NURS 6421 Week 4 Task Analysis Example

Course	NURS 6421 Supporting Workflow in Healthcare Systems
Week	Week 4
Paper type	Task analysis
Length	About 670 words, 5 pages
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Walden University
Program	Master of Science in Nursing (MSN)
Updated	September 2026

Free sample paper for NURS 6421 Week 4

One Box Opened: A Task Analysis of Booking a Referred Patient, Nineteen Actions Across Two Systems and One Phone Call

Student Name

College of Nursing, Walden University

NURS 6421: Supporting Workflow in Healthcare Systems

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title names the single step being opened, so the reader knows the analysis goes deep rather than wide.

One Box Opened: A Task Analysis of Booking a Referred Patient, Nineteen Actions Across Two Systems and One Phone Call

The Step and the Method

On the current-state referral map for our composite sleep medicine clinic, step 19 reads: scheduler books appointment when patient responds. It looks like one action. This analysis opens that box using hierarchical task analysis, which breaks a goal into subtasks and then into the actions that achieve them, recording the order and conditions under which each happens (Kirwan & Ainsworth, 1992). The scheduler was observed booking four patients on one morning, using direct observation, the method workflow researchers use most often (Unertl et al., 2010), and the actions below are those common to all four. Systems are described by function: the clinical record, which holds the referral queue and the patient chart, and the scheduling system, which holds provider calendars.

Task Table

Table 1

Actions in Booking One Referred Patient

No.	Action	Type	Input and its source	Failure if input is missing
1	Answer the return call from the patient	Movement	Phone line	Call goes to voicemail; loop restarts
2	Confirm two identifiers with the caller	Entry	Patient	Wrong patient opened
3	Open the referral queue in the clinical record	Movement	Clinical record
4	Search the queue by name	Search	Clinical record	Duplicate referrals appear
5	Decide which of the matching referrals is current	Decision	Referral dates, notes	Books against a stale referral
6	Read the triage pathway (visit first or study first)	Movement	Triage note	Books the wrong appointment type
7	Check whether authorization is approved	Decision	Authorization field	Books before approval; visit later canceled
8	Wait while the authorization screen loads	Wait	Clinical record
9	Open the scheduling system in a second window	Movement	Scheduling system
10	Search the scheduling system for the same patient	Search	Scheduling system	Patient not yet registered there
11	Select the provider named in the triage note	Entry	Triage note	Provider preference lost
12	Wait while the provider calendar loads	Wait	Scheduling system
13	Offer the first two available new-patient slots	Movement	Calendar
14	Wait while the patient checks their own calendar	Wait	Patient
15	Decide with the patient on a slot	Decision	Patient, calendar
16	Book the slot and select the visit type	Entry	Scheduling system	Wrong visit length
17	Return to the clinical record and mark the referral as scheduled	Entry	Clinical record	Referral stays open; patient called again
18	Confirm the date and intake questionnaire with the patient	Movement	Patient
19	End the call	Movement	Phone line

What the Table Shows

The nineteen actions include three decisions, three waits, two pure searches and four entries, with the remaining seven being movements between screens, people and the phone. Waits occupy their own rows because, folded into the actions around them, they disappear from any estimate of how long booking takes; in the four observed bookings, the three waits together took longer than any single entry. Actions 4 and 10 are pure searching: the scheduler looks for the same patient twice, once in each system, because the two systems do not share a patient context. That duplication is invisible on the process map, where it sits inside a single box.

Three actions carry every failure the scheduler described. Action 5, choosing the current referral, fails when duplicates from Loop A on the map exist. Action 7, checking authorization, fails when the field has not been updated after an approval arrives by fax. Action 17, marking the referral as scheduled in the other system, is the step most often forgotten, because the booking already feels complete; when it is missed, the patient is called again days later by a colleague working the queue. Each failure sits at a point where information must cross between the two systems or be carried in the scheduler's memory. Human factors frameworks locate errors like these in the interaction between tasks and tools rather than in the individual (Holden et al., 2013), and the task analysis makes that interaction visible action by action.

What this page is doingThe closing paragraph counts the actions and names the three that carry every failure, so the analysis ends on something a redesign can target.

