HLT 308 Week 4 Discussion Question One
The prompt offers a way out if you have no organisation to describe, and it asks for suggested actions either way. Both details shape what a complete post looks like.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 25, 2026
The alternative route, and why actions are the graded part
Anchor the post in the National Patient Safety Goals themselves rather than in patient safety generally, since the prompt names them and they are a short, specific list: patient identification, communication of critical results, medication safety including anticoagulants and labelling, alarm management, infection prevention through hand hygiene and device-related infection, suicide risk identification, and surgical site verification. Choosing three from that list gives you an authoritative anchor and stops the post drifting into general complaints about staffing. The prompt also offers an alternative if you cannot describe an organisation, which is worth using honestly rather than inventing a workplace you do not have. Using it also gives you a citable source for the issues themselves rather than an assertion, and it makes the two peer-reviewed references easier to find, because the goals are heavily studied and the general complaints are not. Three goals chosen from that list also keeps the post inside the framework the prompt named.
The graded content is in the actions, and the useful discipline is to identify the level each action operates at, because safety interventions are unequally reliable. Telling staff to be careful is the weakest form and has the shortest half-life; a policy or a training session is stronger; a forcing function that makes the wrong action impossible, such as barcode scanning that will not proceed on a mismatch, or a connector that physically cannot attach to the wrong line, is the strongest. Say which level your suggestion sits at and why you chose it, since that is exactly the reasoning a safety committee applies. Then add the measure: for each issue, name what would be counted to know whether the action worked, because a suggestion with no measure is an opinion and two peer-reviewed references are easier to find for measured interventions than for good intentions.
Likely learning objectives
- Anchor the discussion in the named National Patient Safety Goals.
- Use the prompt's alternative route honestly if you lack organisational access.
- Rank safety interventions by reliability, from exhortation to forcing function.
- Attach a measure to each suggested action.
Assignment instructions
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
The Joint Commission introduced the National Patient Safety Goals to address patient safety issues within health care organizations. Determine three patient safety issues that are being addressed by your health care organization. Identify the actions the organization is taking or identify three issues that you think need to be addressed by health care organizations. Make suggestion for actions to be taken. Support your responses with two peer-reviewed references.
What Week 4 DQ 1 asks for
- 01Three patient safety issues being addressed by your health care organisation and the actions it is taking, or three issues you think need addressing.
- 02Suggestions for actions to be taken.
- 03Support from two peer-reviewed references.
- 04Engagement with the Joint Commission's National Patient Safety Goals.
Three issues, three actions
The goals as the frame
Introduce the National Patient Safety Goals and their purpose.
What the assessor is likely looking for
The named framework used as the anchor.
Issue one
Describe the issue, its mechanism of harm and its local form.
What the assessor is likely looking for
A mechanism rather than a category.
Issue two
The same treatment for a second goal area.
What the assessor is likely looking for
A genuinely different failure mode.
Issue three
The same again, avoiding overlap with the first two.
What the assessor is likely looking for
Breadth across the goal set.
Actions and their reliability
Propose an action per issue and place it on the reliability hierarchy.
What the assessor is likely looking for
Level identified and justified.
Measurement
Name what would be counted for each action.
What the assessor is likely looking for
A measure that could fail.
Where the safety goals and evidence sit
Recommended databases
- The Joint Commission
- AHRQ PSNet
- PubMed Central
- NCBI Bookshelf
Search sequence
- 1.Read the current National Patient Safety Goals and choose three.
- 2.Search evaluated interventions for each chosen goal.
- 3.Read on the hierarchy of intervention effectiveness before writing the actions.
- 4.Find the measures used in the studies you cite.
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.
Sentinel Event Policy
The Joint Commission · 2025
Sentinel event policy, for the accreditation framing of safety events.
Sentinel Event Data
The Joint Commission · 2024
Sentinel event data, for which failure types actually recur.
High Reliability
AHRQ PSNet · 2025
High reliability, for the intervention hierarchy behind the actions.
Patient Safety and Quality
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, NCBI Bookshelf · 2008
Patient safety and quality, for evidence on nursing-sensitive safety issues.
Nursing and Patient Safety
AHRQ Patient Safety Network · 2024
Nursing and patient safety, for the local form these issues take.
Before you post
Common mistakes
- Discussing safety generally rather than the named goals.
- Inventing an organisation rather than using the prompt's alternative.
- Suggesting education and vigilance as the action for all three issues.
- Omitting how anyone would know the action worked.
- Citing news or organisational sources where peer-reviewed ones are required.
Submission checklist
- Are the three issues drawn from the National Patient Safety Goals?
- Does each issue have a specific suggested action?
- Is the reliability level of each action identified?
- Does each action have a measure?
- Are two peer-reviewed references cited?
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.