[ANSWER]7102NRS: Complex Clinical Care- Written Assignment Task 3 – Coroner’s Case Study

TASK DESCRIPTION

Complex Clinical Care Assignment Task 3

7102NRS: Complex Clinical Care

Written Assignment Task 3 – Coroner’s case study

Essay: 2000 words

Weighting: 40%

Due Date: see Course Profile

Aim:

The aim of this essay is for you to demonstrate critical evaluation of a patient deterioration event that ended in death. Patients who deteriorate and die when accessing health services are rarely simple cases and all members of the team usually have a part to play in the events that occur. You will develop an applied understanding of how to identify factors that lead to poor outcomes and suggest ways to avoid these outcomes in the future. Safe patient care is often determined by the vigilance of staff caring for them and this essay will assist you to identify where vigilance is necessary for patient safety in a complex situation.

This assessment addresses learning outcomes 1, 2, and 4

1. Apply critical thinking and problem-solving skills to design comprehensive situational assessment for complex clients.

2. Interpret evidence to identify and manage deteriorating clients and support their families.

4. Apply advanced knowledge and judgement to manage ethical and legal issues in high-risk situations to promote best health outcomes

Task description:

For this task you need to write a 2000-word essay in which you critically evaluate a case study of a patient who has died, related to your clinical specialty.

You must structure your essay using the following headings and inclusions:

  • Introduction: Introduce the topic                                                               [100 words]
  • Recognition and response to deterioration in complex clients: Discuss and justify how recognition and response to deteriorating clients influences patient outcomes.      [200 words]
  • Case study evaluation: Review the case study.
    • Research the condition and management recommendations for the patient in the case study.
    • Critically evaluate the case study and identify the situational factors and most important points of time during the care where incorrect decisions or missed opportunities to intervene influenced the deterioration of the client.
    • Identify patient-related complexities that contributed to the outcome.
    • Outline legal and ethical issues if they exist as well as best practice requirements that were missed or not well applied.
    • Support your evaluation with reference to the literature.                   [800 words]
  • Recommendations: Provide recommendations/strategies for improvement related to the trigger points you identified to reduce the risk of future errors or poor patient outcomes.
    • Explain how applying leadership approaches to the situation may promote alternate outcomes.
    • Align your recommendations with the quality health standards pertinent to your practice (In Australia these are the National Safety and Quality Health Service (NSQHS) Standards).
    • Support your recommendations/strategies with rationales underpinned with research evidence.                                                                                             [800 words]

Conclusion: Conclude with a summary statement about the priority areas of discussion for this case study related to the effective management of complex clients        [100 words]

Other elements: 

  • Always refer to the Health Writing and Referencing Guide.
  • Use APA 7th edition referencing style.
  • Ensure that you use scholarly literature[1](digitised readings, research articles, relevant Government reports and text books) that has been published within the last five years; you may use seminal literature as relevant.
  • Use academic language[2] throughout.
  • The use of headings in this essay is appropriate.
  • Word limit of 2000 words needs to be strictly adhered to. The word limit for an assessment item includes in-text citations, tables and quotations. The word limit DOES NOT include the reference list and headings. Please note the marker will cease marking your submitted work once they have reached the allocated word limit.
  • Refer to the marking guidelines when writing your assignment.  This will assist you in calculating the weightings of the sections for your assignment.

[1] Scholarly or peer-reviewed journal articles are written by scholars or professionals who are experts in their fields, as opposed to literature such as magazine articles, which reflect the tastes of the general public and are often meant as entertainment.

[2] Everyday language is predominantly subjective. It is mainly used to express opinions based on personal preference or belief rather than evidence. Written academic English is formal. It avoids colloquialisms and slang, which may be subject to local and social variations. Formal language is more precise and stable, and therefore more suitable for the expression of complex ideas and the development of reasoned argumentation.

