DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
Chamberlain University DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment– Step-By-Step Guide
This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Chamberlain University DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.
How to Research and Prepare for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Chamberlain University DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.
After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.
How to Write the Introduction for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
The introduction for the Chamberlain University DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.
How to Write the Body for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
After the introduction, move into the main part of the DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.
Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.
How to Write the Conclusion for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.
How to Format the References List for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.
Stuck? Let Us Help You
Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease.
Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW.
Distractions are everywhere. They may include cellphones,
the alarms sounding for multiple different reasons, overhead paging, monitors
beeping, and staff interrupting our thoughts. Give an example of an ethical or
legal issue that may arise if a patient has a poor outcome or sentinel event
because of a distraction such as alarm fatigue. What does evidence reveal about
alarm fatigue and distraction when it comes to patient safety?
Sample Answer for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
As a nurse, you have many responsibilities. Nurses are multitaskers they monitor the patients, medications, equipment, and much more while documenting everything that has been done. “Most technologies are designed by people unfamiliar with nurses’ workflow, and they fail to appreciate the multitude of other devices the nurse is simultaneously managing” (Ruppel & Funk, 2018). Therefore, due to these designers not understanding what a nurse’s role is the technology that we use does not always fit well with the nursing roles. Multitasking is overwhelming and nursing is a hard job in general adding the two can cause errors. Bed alarms are designed to alarm when the patient is moving off the bed. The alarm can also go off when the patient makes certain movements not just moving off the bed. For example, a nurse working a unit with several patients. One of the patients has a bed alarm and tends to make it go off on purpose multiples times. When the nurse arrives, the patient asks her about her day but does not need assistance. At the end of the night the nurse is busy when that patients bed alarm goes off, but the nurse ignores it because of what she experienced all day. “This alarm fatigue is compounded by the number of potential false alarms during a nurses’ work shift” (Hebda, Hunter, & Czar, 2019). The patient had called the nurse to ask for assistance to the bathroom. When the nurse did not respond the patient went alone and fell on the way and broke his leg. This is an ethical because there was a poor patient outcome due to unknown distraction and continuous false alarms. One of the nursing ethical guiding principles is “nonmaleficence: the obligation for doing no intentional harm” (Hebda, Hunter, & Czar, 2019). The nurse did not do intentional harm but cause harm due to the intentional disregard of the bed alarm.
“Alarms are by intent interruptive. Interruptions are typically considered to have a negative effect on patient safety. However, interruptions have been associated with an increased risk of errors” (Ruppel & Funk, 2018). The evidence shows that alarms are used to help patients, but they are a risk for negative patient safety. There is still need for research on how to join the two worlds where they can work together. One way is the lessen the nurses workload so that she does not feel overwhelmed to the point where they ignore their patients.
References
Hebda, T., Hunter, K., & Czar, P. (2019). Handbook of informatics for nurses & healthcare professionals (6th ed.). Pearson.
Ruppel, H., & Funk, M. (2018). Nurse–Technology Interactions and Patient Safety. Critical Care Nursing Clinics of North America, 30(2), 203-213. doi:10.1016/j.cnc.2018.02.003
Sample Answer 2 for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
Nursing workflow is unique and it is very important that we have an input on any design that will impact our job’s workflow. A basic example we experienced at my hospital is when one of our telemetry units was remodeled and the nurses were not asked for any input. The flow of the nurse’s station was so dysfunctional, it was set up like a classroom. The computers were set up in rows so close together that it made it virtually impossible to respond quickly to alarms or any urgent situation for that matter. We had to practically climb over one another. This added to a decrease in response time to alarms which was an increase for patient risk of injury. It was a costly mistake and the unit was redesigned. Now the trend is to consult the individual unit to better understand the needs of the particular specialty in regards to its workflow. Luckily there was a lot of nursing input considered when my facility chose to go with a new operating system. We chose Epic.
Bed alarm fatigue is also an issue at my workplace. One thing that helps, aside from making sure staff is deactivating the alarm prior to getting patients up, is the alarm sensitivity buttons. Our bed alarm sensitivity can be adjusted based on weight or increased risk. I can appreciate your suggestion of a decreased ratio however, I don’t believe I will experience that anytime soon.
