New here? Get 15% off your first order.See how it works

Nursing questions

Emerging Wireless Technology in the Healthcare

Four required moves and the third is the one nobody writes. Staffing and support for a wireless clinical network is a real cost, and the paper is graded on whether you costed it.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 23, 2026

01

The staffing task is the one that gets skipped

Four moves are required and three of them are comfortable. Summarising the technology is research, describing business value is argument, and analysing risk is where the interesting material lives. The third task, assessing additional staffing and support requirements, is the one that gets a sentence when it should get a section, and it is also the one that distinguishes a management paper from a technology essay. A clinical wireless network is not self-maintaining. It needs network engineering with clinical awareness, device management for an inventory that walks out of the building, a service desk that can triage a nurse's failed scan at three in the morning, biomedical engineering for networked devices that are also regulated equipment, and security operations. Cost that, at least in headcount terms, and the paper acquires a spine. Roles and rough headcount are what turn this from a technology essay into a management paper.

The regulatory analysis should be specific rather than a general appeal to privacy law. The security rule requires transmission security and access controls, which for wireless means encryption in transit, authentication, and audit logging that can attribute an access to a person rather than to a shared device. Medical devices communicating wirelessly are regulated as devices, which constrains how quickly you may patch them and creates the specific problem that a security update may require revalidation. Spectrum matters too, since dedicated medical telemetry bands exist precisely because ordinary wireless traffic cannot be allowed to contend with patient monitoring. For each problem, name a mitigation that a real organisation would implement: network segmentation, device certificates rather than shared keys, a validated patching pathway agreed with the vendor, and coverage surveys before deployment rather than complaints after it. None of those is exotic, and naming them is what a marker is looking for.

Likely learning objectives

  • Treat staffing and support as a costed requirement rather than an afterthought.
  • Name specific regulatory requirements rather than appealing to privacy generally.
  • Recognise the patching constraint created by device regulation.
  • Pair each identified risk with an implementable mitigation.

Assignment instructions

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

Case Study 1: Emerging Wireless Technology in the Healthcare Industry The medical industry is a good example of an industry that must balance the security issues associated with wireless technologies with the business value added from wireless technologies. Read the article about emerging wireless medical technologies titled, “How 5G (and concomitant technologies) will revolutionize healthcare” Read the Information Week article about how wireless and mobile devices will change the healthcare practices titled “Strategy: How Mobility, Apps and BYOD Will Transform Healthcare”. Write a 4-page paper in which you do the following: Summarize the current and emerging wireless medical technologies. Describe the wireless components needed for added business value in the healthcare environment. Assess the additional staffing and support requirements needed to support the wireless technologies. Analyze the potential technical and regulatory problems with implementing a wireless network in a healthcare organization and describe the mitigation methods to overcome these potential problems in the healthcare industry. Use at least three quality resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar websites do not qualify as quality resources. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: Be typed, double-spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with 1-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions. Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are as follows: Compare and contrast wireless systems and their recent advances. Evaluate the application of wireless LANs, MANs, and PANs.

Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes. Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages. Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor. The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument. Rubric Criteria Total70 points Criterion 1. Unsatisfactory 2. Less Than Satisfactory 3. Satisfactory 4. Good 5. Excellent Layout Layout 0 points The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident. 2.8 points The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text. 3.08 points The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability. 3.22 points The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. 3.5 points The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text. Presentation of Content Presentation of Content 0 points The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear. 2.8 points The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information. 3.08 points The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other. 3.22 points The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive information from reliable sources. 3.5 points The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea. Discussion of Potential Strengths and Limitations of the Technology Discussion of Potential Strengths and Limitations of the Technology 0 points Discussion of the potential strengths and limitations of the technology is not present. 5.6 points Discussion of the potential strengths and limitations of the technology is present but incomplete. 6.16 points Discussion of the potential strengths and limitations of the technology is present but done at a perfunctory level. 6.44 points Discussion of the potential strengths and limitations of the technology is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 7 points Discussion of the potential strengths and limitations of the technology is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. Documentation of Sources Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 0 points Sources are not documented. 5.6 points Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. 6.16 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. 6.44 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. 7 points Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. Applicable Theory to Guide Presentation Applicable Theory to Guide Presentation 0 points Discussion of applicable theory to guide presentation is not present. 8.4 points Discussion of applicable theory to guide presentation is present but incomplete. 9.24 points Discussion of applicable theory to guide presentation is present but done at a perfunctory level. 9.66 points Discussion of applicable theory to guide presentation is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 10.5 points Discussion of applicable theory to guide presentation is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. How the Technology Will Assist in Resolving the Select Clinical Problem How the Technology Will Assist in Resolving the Select Clinical Problem 0 points Discussion of how the technology will assist in resolving the select clinical problem is not present. 8.4 points Discussion of how the technology will assist in resolving the select clinical problem is present but incomplete. 9.24 points Discussion of how the technology will assist in resolving the select clinical problem is present but done at a perfunctory level. 9.66 points Discussion of how the technology will assist in resolving the select clinical problem is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 10.5 points Discussion of how the technology will assist in resolving the select clinical problem is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) 0 points Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately. 2.8 points Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately. 3.08 points Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part. 3.22 points The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly. 3.5 points The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope. Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 0 points Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. 5.6 points Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. 6.16 points Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. 6.44 points Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. 7 points Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English. Brief Description of Clinical Problem Brief Description of Clinical Problem 0 points Brief description of clinical problem is not present. 5.6 points Brief description of clinical problem is present but incomplete. 6.16 points Brief description of clinical problem is present but done at a perfunctory level. 6.44 points Brief description of clinical problem is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 7 points Brief description of clinical problem is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. Problem-Specific Technology to Improve Patient Outcomes Problem-Specific Technology to Improve Patient Outcomes 0 points Discussion of a problem-specific technology to improve patient outcomes is not present. 8.4 points Discussion of a problem-specific technology to improve patient outcomes is present but incomplete. 9.24 points Discussion of a problem-specific technology to improve patient outcomes is present but done at a perfunctory level. 9.66 points Discussion of a problem-specific technology to improve patient outcomes is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 10.5 points Discussion of a problem-specific technology to improve patient outcomes is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

02

What the wireless case study requires

  1. 01A four page paper in the specified format.
  2. 02A summary of current and emerging wireless medical technologies.
  3. 03A description of the wireless components needed for added business value.
  4. 04An assessment of the additional staffing and support requirements.
  5. 05An analysis of potential technical and regulatory problems with mitigation methods.
  6. 06At least three quality resources, excluding Wikipedia and similar sites.
03

Technology, value, people, then risk

01

The technology landscape

Summarise current and emerging wireless medical technologies concisely.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Current and emerging distinguished.

02

Components that add business value

Identify the infrastructure and applications that generate the value claimed.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Value tied to a named component rather than to wireless in general.

03

Staffing and support

Set out the roles, skills and headcount required to run this reliably.

What the assessor is likely looking for

A costed operational requirement.

04

Technical problems

Cover coverage, contention, interference and device management.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Problems specific to a clinical environment.

05

Regulatory problems

Name security rule requirements and device regulation constraints.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Specific obligations rather than general privacy concern.

06

Mitigations

Give an implementable mitigation for each problem identified.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Mitigations a real organisation would recognise.

04

Where the technical and regulatory sources sit

Recommended databases

  • HealthIT.gov
  • NIST
  • PubMed Central
  • University Library

Search sequence

  1. 1.Read the two supplied articles before searching anything else.
  2. 2.Look up the security rule technical safeguards rather than paraphrasing privacy law.
  3. 3.Search medical device cybersecurity for the patching constraint.
  4. 4.Find a peer-reviewed implementation study for the staffing estimate.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Clinical Decision Support

Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology · 2024

Review before citing

Clinical systems governance, for how technology reaches clinical workflow safely.

06

Before you submit the paper

Common mistakes

  • Giving the staffing assessment one sentence.
  • Appealing to privacy law without naming a specific requirement.
  • Ignoring that networked medical devices cannot be patched freely.
  • Listing risks without mitigations.
  • Using vendor marketing material as a quality resource.

Submission checklist

  • Does the staffing section name roles and rough headcount?
  • Are the regulatory requirements named specifically?
  • Have you addressed device patching and revalidation?
  • Does every risk have a mitigation attached?
  • Are your three sources genuinely of research quality?

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read Brinevia's academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Maren Caldwell

MSN, RN, CNE

Medical-surgical nursing, pharmacology and NCLEX preparation

Maren is a registered nurse with over 15 years of clinical and educational experience in medical-surgical nursing. She writes on NCLEX preparation, patient care fundamentals, pharmacology and evidence-based practice.

Reviewed by

Dr. Tessa Redmond

DNP, RN, CNE

Evidence-based practice and clinical education

Tessa is a doctorally-prepared nurse educator. She reviews Brinevia content for clinical accuracy and alignment with current evidence-based guidelines.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order