Complex Clinical Care Assessment 3 – 7102NRS GRADING RUBRIC

Task-specific criteria20-1716.5-1514.5-1312.5-109.5-0
Recognition and response to deterioration   (Total possible marks 20)  Clearly and concisely evaluates the situational factors related to recognition and response of patient deterioration and uses the literature to demonstrate evidence of wide reading.Able to discriminate high quality evidence-based literature that is highly relevant to the issues identified.Concise and excellent justification and application of evidence presented.Clearly evaluates the situational factors related to recognition and response of patient deterioration and uses the literature to demonstrate evidence of wide reading.Able to discriminate high quality evidence-based literature that is mostly relevant to the issues identified. Detailed justification and application of evidence presented.Evaluates most of the situational factors related to recognition and response of patient deterioration and uses the literature to demonstrate evidence of wide reading.Mostly able to discriminate high quality evidence-based literature generally relevant to the issues identified.Sound justification and application of evidence presented.Evaluates the essential situational factors related to recognition and response of patient deterioration and uses the literature to demonstrate evidence of adequate reading.Generally able to discriminate evidence-based literature relevant to the issues identified.Basic justification and application of evidence presented.Discussion provided only, evaluation not undertaken, of the essential situational factors related to recognition and response of patient deterioration and uses the literature to demonstrate limited scope of reading.Literature cited often not relevant to chosen patient case presented or not from valid academic sources (e.g., websites) OR parts of your assignment were not supported by appropriate references.Poor justification of evidence presented. Links to the chosen patient case are unclear.  
Complex Clinical Care Assignment
 40-3433-3029-2625-2019-0
Case study critical evaluation   (Total possible marks 40)Clearly and concisely evaluates the situational factors related to the patient’s deterioration in the chosen case study.Includes strong justification for evaluation of case study with reference to best practice guidelines and a wide range of scholarly literature.Clearly and concisely discusses patient factors that created complexity in the chosen case. Comprehensive, concise, and relevant discussion of all/any legal or ethical issues identified in the chosen case study. Able to discriminate high quality evidence-based literature that is highly relevant to the issues identified.Clearly evaluates the situational factors related to the patient’s deterioration in the chosen case study.Able to justify evaluation of case study with reference to best practice guidelines and a wide range of scholarly literature. Clearly discusses patient factors that created complexity in the chosen case. Comprehensive and relevant discussion of all/any legal or ethical issues identified in the chosen case study. Able to discriminate high quality evidence-based literature that is mostly relevant to the chosen patient case.Evaluates most of the situational factors related to the patient’s deterioration in the chosen case study.Most often able to justify evaluation of case study with reference to best practice guidelines and a range of scholarly literature. Detailed discussion of many patient factors that created complexity in the chosen case. Detailed and relevant discussion of most/any legal or ethical issues identified in the chosen case study.Mostly able to discriminate high quality evidence-based literature generally relevant to the chosen patient case.Evaluates the essential situational factors related to the patient’s deterioration in the chosen case study. Able to justify essential elements of evaluation of case study with reference to best practice guidelines and a range of scholarly literature. Discusses main patient factors that created complexity in the chosen case. Relevant discussion of many/any legal or ethical issues identified in the chosen case study. Generally able to discriminate evidence-based literature relevant to the chosen patient case.Discussion provided only, evaluation not undertaken, or situational factors discussed not relevant to the patient as described. Inadequate justification of evaluation of case study OR does not regularly reference best practice guidelines using a range of scholarly literature.Unclear or inadequate discussion of many patient factors that created complexity in the chosen case. Inadequate discussion of many/any legal or ethical issues identified in the chosen case study. Literature cited often not relevant to chosen patient case presented or not from valid academic sources (e.g., lay websites).                    
Complex Clinical Care Assignment
 30-25.525-22.522-19.519-1514.5-0
Recommendations for improvement to reduce risk of future errors (Total possible marks 30)Excellent, comprehensive, and relevant recommendations developed supported by concise and thorough justification and application of evidence presented.All recommendations showed strong links to quality standards, ethical and legal principles (where appropriate) and how this could impact positively on patient outcomes.Detailed and relevant recommendations developed supported by concise and excellent justification and application of evidence presented.All recommendations showed direct links to quality standards, ethical and legal principles (where appropriate) and how this could impact positively on patient outcomes.  Credible and relevant recommendations developed supported by sound justification and application of evidence presented.Most recommendations showed links to quality standards, ethical and legal principles (where appropriate) and how this could impact positively on patient outcomes.  Recommendations developed were mostly relevant and supported by justification and application of evidence presented.Some recommendations showed some links to quality standards, ethical and legal principles (where appropriate) and how this could impact positively on patient outcomes.  Inadequate recommendations developed. Links to the chosen patient case may be unclear.Recommendations were poorly linked to quality standards, ethical and legal principles (where appropriate) or how this could impact positively on patient outcomes.  
 10-8.58-7.57-6.56-55-0
Referencing style and essay presentation (Total possible marks 10)References cited using APA 7th edition in-text and reference list, consistent with very few if any, minor errors.References are predominantly sourced from a range of peer-reviewed research.There were no mistakes in punctuation, English expression, spelling, grammar &/or syntax and non-discriminatory language was used throughout.Excellent organisation of ideas / logical sequence. Key points clear and relevant to topicReferences cited using APA 7 in-text and reference list, consistent with few minor errors.At least half of the references are sourced from peer-reviewed research. Non-discriminatory language was used throughout there were very few minor mistakes in English expression, spelling, punctuation, grammar &/or syntax.Very good organisation of ideas / logical sequence.Key points clear and relevant to topic.References cited using APA 7 in-text and reference list, consistent with some minor errors.At least half of the references are sourced from peer-reviewed articles. There were some mistakes in English expression, spelling, punctuation, grammar &/or syntax.Good organisation of ideas / logical sequence. Key points clear and relevant to topic.References cited using APA 7 in-text and reference list; may be some major or minor errors.The references are predominantly from websites or grey literature. Several mistakes in English expression, spelling, punctuation, grammar &/or syntax indicate lack of proof reading.Organisation of ideas / logical sequence.Key points clear and relevant to topic.References not consistently cited using APA 7 in-text and reference list; major errors in applying APA 7 style.The references are from non-peer reviewed sources. Multiple errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation. Organisation of ideas / sequence lack logical arrangement.Key points clear and relevant to topic.
Complex Clinical Care Assignment

