HS420 Unit 3 Workflow Analysis Example

Reviewed by Elspeth Marlowe, MSN, RN Health Informatics Purdue University Global Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

The HS420 Unit 3 workflow analysis maps, step by step, how composite Hollis Park Pediatrics checks a child's immunization history, to learn how often a child got a dose the state registry already showed. Purdue Global HS 420 teaches BS in Health Science students to describe current work before designing new systems. A swimlane map across front desk, medical assistant, provider, nurse and registry lays out fourteen steps, from two separate logins and a sticky note to an end-of-day retyping session nobody checks. Triangles mark retyping, clocks mark waits and question marks mark steps without an owner. One month of 412 vaccine visits left 39 doses unreported after thirty days and six doses given unnecessarily, and every error passed through a marked step.

CourseHS420 Health Informatics
UnitUnit 3
Paper typeWorkflow analysis
LengthAbout 720 words, 5 pages double-spaced
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolPurdue University Global
ProgramBS in Health Science
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for HS420 Unit 3

1

Two Logins and a Sticky Note: A Unit 3 Workflow Analysis of the Immunization History Check at a Composite Pediatric Clinic

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

HS420: Health Informatics

Unit 3 Workflow Analysis

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Hollis Park Pediatrics, its visit counts and its error figures are composite; the process mapping article, the sociotechnical model and the study of information system errors cited are real.

What this part is doingPutting the two error counts in the lead shows the reader that the map is tied to measured harm, not only to inconvenience.
2

Why This Process

Of the four double-entry points found in the system overview, the immunization history check affects children directly. If a dose given elsewhere is missed, a child can receive an extra shot. If a dose given here is not reported, the next clinic may repeat it, and the school may reject the child's record.

Method

The analysis used a swimlane process map, which shows each step in order and assigns it to the role that performs it, so that handoffs and waits are visible (Antonacci et al., 2018). Steps were gathered by observing six visits, interviewing a medical assistant, a nurse and the vaccine coordinator, and checking one month's records. Lanes are front desk, medical assistant, provider, nurse and the state registry.

The Current Process, Step by Step

1. Front desk checks in the child and confirms the parent's phone number.

2. Medical assistant opens the health record and reviews the vaccine list.

3. Medical assistant opens a second window, logs into the registry website and searches by name and birth date.

4. If the registry finds more than one possible match, the medical assistant chooses one by address.

5. Medical assistant compares the registry list with the health record list on screen.

6. For any dose in the registry but not in the record, the medical assistant writes it on a sticky note.

7. Medical assistant types the historical doses into the health record.

8. Health record recalculates which vaccines are due.

9. Provider reviews the forecast and orders vaccines.

10. Nurse or medical assistant gives the vaccines and records them in the health record.

11. Nurse adds the day's doses to a paper list.

12. At the end of the day, the nurse logs into the registry and types each dose.

13. If the nurse is called away, the list waits until the next shift.

14. No one checks whether every dose on the list reached the registry.

Marks on the Map

Triangles mark retyping of data that already exists: steps 6, 7 and 12. Clocks mark waits: step 12, which waits until the day's end, and step 13, which can wait days. Question marks mark steps with no owner: step 4, where a wrong match is possible, and step 14, where nobody checks.

Every dose that went missing, and every extra dose that was given, passed through a step marked with a triangle or a question mark, never through a step the system did automatically.

What this part is doingThe highlighted sentence ties the errors to specific marks on the map, which is how a workflow analysis earns its conclusions.
3

What the Month Showed

[412] visits included vaccines, with [1,036] doses given. Thirty days later, [39] doses, 3.8 percent, were still not in the registry; most came from days when the nurse responsible was out. Six children received a dose the registry already showed from another provider, because the history check was skipped on a busy afternoon or the sticky note was lost. The median time for steps 3 to 7 was [4] minutes per visit, about [27] staff hours a month.

Why the Process Looks Like This

The process is not the result of careless staff. The registry offers an electronic connection, but the clinic's health record was never set up to use it, so people built workarounds. Workarounds of this kind are a common unintended consequence when systems do not fit the work (Ash et al., 2004). A sociotechnical view would say the problem sits in the fit between technology, workflow and people, not in any one of them (Sittig & Singh, 2010).

