HIM 690 Module 8 Journal Example

Reviewed by Delia Ravenscroft, MSN, RN

This HIM 690 Module 8 Journal sample reflects on presenting an unwelcome capstone result to senior leaders. It was written for SNHU HIM 690 (HIM-690), where the eighth module has MS Health Information Management candidates reflect on communicating findings and leading in difficult moments. The composite writer, a data integrity lead at an academic hospital in Tulsa, tells the quality committee that the hospital's low rate of pressure wounds acquired in its care is probably understated because admission flags call many such wounds pre-existing. The chief nursing officer, who had championed that rate, goes quiet, and a physician asks whether health information is trying to make nursing look bad. The entry looks at what went wrong in the room, what the research says about the finding and what the writer will do differently in the follow-up meeting.

CourseHIM 690 Health Information Management Capstone
ModuleModule 8
Paper typegraduate journal entry on presenting unwelcome capstone results
LengthAbout 350 words, 3 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolSouthern New Hampshire University
ProgramMS Health Information Management
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for HIM 690 Module 8

1

Module Eight Journal

The Rate Everyone Was Proud Of

I had twenty minutes on the quality committee agenda. By minute twelve, when I showed that 26 of 31 wrong pressure wound flags called our own wounds pre-existing, the chief nursing officer had stopped taking notes. A hospitalist asked, not unkindly, whether health information was trying to make nursing look bad. I answered with more data, which did not help.

What this page is doingThe entry opens in the middle of a difficult meeting.
2

The finding itself is sound. Reported safety rates move substantially depending on how present-on-admission values are set (Bahl et al., 2008), and Goldman et al. (2011) found flag errors common enough to warn against using them for payment without improvement. Our rate has been featured in board reports for two years, and the nursing leaders who built the prevention program have reason to be proud of real work. My finding does not say their program failed. It says we cannot tell how well it worked, because the measure was partly wrong. I never said that sentence in the meeting.

Looking back, I made three mistakes. I presented to the whole committee before briefing the chief nursing officer privately, so she heard it at the same moment as everyone else. I led with the error rate rather than with the question we share, which is whether our patients are protected. And I answered a worry about blame with statistics. Kotter (1995) wrote that change efforts need a guiding coalition before the vision is broadcast; I broadcast first and looked for allies afterward.

I also learned something I did not expect. After the meeting, the nurse manager of the unit with the required skin template stopped me in the hallway and said her unit's rate looked worse than others only because it was the honest one. She wants to help present the fix.

What this page is doingThe writer separates the finding from the delivery and names mistakes.
3

For the follow-up meeting, I will meet the chief nursing officer first, open with patient protection, show accuracy and rate side by side and ask the nurse manager to describe her unit. I will also stop answering a feeling with a number. The data will not change; the way I bring them will.

What this page is doingThe writer commits to specific changes for the next meeting.
4

References

Bahl, V., Thompson, M. A., Kau, T.-Y., Hu, H. M., & Campbell, D. A. (2008). Do the AHRQ patient safety indicators flag conditions that are present at the time of hospital admission? Medical Care, 46(5), 516-522. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e31815f537f

Goldman, L. E., Chu, P. W., Osmond, D., & Bindman, A. (2011). The accuracy of present-on-admission reporting in administrative data. Health Services Research, 46(6pt1), 1946-1962. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01300.x

Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59-67.

What the HIM 690 Module 8 instructions ask for

HIM 690's eighth module asks you to reflect on communicating capstone findings, especially ones people did not want to hear. About a page is typical, in first person, with a reading or two in APA 7 where they help. Describe a real or anticipated presentation: who was in the room, what you said and how people reacted. Separate the finding itself, which should stand on its evidence, from how it was delivered. Identify specific things you would do differently, such as who to brief first, what to lead with and how to respond to concerns about blame. Note anything unexpected you learned from the reaction. Close with concrete changes for your next presentation or follow-up meeting.

How this HIM 690 Module 8 journal example is built

Cimarron Heights Medical Center's capstone writer presents to the quality committee that 26 of 31 wrong wound flags called hospital wounds pre-existing. The chief nursing officer stops taking notes and a hospitalist asks whether HIM is trying to make nursing look bad. Bahl and colleagues and Goldman and colleagues confirm the finding is sound, but the writer names three delivery mistakes: no private briefing, leading with errors instead of shared purpose and answering worry with statistics, read through Kotter's point about building a coalition first. A nurse manager offers help. The HIM 690 journal commits to a private briefing, a patient-first opening and side-by-side accuracy and rate. Evidence stays fixed; delivery changes.

Where the HIM 690 Module 8 rubric puts the points

Journal entries in HIM 690 on communicating results are usually graded on an honest account of a specific presentation, a clear distinction between the strength of the evidence and the quality of its delivery, specific self-critique, use of research to understand the situation and concrete changes for next time. Entries that score highest show empathy for those who hear unwelcome news without softening the finding itself. Graders value recognition of unexpected allies and of how the writer's own behavior shaped the reaction. A personal yet professional voice, de-identified details and correct APA 7 citations support the stronger ratings. Entries that blame the audience score lower. Specific next steps beat general lessons.

HIM 690 Module 8 help: the mistakes that cost points

Journals on presenting results in this course often lose marks by blaming the audience, softening the finding to avoid conflict, describing the presentation without self-critique or ending with a vague plan to communicate better. If you have not presented yet, the prompt may allow a reflection on an anticipated presentation; send it with your key findings and the audience, and the entry will plan the delivery thoughtfully. Your audience's stake in the result matters, so describe it. Our HIM 690 journals keep the evidence firm, own the delivery mistakes and end with specific changes for the next conversation. Composite details are fine.

Get HIM 690 Module 8 written to your instructions

Send the HIM 690 Module 8 prompt with a short account of your presentation, or your plan for one, and the key finding. The journal will reflect honestly on the room, separate evidence from delivery, draw on research and close with specific changes for your next meeting, written within one to two days, free for a first order. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.

Request this module free All HIM 690 modules

More HIM 690 papers and related MS Health Information Management samples

HIM 690 Module 8 questions, answered

Where can I find a free HIM 690 Module 8 Journal sample?

This page has the complete HIM 690 Module 8 journal, reflecting on presenting a finding that a hospital's pressure wound rate was understated.

How should unwelcome capstone results be presented?

Brief key leaders privately first, open with the shared goal, present the evidence clearly and separate what the data show from any judgment about people.

Why can better data make performance look worse?

Correcting measurement errors can raise reported problem rates even when care is unchanged, so leaders need context to read the new numbers.

What should a reflection on a difficult presentation include?

What happened, how people reacted, what you would do differently and specific changes for the next conversation, without softening the evidence.

Can a journal reflect on a presentation that has not happened yet?

Some prompts allow it. Plan the delivery around the audience's stake in the finding and anticipate their concerns.