[ANSWER PREVIEW]

Managing a complex patient like Parker requires close attention to the patient’s unique needs, swift response, sound clinical decision making, and effective interprofessional collaboration at every point of the care process (Bauman et al., 2019; Loeb et al., 2016). One of the critical areas of focus in ensuring such care is medication management (Wallace et al., 2015).

Medication management is a key focus area during the care complex patients due to the far-reaching implications medication errors can have on patients and their families, hospitals and healthcare systems. In Australia, approximately 230,000 medication-related hospitalisations occur every year, which equates to 2-3% of all hospitalisations in the country (ACSQHC, 2017). This is why medication administration guidelines direct that the right drug be administered to the right patient in the right dose at the right time using the right route (Hanson & Haddad, 2020).

In Parker’s case, pneumonia was determined to be the cause of death, but the medication error that occurred cannot be ignored; it was a commission that had the potential to deteriorate the patient’s health. The patient received a Schedule 8 drug that had been prescribed for another patient. For a patient whose condition was already complex, receiving such a high-risk medication posed a significant risk to his safety.   The medication error committed by the PCW can be attributed to situational factors at McGregor Gardens.

Situational factors are factors in the care environment that can contribute to patient deterioration. Such factors range from individual-level factors such as inadequate knowledge and fatigue to task-related factors such as task complexity and clinical factors such as excessive workload, inadequate equipment, ineffective teamwork, time constraints, and distractions (Gluyas & Harris, 2016). In his coronial report, Jamieson (2020) found that several situational factors played a part in the commission of the medication error, notably distraction and workload. On the evening the error was committed, the PCW was interrupted by another patient with toileting needs as she was heading…[Buy Full Answer of Complex Clinical Care Assignment for Just USD 9: 3231 WORDS]

[SOLUTION DESCRIPTION]

Topic: Complex Clinical Care Assignment

Type: Essay

Word Count: 3231

Grade/Mark: 83 (Distinction)

Graded Solution Home – Complex Clinical Care Assignment