NSB236 Integrated Nursing Practice 3 On Campus ASSESSMENT TASK 1

Transcription

1 NSB236 Integrated Nursing Practice 3 On Campus ASSESSMENT TASK 1

2 <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 2 of 15

3 Assessment Task 1 Assessment name: Task description: What you need to do: Case Study: The Deteriorating Patient For this essay you are required to select ONE case scenario related to the clinical deterioration of a patient: Option 1: Traumatic Brain Injury Option 2: Septic Shock In order to undertake this 1500 word essay you will need to research the topic using current and relevant peer reviewed literature and review of: The lecture and tutorial material associated with the relevant topic. Your knowledge and understanding related to: 1. The physiology and pathophysiology of the primary diagnosis and associated clinical data identified within the chosen case study; 2. The physiological assessments relevant to the features within the case study. The assessment tasks requires you to: 1. Identify and discuss two (2) signs or symptoms of clinical deterioration associated with the presenting problem, from chosen case study. This discussion should consider the potential impact of case study data (e.g. pathology results, past medical history) on the health status of the patient in the chosen case. 2. Following on from your presented discussion associated with point one (1), develop a clinical plan of care which identifies: One (1) priority of clinical care and; Discuss three (3) nursing interventions that directly address the identified clinical priority. The discussion should refer to relevant clinical assessments. Measurable outcome parameters for each intervention will be discussed to justify the intervention and evaluate its efficacy. Discussion is to be supported with contemporary research. Length: Estimated time to complete task: 1500 words +/-10% (word length includes in-text referencing and excludes your reference list) Approximately 30 hours Weighting: 50% How will I be assessed: As a percentage using a 7-point grading scale rubric Due date: Friday September 21 st submitted via Turnitin in your <Unit Code> Blackboard site by 23:59 hours. More information about Turnitin is available on the FAQs about Turnitin page. Presentation requirements: This assessment task must: Be a written academic essay containing an introduction, body <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 3 of 15

4 and conclusion, addressing the task. Use QUT APA referencing for citing academic literature (see Assignment cover sheet must be included as the first page of your document. Be submitted in electronic form via Turitin. A minimum of 15 relevant references to be cited from valid, contemporary journal articles or books no older than 7 years. The use of websites as references is NOT permitted. The submitted essay should NOT contain tables, figures or appendices. The uses of dot points are NOT permitted. Your assignment should be prepared as follows: Has a cover sheet with the assessment title, your name, student number, tutor name and word count. Coversheet template is recommended. Include a footer on each page with your name, student number, unit code and page number. 3 cm margins on all sides, double-spaced text Times new roman, font size 12 APA style referencing (see Headings can be used to structure your assignment logically (if applicable) Learning outcomes assessed: be submitted in electronic format via Turnitin. 1. Consolidate knowledge of key NMBA Registered Nurse Standards for Practice, National Safety and Quality Health Services Standards, and National Health Priorities to enable effective decision planning and action in a range of complex clinical situations across the lifespan. 2. Apply knowledge of anatomy, physiology and pathophysiology to support evidence based decision making associated with planning and action. 3. Demonstrate structured decision making and clinical reasoning to review a range of health situations, synthesise evidence and data, determine priorities and formulate plans of care and interventions in line with timeframes and agreed goals. What you need to submit: Resources needed to complete task: One word document that contains the following items: 1. Assignment Cover Sheet & responses to Question 1 & 2 2. Must be submitted in electronic form via Turitin by the assigned date. Case studies and clinical documents available within this document. <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 4 of 15

5 Documents such as additional readings available on your blackboard site. Access to the prescribed texts for this unit as outlined in the unit details. QUT Cite Write APA guide. Turnitin Tip Sheets. Academic Integrity The School of Nursing takes academic integrity very seriously. All work submitted must be your own work and work not previously submitted for other study. The work of others needs to be correctly acknowledged and referenced according to the APA guidelines. There are serious consequences that will be imposed should you be found to breach academic integrity. Make sure you are familiar with the MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity and view the Academic Integrity video and explore the Academic Case Studies available on your Blackboard site. Maintaining academic integrity is your responsibility. If in doubt, check it carefully. Assignment Hints This assignment requires you to critically consider the signs and symptoms associated with clinical deterioration in relation to the patient s primary clinical diagnosis, with consideration to: The change in health status associated with the primary clinical diagnosis; How the patients clinical history may impact on assessment data and core interventions; The identified clinical priority which should clearly emerge from your discussion of the primary health alteration. The application of clinical data and research to identify three (3) core interventions and assessments that address the stated clinical priority. Evaluation data supported by research to effectively determine success of the intervention. The SMART goals format may be of assistance in guiding you in structuring this. Demonstration of your clinical reasoning for your selected case study. Demonstrating your understanding and application of evidence based care i.e. the research you have to support your discussion and ideas regarding clinical interventions and assessment outcomes. Format example: The introduction to your paper should provide the reader with background regarding the primary pathophysiological concepts being discussed, a brief overview of the case study (summation of the primary points), the objective of the paper (what you intend to address), and the rationale for the paper (why is it important to apply and understand the content). <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 5 of 15