Future State in Brief

With a two-way electronic connection, step 3 to 7 would become a query the health record sends automatically when the visit opens, with the registry's doses offered for one-click acceptance. Steps 11 to 14 would disappear: doses would be sent as they are recorded, and rejected messages would land in a queue with a named owner. The next unit turns that future state into a list of requirements.

What this part is doingEnding with a short future state points the analysis toward the requirements unit, which keeps the course project connected.
4

References

Antonacci, G., Reed, J. E., Lennox, L., & Barlow, J. (2018). The use of process mapping in healthcare quality improvement projects. Health Services Management Research, 31(2), 74-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951484818770411

Ash, J. S., Berg, M., & Coiera, E. (2004). Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: The nature of patient care information system-related errors. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11(2), 104-112. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1471

Sittig, D. F., & Singh, H. (2010). A new sociotechnical model for studying health information technology in complex adaptive healthcare systems. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 19(Suppl. 3), i68-i74. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2010.042085

What the HS420 Unit 3 assignment asks for

Unit 3 usually asks for an analysis of one current workflow in a health setting, documented as a process map with a description of each step and an identification of problems. Analyses often run three to five pages, with the map as the centerpiece. Graders look for a process chosen for a reason, steps gathered by observation or interview rather than from a policy manual, each step assigned to a role, and problems marked on the map and linked to evidence such as error counts or time. Many sections also ask for a brief future state. Include steps staff skip, since the map must show what really happens. Cite a source on process mapping and one on how technology and work interact.

How the HS 420 Unit 3 example is put together

The analysis explains why this process was chosen from the four double-entry points found earlier. A method paragraph describes the swimlane map and how steps were gathered. Fourteen numbered steps follow in order with their roles. A section explains the three marks, retyping, waiting and missing ownership, and where each appears; the highlighted sentence ties every error to a marked step. A section reports one month's figures for unreported doses, unnecessary doses and staff time. A paragraph explains why the process grew this way, drawing on studies of workarounds and on the course's model of technology in context. A short future state describes an automatic query and automatic sending with an owned error queue.

HS420 Unit 3 rubric: what earns full points

Workflow analyses are generally marked on the accuracy of the current state, clarity of the map, identification of problems, use of evidence and the link to improvement. Accuracy and problem identification usually earn the most, since a map of the official procedure misses what the unit is teaching. Map clarity rewards roles, ordered steps and consistent symbols. Evidence credit goes to counts or timings that show a problem's size. The link to improvement earns points when the future state follows from the marked problems. Sources on process mapping and on technology in context complete the expected support, and clean step numbering lets a grader follow along.

Common HS420 Unit 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them

A frequent weakness is a map of how the process should work rather than how it does, which hides the very steps that cause errors. Another is a map with no roles, so handoffs disappear. Some students mark problems without any measure of their size. Others jump to a solution before finishing the current state. Leaving out skipped or informal steps, such as a sticky note, misses where data is lost. If you are mapping a different process, perhaps prescription refills or lab result follow-up, describe the steps you have observed and the people who do them, and the map can be drawn from there.

Get an HS420 Unit 3 example written to your instructions

Workflow analyses start from a process, so name the one assigned in Unit 3, or a process you intend to observe, then add the rubric and any mapping format required. The map, step table and counts are built on that process as it runs now. It is ready within 24-48h, and the first custom sample is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.

Request this unit free All HS420 units Finished samples

More HS420 papers and BS in Health Science samples

HS420 Unit 3 questions, answered

What mapping format does a workflow analysis use?

Swimlane maps are the most common because they show who does each step, but basic flowcharts and numbered step tables also appear in HS420 sections. The format matters less than consistency: every step on the map should appear in any table, with the same number. Free online diagram editors are adequate for coursework.

Can a current state include steps the staff admit they skip?

It should. A map that shows the documented procedure while staff skip two steps every day misrepresents the process being analyzed. The example records a skipped step as it happens, marked and explained, because skipped steps often point to the real problem. Keep individuals unnamed, and describe the step rather than the person.

Where can I find a free HS420 Unit 3 sample paper?

You will find the complete Unit 3 workflow analysis here, mapping a pediatric clinic's immunization history check in fourteen steps.

What is a swimlane map?

A process map divided into lanes, one per role, with each step placed in its performer's row so that handoffs between roles stand out.

How were the errors in the example measured?

By checking one month's vaccine doses against the registry thirty days later, and by reviewing which children received a dose the registry already showed.