N 520 Legal and Ethical Issues in Health Care: Module 7 Assignment
Professional Development Exercises :
Read the case study presented at the end of Chapter 17 (Guido, p. 362)
Was the nurse negligent for unlocking the bath-room door and allowing Judy to shower by herself?
Was it below the standard of care for the nurse to leave the bathroom door unlocked when the psychiatrist came to see Judy?
How significant are the hospital policy and procedures in this instance?
How would you decide this case?
Read the case study presented at the end of Chapter 18 (Guido, p. 393)
Was the nurse negligent in the advice she gave Mr. Gonzales concerning his condition?
Did the nurse exceed her scope of practice in the advice she gave the patient?
Should the nurse have instructed Mr. Gonzales to go immediately to the local emergency center?
How would you decide this case? Who, if anyone, is liable in this case?
Read the case study presented at the end of Chapter 20 (Guido, p. 439)
What should the standards of care be for such a patient?
Even though the nursing care plan did not specify that the wound should be checked hourly, how should the prudent nurse have acted?
Should the lawsuit center primarily on the surgeon for allowing this patient to be sent back to the nursing home for post- operative care rather than insisting he be kept for 24 hours in an acute care facility post-operatively?
How would you decide this case?
Please combine all of these responses into a single Microsoft Word document for submission
Please submit only complete assignments (not partial or “draft” assignments). Submit only the assignments corresponding to the module in this section.
You are not required to adhere to the 500-1000 word count for each of the responses, but please be thorough in your responses so that you adequately address all aspects of each question.
Assessing and Evaluating Learning
The selected population is adults diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The latter cannot be, treated but patients receive medications to avoid adverse events associated with the ailment. In this case, the selected members need to practice self-care to manage the condition so as to avoid macro and microvascular complications related to T2DM. According to Zoungas et al. (2014), the aspects of self-care relates to routine medication where patients use insulin as per the recommended time to facilitate the metabolism of sugar in the blood. Besides, the other component of self-care is on dietary choices.
Since the selected population is required to embrace self-care, they need an education on what to practice. I will inform the patients about drug combination therapy that will optimize care. They will need to know steps to be undertaken on medication as well as inform them about the proper timing of the drugs administered to them. I will introduce the idea of self-monitoring of blood glucose and enlight them about recommended levels for healthy living. Zoungas et al. (2014) posit that patients also need information on complications related to T2DM. Specifically, I will inform them about diabetes ketoacidosis, hyperglycemic state as well as neuropathy and nephropathy. Nonetheless, I will address the benefits of a healthy diet and emphasize the values of selecting foods with a low glycemic index. The patients will also be educated on the benefit of moderate and regular exercise to control weight as well as enhance the activity of insulin in the body.
The effectiveness of teaching can be evaluated using various instruments. According to Abdullah et al. (2016), questionnaires can be used to establish whether patients have acquired the information. This provides a set of questions which patients are required to answer. Ramadani, Supahar, and Rosana (2017) postulate that interview can as well offer an evaluation of the education on self-care. Interviews can be semi-structured or structured based on the type of client.
Even though questionnaires are administered at the end of the teaching, they widely elicit the opinions of the learners with regard to content taught. Studies on reliability as well as validity affirm this instrument to yield satisfaction on both the educator and the learner (DeYoung, 2015). However, judgments of the respondents about questions asked can alter the accuracy of the instrument. It requires that questions must be carefully selected to conform to the appeals of the population under study and this can affect the feasibility of the outcome as well as the answers given (Bradshaw & Lowenstein, 2014). Evaluating the effectiveness of teaching using questionnaires can be challenging especially when most of the questions asked address sensitive life of a patient for example about the number of family members suffering from type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Interviews are effective instruments of evaluation as it provides immediate feedback about the responses of the learners. Specifically, highly structured interviews are reliable and can be validated as they are based on protocols questions and answers. Besides, interviews are appropriate for the selected population as they probe details of patients about their knowledge of type 2 diabetes and self-care. In this case study, interviews guarantee the feasibility of the feedback in improving care to patients with diabetes (DeYoung, 2015). However, the accuracy of the interview can be compromised when the interviewer does not establish a rapport with the respondent. Moreover, the approach requires a great deal of time since patients will need to comprehend the questions before responding.
Based on the listed evaluation instruments, I prefer interviews to guide my teaching for the patient. The approach provides immediate feedback which can be used for summative evaluation of the education session. It provides an opportunity for me to build trust with the patient which can be helpful during reviews (Bradshaw & Lowenstein, 2014). I will also be able to interact with the client to gain insights into other aspects of care to improve sugar control. I consider this approach less expensive compared to the use of questionnaires.
Abdullah, N., Wahab, N. A., Noh, N. M., Abdullah, E. M., & Ahmad, A. (2016). The evaluation and effectiveness of school-based assessment among science teachers in Malaysia using the CIPP Model. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 3(11), 1-7.
Bradshaw, M. J., & Lowenstein, A. J. (2014). Innovative teaching strategies in nursing and related health professions (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
DeYoung, S. (2015). Teaching strategies for nurse educators (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
Ramadani, M., Supahar, S., & Rosana, D. (2017). Validity of evaluation instrument on the implementation of performance assessment to measure science process skills. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 3(2), 180-188.
Zoungas, S., Chalmers, J., Neal, B., Billot, L., Li, Q., Hirakawa, Y., … & Cooper, M. E. (2014). Follow-up of blood-pressure lowering and glucose control in type 2 diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine, 371(15), 1392-1406
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.