6 The body should include: o Discuss the physiology of the health alteration and how the signs and symptoms you have identified reflect these changes (you may wish to consider the clinical data provided to support your discussion of ideas e.g. blood results, medical imaging and/or past medical history). o Research you have undertaken is discussed in relation to the change in the health status of your patient, and the one (1) priority of clinical care. o A discussion of research relevant to nursing interventions that address the clinical priority that you have identified. What can be implemented that would help address the priority of care, and why such interventions are likely to be helpful based on your research. Remember this should address key considerations for deteriorating patient, therefore nursing interventions such pressure area care may not be a major clinical priority in this context. The research you have undertaken should assist you in identifying and discussing the key assessment parameters: e.g. what are the current research recommendations, how will you evaluate the impact of an intervention on the patient (this should be measurable e.g. oxygen saturations are greater than 95% and a justification for why 95% is the chosen target) Conclusion: The conclusion should bring together the main objective of the paper (which you outlined in the introduction), provide a summation of the key points that you discussed (do not introduce need content into the conclusion), and provide a concluding comment regarding the clinical application of the concepts. This unit has three main texts assigned to it, which should form the basis of your initial research and conceptual development relating to the assessment concepts, these are: <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 6 of 15

7 Case Option 1: Traumatic Brain Injury James Jimmy Parsons is a 26 year old flight engineer who was admitted postoperatively to the High Dependency Unit approximately 46 hours ago. He was out with friends on Saturday night when he was involved in an altercation out the front of a bar with another group of males who had been making lude remarks about female acquaintances of Mr Parsons. During this altercation, it is alleged that one of the individuals punched Mr Parsons in the face, and as a result he lost consciousness, fell, and hit the back of his head on the pavement. On arrival to the Emergency Department he underwent an urgent CT brain scan which revealed a sub-dural hemorrhage with 1cm mid-line shift and petechial hemorrhages, which was drained intra-operatively. A Codman s intracranial pressure monitoring device was placed in order to monitor ICP levels post operatively. Mr Parson s blood alcohol levels were noted to be elevated on assessment at the ED and his blood toxicology screen was negative for illicit substances. Over the immediate post-operative period he has been deemed to be stable and he has been extubated approximately 6 hours ago and is currently on Hiflow Nasal Prongs (HFNP). Past medical History Type 1 Diabetes, smoker (7-10 cigarettes per day), social drinker (6-10 beers on weekends), wisdom teeth removal x 4 (2010). On assessment: He is lying supine (head of bed elevated 30%), Codman s ICP monitoring insitu, GCS 10/15 (E3, V3, M4), Pupils equal and reactive to light and accommodating. There is visual evidence of raccoon eyes (see below image) and battle sign (right sided) (refer to below image). <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 7 of 15

8 Vitals Time 08:00hrs 10:00hrs ICP (mmhg) Temp ( C) Respirations (breaths/min) Blood pressure and Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) (mmhg) Heart rate (beats/min) 18 (eupnic) 23 (increased work of breathing, associated with agitation) 128/92 (98) 122/68 (86) SpO2 (Fio2) 97% (Fio2 30%, 30L high flow nasal prongs (HFNP)) 96 (FiO2 30%, 30L, HFNP) BGL 6 (Actrapid infusion at 2units/hr) 6.4 (Actrapid infusion at 2 units/hr) At 13:00 hours Mr Parson s becomes tachycardic with a HR 118 without a clear precipitating cause, a 12 lead ECG confirms the rhythm to be sinus tachycardia. <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 8 of 15

9 At 13:10 his BP is 108/54mmHg (MAP 72), Heart rate beats/min, temp 37.8 C (mildly diaphoretic), ICP 21mmHg, Sp02 95% (HFNP FiO2 30%, 30L), respiratory rate 11breaths/min with apneic periods (on auscultation air entry is decreased to both the left and right bases), BGL 12.1 mmol/l (Actrapid infusion at 2 units/hr), pupils equal (right side 4mm, slow reaction to light, left 4mm brisk reaction to light). An urgent arterial blood gas is taken: Temperature corrected result (37.8 C) Results Reference range ph PaCO PaO Na Cl- 105 Ca Gluc 12.4 Lac 1.9 <2 Hb 89 SaO2 89 HCO Pa02/FiO2 ration 293 <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 9 of 15