When I imagine a hospital, I picture bright white lights in the halls and patient rooms, the smell of Clorox wipes or germicidal wipes, and then the sound of never-ending beeping alarms. Even my patients have complained about the sound IV pumps make when alarming about downstream or upstream occlusions, or when an infusion is complete. I do believe alarms are useful in preventing harm to patients. In my time as a nurse, I have noticed many situations in which alarm fatigue or lack of alarms has caused poor outcomes for patients. One example that comes to mind, is when a patient who appeared to be medically stable, suffered an Anterior ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. The patient’s telemetry monitor did not alarm to the change in heart rhythm. The patient used the call light to ask for help because he became symptomatic of the MI he was experiencing. Upon review of the telemetry strips, the patient’s ST segment had changed for 12 minutes before the patient called for help. The patient did unfortunately pass away, but there were no legal repercussions since the patient’s death was not due to negligence. Had the telemetry monitor alarmed, and been silenced by a medical professional, then that would be considered negligence. This death took a toll on all of the healthcare team members including the physicians, nurses, CNAs, and telemetry technicians involved. At our hospital, the telemetry monitors have the same constant alarm sound for VTACH as for when the patient’s oxygen saturation decreases. The same rhythmic alarm sounds when a lead has been removed as when the monitor detects a PVC. Our textbook mentions how a nurse may experience alarm fatigue during their shift because of the high number of potential false alarms they hear (Hebda, Hunter, & Czar, 2019, p.12). I believe the solution to alarm fatigue is to change the sounds made by these alarms for different kinds of alerts. A deadly cardiac rhythm such as VTACH or severe bradycardia should have distinctly different alarm sound than the alert for an oxygen saturation of 88%, especially if the patient has COPD or another disease that may cause the patient to have consistently low oxygen saturations. According to the article, Alarm fatigue a top patient safety hazard, “85%-90% of alerts are false or nuisance alarms, indicating conditions that don’t require clinical interventions” (Jones, 2014, p. 178). In my opinion, 1 single PVC should not warrant a sound alarm, but it should show a visual alarm. Changing alarm sounds and tones may also be useful, such as verbal commands or different sounds for critical alerts vs routine alerts.
References
Hebda, T., Hunter, K., & Czar, P. (2019). Handbook of informatics for nurses & healthcare professionals (6th ed.). Pearson.
Jones K. (2014). Alarm fatigue a top patient safety hazard. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l’Association medicale canadienne, 186(3), 178. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-4696
Sample Answer 3 for DeVRY NR 361 Week 6 discussion Distractors in our Environment
Nursing workflow is unique and it is very important that we have an input on any design that will impact our job’s workflow. A basic example we experienced at my hospital is when one of our telemetry units was remodeled and the nurses were not asked for any input. The flow of the nurse’s station was so dysfunctional, it was set up like a classroom. The computers were set up in rows so close together that it made it virtually impossible to respond quickly to alarms or any urgent situation for that matter. We had to practically climb over one another. This added to a decrease in response time to alarms which was an increase for patient risk of injury. It was a costly mistake and the unit was redesigned. Now the trend is to consult the individual unit to better understand the needs of the particular specialty in regards to its workflow. Luckily there was a lot of nursing input considered when my facility chose to go with a new operating system. We chose Epic.
Bed alarm fatigue is also an issue at my workplace. One thing that helps, aside from making sure staff is deactivating the alarm prior to getting patients up, is the alarm sensitivity buttons. Our bed alarm sensitivity can be adjusted based on weight or increased risk. I can appreciate your suggestion of a decreased ratio however, I don’t believe I will experience that anytime soon.
ALSO READ:
DeVRY NR 361-Week 6 Assignment: Interview with a Nurse Information Expert
DeVRY NR 361 Week 7 discussion Use of Personal Communication Devices in Patient Care Settings
DeVRY NR 361 Week 8 discussion Reflective and Projected Practice
Name: Discussion Rubric
| Excellent
90–100 |
Good
80–89 |
Fair
70–79 |
Poor
0–69 |
|||
| Main Posting:
Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current credible sources. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible references. |
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Cited with fewer than two credible references. |
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible references. |
||
| Main Posting:
Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
||
| Main Posting:
Timely and full participation |
9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main Discussion by due date. |
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Meets requirements for full participation. Posts main Discussion by due date. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main Discussion by due date. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main Discussion by due date. |
||
| First Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. |
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. |
||
| First Response:
Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
||
| First Response:
Timely and full participation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
||
| Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. |
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. |
||
| Second Response: Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
||
| Second Response: Timely and full participation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
||
| Total Points: 100 | ||||||
Name: Discussion Rubric
Check Out also: DeVRY NR 361 Week 7 discussion Use of Personal Communication Devices in Patient Care Settings