusingprocessesofeducationalandhealthmanagementstrategies,as
2PROGRAM PLAN DESIGN AND EVALUATION reported by an outcome and process evaluation, the allocation of resources to pharmacists, nurses and clinicians is justified (Hsu et al., 2017). To further mitigate process evaluation estimation of possible barriers and management of engagement facilitators, the allocation of resources to social workers is justified (Moore et al., 2015). Question 4 Chronic illnesses can be prevented and mitigated through self management - which is an outcome of individual adherence to specific lifestyle and medication strategies as targeted by this project for the purpose of overall incidence minimization. Hence, outcome evaluation of enhanced awareness on disease management and improved disease minimized, strongly justifies the allocation of resources to designated medical personnel like nurses, pharmacists and social workers (Sorensen et al., 2016).
3PROGRAM PLAN DESIGN AND EVALUATION References Breuer, E., Lee, L., De Silva, M., & Lund, C. (2015). Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review.Implementation Science,11(1), 63. Hsu, H. C., Chuang, S. H., Hsu, S. W., Tung, H. J., Chang, S. C., Lee, M. M., ... & Po, A. T. (2017). Evaluation of a successful aging promotion intervention program for middle-aged adults in Taiwan.Global health promotion, 1757975917702087. Moore, G. F., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., ... & Baird, J. (2015). Processevaluationofcomplexinterventions:MedicalResearchCouncil guidance.bmj,350, h1258. Sligo, J., Gauld, R., Roberts, V., & Villa, L. (2017). A literature review for large-scale health informationsystemprojectplanning,implementationandevaluation.International journal of medical informatics,97, 86-97. Sorensen, G., Nagler, E. M., Hashimoto, D., Dennerlein, J. T., Theron, J., Stoddard, A. M., ... & Tamers, S. L. (2016). Implementing an integrated health protection/health promotion intervention in the hospital setting: lessons learned from the Be Well, Work Well study.Journalofoccupationalandenvironmentalmedicine/AmericanCollegeof Occupational and Environmental Medicine,58(2), 185.