10 Case Option 2: Shock Jedda Merindah 33 year old male of indigenous heritage who has been admitted to the Hematology/Oncology unit. Jedda was admitted post a medical emergency call for hypotension, via the oncology day unit where he was receiving chemotherapy for his Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). Background: AML induction phase chemotherapy treatment Patient reports nil temperatures self monitors at home Routine blood cultures taken from Hickman s line 1 week ago nil growth to date. Past Medical History Acute Rheumatic Fever as a child previous echocardiogram reveals no structural abnormalities, mild dilation of the left ventricle, normal ejection fraction. Depression Citalopram 10mg daily Previous suicide attempt (2003) drug overdose Hypercholesterolemia Atorvastatin 40mg On assessment: Neuro: GCS 15/ 15, pupils equal and reactive to light, appears anxious and restless. Cardiovascular: HR 118 beats/min- ECG reveals atrial fibrillation, non -invasive blood pressure 92/65mmHg, 250ml NaCl 0.9% fluid challenge given in ED, Febrile (38.8 C), diaphoretic, capillary refill time (CRT) < 3 sec., cool peripheries, Hickman s line in situ, central venous catheter line inserted by ED senior registrar. Respiratory: Decreased air entry to left and right bases, non-productive cough, tachypneoic 28 breaths per minute, using accessory muscles, Fi02 44% via Hudson mask, SpO2 >95%. <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 10 of 15

11 GIT: nil reports of vomiting, decreased nutritional intake secondary to mouth ulcers, some loose bowel actions over last 2/7 days, nil malena, abdomen lax and nontender, BGL 9.6mmol. Renal: Decrease urinary output, patient reports dark in colour, IDC insertion pending. Blood pathology results: Results Hb 89 White cell count 3.4 Reference ranges g/l 4-11 (x10*9/l) Platelets (x10*9/l) Sodium 140 Potassium 4.7 Creatinine 138 Urea 11.2 Albumin 31 APTT 47 INR mmol/l mmol/l µmol/l µmol/l g/l sec units/kg <Unit Code> Assessment Task # Page 11 of 15

12 <Insert unit code and title> NSB236 Assessment Task 1 Rubric Name: Learning outcomes assessed: 1,2,& 3 Weighting: 50% Criteria Critical thinking and knowledge Weighting: 25% Assignment content: critical explanation reflects a comprehensive interpretation and critical explanation of the assessment data; Comprehensive understanding of the central issues of the case all key pathophysiological concepts and physical assessment issues addressed to determine priorities of care; Demonstrated a comprehensive depth of reasoning and logical and analytical thinking. Assignment content: critical explanation reflects good interpretation and critical explanation of the assessment data; Good understanding of the central issues of the case almost all key pathophysiological concepts and assessment issues addressed to determine priorities of care; Mostly demonstrated a depth of reasoning and logical and analytical thinking. Assignment content: critical explanation reflects sound interpretation and some critical explanation of the assessment data; Sound understanding of the central issues of the case most key pathophysiological concepts and assessment issues addressed to determine priorities of care; Soundly demonstrated a depth of reasoning and logical and analytical thinking. Assignment content: critical explanation reflects basic interpretation and some or no critical explanation of the assessment data content not overly discerning; Fair understanding of the central issues of the case some key pathophysiological concepts and assessment issues addressed to determine priorities of care; Adequately demonstrated depth of reasoning and logical and analytical thinking. Assignment content: limited critical explanation reflects poor interpretation and no critical explanation of the assessment data content not discerning; Poor understanding of the central issues of the case not all key pathophysiological concepts and assessment issues addressed to determine priorities of care; You have not adequately demonstrated depth of reasoning and logical and analytical thinking. Assignment content: no critical explanation reflects poor interpretation and no critical explanation of the assessment data content not discerning; No understanding of the central issues of the case limited demonstrated understanding of pathophysiological concepts and assessment issues to determine priorities of care; You have not demonstrated depth of reasoning and logical and analytical thinking. <Unit Code> - Assessment # Page 12 of 15

