I need support with this Nursing question so I can learn better.
Using the information from the case study below, discuss the following issues from the perspective of an APN role:
- Practitioner
Standards of care – what were the standards of care that were violated? Who was responsible for the violations?
In your role as an educator, administrator, or practitioner, what risk management steps needs to be taken before or after the incident to alleviate the issue?
Page length should be 3-4 pages exclusive of cover page and references.
Support your paper with a minimum of three scholarly references.
Case Study: Malpractice Action Brought by Yolanda Pinellas
Yolanda Pinellas is a 21-year-old female student studying to be a music conductor. She was admitted for chemotherapy. The medication Mitomycin was administered by intravenous infusion through an infusion pump.
During the evening shift the infusion pump began to beep. The RN found that the IV was dislodged and discontinued the infusion, notified the physician and provided care to the infusion site. The patient testified that a nurse came in and pressed some buttons and the pump stopped beeping. She was groggy and not sure who the nurse was or what was done. The documentation in the medical record indicates that there was an infiltration to the IV.
Two weeks after the event, the patient developed necrosis of the hand and required multiple surgical procedures, skin grafting, and reconstruction. She had permanent loss of function and deformity in her third, fourth, and fifth fingers. The patient is alleging that because of this, she is no longer able to perform as a musical conductor.
The risk manager had noted when doing chart reviews over the last 3 months prior to this incident that there were issues of short staffing and that many nurses were working double shifts, evenings, and nights then coming back and working the evening shift. The risk manager also noted a pattern of using float nurses to several units.
To view the Grading Rubric for this Assignment, please visit the Grading Rubrics section of the Course Resources.
Assignment Requirements:
Before finalizing your work, you should:
- be sure to read the Assignment description carefully (as displayed above);
- consult the Grading Rubric (under the Course Resources) to make sure you have included everything necessary;
- utilize spelling and grammar check to minimize errors; and
- review APA formatting and citation information found in the Academic Success Center, online, or elsewhere in the course.
Your writing Assignment should:
- follow the conventions of Standard English (correct grammar, punctuation, etc.)
- be well ordered, logical, and unified, as well as original and insightful;
- display superior content, organization, style, and mechanics; and
- use APA 6th edition formatting and citation style.
H
3 mins ago
| Unit 4 Assignment: Grading Rubric | Total Available Points = | 120 | |||||
| Instructions: enter score (0-4) in column F | |||||||
| Introductory | Emergent | Practiced | Proficient/Mastered | Final | |||
| 0-1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Score | Weight | Score | |
| Criterion 1 The role of the APN – Administrator, Practitioner, or Educator – is clearly stated, content of paper pertains to the identified role | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. The role of the APN is identified but is not specific to the administrator or practitioner or educator areas. The APN perspective is applied to some aspects of the case. Content is not supported. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). The role of the APN (administrator or practitioner or educator) is identified, and applied to some aspects of the case. Content is not adequately supported. | Work demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). The APN role (practitioner, educator or administrator) was clearly identified and discussed for all aspects of the case. Content is supported adequately with references from credible sources. | 10% | 0.00 | |
| Criterion 2 All standards of care violations pertaining to the identified APN role (administrator, practitioner, or educator) are identified. | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. Some information on codes of conduct presented. Codes of conduct identified are not relevant to the APN role (Administrator, Practitioner, or Educator) identified. Content is not supported. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). Some codes of conduct are identified, not all codes of conduct identified are relevant to the APN role (Administrator, Practitioner, or Educator) identified. Content support is not adequate. | Work demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). All standards of care violations related to the APN role stated were clearly identified and described. Content is supported adequately with references from credible sources. | 10% | 0.00 | |
| Criterion 3 Paper clearly identifies who violated the standards of care, and how the standards of care were violated | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. Some individuals responsible for the violations were identified. The standard of care violated by each individual is not described. There is no information on how the individuals violated the standard of care. Content is not supported. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). Some individuals responsible for the violations were identified. Each individual’s standards of care violation is described, no information on how the violation happened. Content support is not adequate. | Work demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). The individuals responsible for the violations were identified. Each individual’s standards of care violation is described, including how the violation happened. Content is supported adequately with references from credible sources. | 20% | 0.00 | |
| Criterion 4 Identifies risk management steps relevant to the APN role (Administrator, Practitioner, or Educator) before event to prevent such adverse events | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. The paper identifies one or more risk management steps that need to be taken before the event. Risk management steps are not relevant to the event or to the APN role identified in the paper. Content is not supported. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). The paper describes some risk management steps that need to be taken before the event. Paper does not identify all risk management measures that could be implemented. Some of the risk management measures are not appropriate to the relevant adverse event. Content support is not adequate | Work demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). The paper describes all the relevant risk management steps that need to be taken before the event in order to prevent adverse events. Risk management measures are relevant to the APN role identified. Content is supported adequately with references from credible sources. | 20% | 0.00 | |
| Criterion 5 Identifies risk management steps to be taken that are relevant to the APN role (Administrator, Practitioner, or Educator) after event to prevent future adverse events | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The paper identifies one or more risk management steps that need to be taken after the event. Risk management steps are not relevant to the event or to the APN role identified in the paper. Content is not supported. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). The paper describes some of the relevant risk management steps that need to be taken after the event in order to prevent adverse events. Risk management measures are not appropriate to the APN role identified. Some of the risk management measures are not appropriate to the relevant adverse event. Content support is not adequate Content support is not adequate. | Work demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). The paper describes all the relevant risk management steps that need to be taken after the event in order to prevent adverse events. Risk management measures are relevant to the APN role identified. Content is supported adequately with references from credible sources. | 20% | 0.00 | |
| Length | Less than 3 pages. | NA | NA | At least 4 pages. | 10% | 0.00 | |
| Format/Style | Did not follow APA format | Major errors with APA formatting | Text, title page, and references page follow APA guidelines . Minor references and grammar errors | Text, title page and references page follow APA guidelines. No grammar, word usage or punctuation errors. Overall style is consistent with professional work. | 10% | 0.00 | |
| 100% | 0.00 | ||||||
1 min ago