References

Holden, R. J., Carayon, P., Gurses, A. P., Hoonakker, P., Hundt, A. S., Ozok, A. A., & Rivera-Rodriguez, A. J. (2013). SEIPS 2.0: A human factors framework for studying and improving the work of healthcare professionals and patients. Ergonomics, 56(11), 1669-1686. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2013.838643

Kirwan, B., & Ainsworth, L. K. (Eds.). (1992). A guide to task analysis. Taylor & Francis.

Unertl, K. M., Novak, L. L., Johnson, K. B., & Lorenzi, N. M. (2010). Traversing the many paths of workflow research: Developing a conceptual framework of workflow terminology through a systematic literature review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 17(3), 265-273. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2010.004333

Reading the NURS 6421 Week 4 instructions

Week 4 in this course typically calls for a task analysis of one step or activity from your process map, breaking it into its component actions, identifying who or what supplies each input and noting where errors or delays occur. Prompts often name hierarchical task analysis or a similar method and ask for a table. The analysis is usually two to three pages. Choose a box that looked simple on the map but takes real time, observe it several times and record the actions common to each. Describe systems by function rather than by product name, and leave out screenshots. If your prompt allows, observe the step on different days to see which actions vary.

Inside the NURS 6421 Week 4 example

The first section identifies the map step, the method and the four observed bookings, and names the two systems by function. Table 1 lists nineteen actions with type, input source and failure point. The closing section counts actions by type, explains why waits are listed separately, points out that actions 4 and 10 search for the same patient in two systems and names actions 5, 7 and 17 as the three that carry every described failure. It ties each failure to information crossing between systems or held in memory, citing a human factors framework, and notes that the duplication is invisible on the process map.

Where the marks sit in the NURS 6421 Week 4 rubric

Task analysis rubrics generally score depth of decomposition, accuracy, identification of inputs and failure points, connection to the process map, insight into sources of error or delay, and presentation. Depth is judged by whether the analysis reveals actions a worker would not mention in an interview. Accuracy rests on observation. Inputs and failure points are often scored together. Connection to the map rewards naming the box being analyzed. Insight earns the most credit when the analysis identifies a pattern, such as duplicated searches, that suggests a design change. Presentation covers a clear table and APA references. Some rubrics also reward counting actions by type, since the counts often reveal the pattern that matters most.

NURS 6421 Week 4 help: mistakes that cost marks

The most common loss is stopping at the level of the process map, listing four or five actions that repeat the box's label. Another is folding waits into other actions, which hides where time goes. Some analyses describe what the worker should do rather than what they did. Others include screenshots from an employer system. Observe the step more than once, write each action with a verb, list waits and searches as their own rows, note what fails when each input is missing and finish by naming the actions where most failures cluster. Also check that every failure you name can be traced to a specific action row, since graders look for that link.

Get a NURS 6421 Week 4 example written to your instructions

Name the step your classroom assigned, attach the prompt and the rubric, and a NURS 6421 task analysis comes back decomposed to that depth on a composite version of the step. Systems and screens stay generic, and nothing owned by your employer is reproduced. The first custom sample is free and reaches you inside 24-48h.

More NURS 6421 papers and MSN samples

NURS 6421 Week 4 questions, answered

How deep does a task analysis have to go?

Deep enough that the reader learns something the worker would not have said in an interview. In practice that means the individual moves inside each named action, including the ones performed without thinking. The example runs to nineteen actions on a step most people describe in a single sentence, which is roughly the ratio these prompts expect. Depth that adds nothing a reader can use has gone too far.

Do you need my organization's screens?

Not at all, and we will not use them. Systems appear by function in the sample: the scheduling system, the referral queue, the phone. That keeps a vendor name and a real configuration off the page while leaving the analysis usable. Your own version can name whatever your instructor allows you to name. Function names survive a system upgrade; captured screens do not.

Is a task analysis the same as a process map?

No. A map answers what happens across a whole process and who does each part. A task analysis answers what one of those boxes actually contains. The two run together in this course, and a strong Week 4 submission names the map box it opened, which is the connection graders look for first. Submissions confusing the two usually surrender the decomposition row outright.

Where can I find a free NURS 6421 Week 4 sample paper?

This page carries the whole task analysis, the table of nineteen actions and the closing section, free to read. A task analysis of the step your section chooses can be drafted to its method on request.

Which step should I choose for the NURS 6421 task analysis?

Pick a box on your process map that looks like one action but takes minutes and involves more than one system or person. Booking, admission intake and medication reconciliation are common choices.

NURS 6421 Week 4 task analysis example