13 <Insert unit code and title> Applied knowledge of pathophysiology to inform clinical reasoning, clinical priority, assessment and outcome measures Weighting: 25% Comprehensive application of pathophysiological and physiological concepts which demonstrated an understanding of links between the patient condition, and assessments to formulate plans of care and interventions. Outcome measures discussed are comprehensively supported by contemporary evidence and makes association with physiological concepts. Good application of pathophysiological and physiological concepts which demonstrated an understanding of links between the patient condition, assessments and outcome measures discussed to formulate a plan care of care and interventions. The approaches are supported to a high level by contemporary evidence and makes association with physiological concepts. Sound application of pathophysiological and physiological concepts which demonstrated an understanding of links between the patient condition, assessments and outcome measures discussed to formulate a plan of care and interventions. The approaches are supported to a good level by contemporary evidence and makes association with physiological concepts. Fair application of pathophysiological and physiological concepts which demonstrated a fair understanding of links between the patient condition, assessments and outcome measures discussed to formulate a plan care and interventions. The approaches are supported to a satisfactory level by contemporary evidence and makes association with physiological concepts. Poor application of pathophysiological and physiological concepts which demonstrated little understanding of links between the patient condition, assessments and outcome measures discussed to plan care and appropriate interventions. The approaches are supported by citation of research which may/may not be contemporary, but lacks insight and understanding of the association with physiological concepts. No application of pathophysiological and physiological concepts which demonstrated no understanding of links between the patient condition, assessments and outcome measures discussed to plan care. The approaches omitted physiological assessments for outcomes, may not adequately consider the correlation of physiological assessment and outcomes in relation to critical physiological concepts. Application of evidence Weighting: 25% Demonstrates skilful and insightful use of high quality, credible and relevant sources to develop ideas, rationalise approaches and decision making that are appropriate to the clinical scenario. There is an excellent demonstration of conceptual understanding of Demonstrates skilful use of high quality, credible and relevant sources to develop ideas, rationalise approaches and decision making that are appropriate to the clinical scenario. There is a good demonstration of conceptual understanding of Demonstrates consistent use of credible, relevant sources to support ideas and decision making that are situated within the thought question. There is a well-grounded demonstration of conceptual understanding of content. Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources to support ideas and decision making that are appropriate for the thought question. There is a satisfactory demonstration of conceptual understanding of content. Demonstrates an attempt to use sources to support ideas and decision making in the writing. May have a number of 3-4 direct quotes that could have been paraphrased to demonstrate synthesis and understanding of content. Limited evidence used to support ideas, poorly cited and or paraphrased. Demonstrates limited critical application and understanding of content being applied. Frequent use of direct quotes. The discussion does not demonstrate a strong grasp of <Unit Code> - Assessment # Page 13 of 15

14 <Insert unit code and title> content. content. The conceptual understanding of the content requires further development. conceptual understanding to support decision making. Academic writing Weighting: 25% Comprehensive, Clear and logical presentation; good development of an argument. Used correct terminology and professional language consistently with the case study. Uses language that skillfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency. Clear, readable, prose. Good use of transitions; no problems with spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Infrequent and minor mechanical problems. Errors do not impair readability. Did not use direct quotes All relevant aspects Clear and logical presentation; good development of an argument. Used correct terminology and professional language for most of the handover the case study. Uses language that effectively communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency. Clear, readable, prose. Some issues with transitions; no to minimal (2-4) problems with spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Infrequent and minor mechanical problems. Errors do not impair readability. Rarely used direct quotes; Adhered to prescribed word limit. Presentation is organized but does not present a clear argument for a given position. Used correct terminology and professional language for some of the handover the case study. Uses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. Occasional errors and minor problems with mechanics of language. Occasional awkward sentences and poor transitions reduce readability. Sometimes used (1-2) direct quotes ; Adhered to prescribed work limit Infrequent errors in APA style; errors involve only minor aspects of APA style no errors in style for citations & references. Minor problems of organization or logic; Needs work on creating transitions between ideas. Used correct terminology and professional language for part of the handover the case study. Uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity, although writing may include some errors. Frequent problems with mechanics of language. Awkward sentence construction. Poor or absent transitions. Frequently difficult to understand. Sometimes used direct (3-4) quotes; Attempted to use APA style but errors are frequent and include errors in citations and references. Word limit under/over the 10% allowance. Logical flow and organisation is hampered by poor expression of ideas and grammatical errors Mechanics of writing impedes the discussion of ideas and the submission would benefit from further editing. You have not used correct terminology and professional language for the majority of the handover the case study. Overuse (4-5) of direct quotes; Not within required word limit. (15% over or under prescribed work limit). No logical order to the information provided; sentences rambling; ideas are repeated. Correct terminology and professional language used infrequently the case study. Uses language that sometimes impedes meaning because of errors in usage. Problems with the mechanics of language serious enough to interfere with effective communication. Frequent errors in punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, etc. Overuse of direct quotes (>5); Did not adhere to word limit and is under or exceed by >/<15% Minimal use of APA style; multiple errors in <Unit Code> - Assessment # Page 14 of 15

15 <Insert unit code and title> of APA style are used correctly. Title page properly formatted, use of intext citations, format of references cited. Adhered to prescribed word limit. use of APA style. Issues identify associated with breaches to academic integrity. <Unit Code> - Assessment # Page 15 of 15