Case Study : Take A Number

A nurse attending stated “during the morning’s second surgery, he actually dozed off. The nurse took him aside and recommended that he take a break, but he refused and returned to the operation.” The nurse here was in fault in more ways than one. This nurse should never allowed the doctor return back to operate on the patient, he should have been removed from the operating room immediately. The nurse should have

The plaintiff in Ard v. East Jefferson General Hospital, stated on 20 May, she had rang the nurses station to inform the nursing staff that her husband was experiencing symptoms of nausea, pain, and shortness of breathe. After ringing the call button for several times her spouse received his medication. Mrs. Ard noticed that her husband continued to have difficulty breathing and ringing from side to side, the patient spouse rang the nursing station for approximately an hour and twenty-five minutes until the defendant (Ms. Florscheim) enter the room and initiated a code blue, which Mr. Ard didn’t recover. The expert witness testified that the defendant failed to provide the standard of care concerning the decease and should have read the physician’s progress notes stating patient is high risk upon assessment and observation. The defendant testified she checked on the patient but no documentation was noted. The defendant expert witness disagrees with breech of duty, which upon cross-examination the expert witness agrees with the breech of duty. The district judge, upon judgment, the defendant failed to provide the standard of care (Pozgar, 2012, p. 215-216) and award the plaintiff for damages from $50,000 to $150,000 (Pozgar, 2012, p. 242).

While the seriousness of a patient’s death should be investigated, the hospital failed to act promptly and investigate the supervisor’s or human resource (HR) department’s denial of reasonable accommodations or the previous errors made by the nurse. Therefore, the wrongful termination seems more likely to have been the case in this situation. The defense will show that rather than terminating her employment earlier the hospital waited until something catastrophic happened. The nurse took appropriate action discussing her health condition diagnosed by her physician that precludes her from working in the ER at full capacity with her supervisor. The nurse should have been given alternative assignments as appropriate or disability leave if no other alternative was available and should not have been terminated wrongfully after the incident (Pozgar,

M was taking a look at his leg that was injured but seemed to be healing. All was thought to be well until one office visit the doctor went across the hall to check on another patient who seemed to have an infected leg. The doctor left the door open where confidentiality here was obviously not being taking into consideration for the patient he was seeing as well as others who were able to hear them. Since the door was open, his parents noticed that he did not change his gloves while entering that other room and came back to check on their son with no gloves on. Dr. M was concerned about Jacobs leg and told him to come back the following week while treating it with antibiotics. The following week he comes back only to see that he has developed osteomyelitis. This was the same infection that the other patient developed while under the care of his supervision. Jacobs delay in his recover cost him the opportunity to play football and a college scholarship. Jacobs’s parents then resorted to suing Dr. M because of his negligence and lack of medical

As noted, on February 29, 2016, the patient was nonetheless admitted to the UCR hospitalist. This was a senior member of the UCR hospitalist team who knew or should have known all of the policies and procedures for admission, and should never have admitted the patient as an attending to the hospital. In so doing, he was directly and deliberately interfering with the doctor patient relationship.

The resident physician violated beneficence, because he did not do good by respecting the patient’s autonomy and he was being uncivil.

The case study of Crowe v. Provost, 374 S. W. 2d. 645 (Tenn. 1963), was a highly-anticipated court case for the 1960’s. The following list pertaining to the example of what went wrong and by whom. The first patient appointment opens a file with the patient’s basic information and any allergies including medication(s). This would typically be done with the receptionist. If this was not the doctor’s first time seeing this patient, then the physician should have checked the chart to see if there were any allergies to anything including medication, such as, Penicillin and Cosa-Terrabon. Referring to the Crowe vs. Provost, the child was then rushed back into the doctor’s office with worsening symptoms, the nurse should have listened to the mother. The nurse, could have instructed the mother to take the worsening child to the nearest Emergency Department. The nurse advising the doctor, “That she thought the child was about the same as when the physician saw him earlier in the day” (Flight, M., 2011, page 5-6) was not a good idea. The doctor could have been brought in for an examination of the ailing patient. The receptionist returning from her lunch should not have been a signal for the nurse to leave for any reason with the patient getting worse. Again, the patient and mother should have been instructed to go to the nearest emergency room. The receptionist should not have been left alone with an ailing patient. Mistakenly, the receptionist calling the doctor first and

University Hospital is a well known hospital with a level 1 trauma treatment center for the tri-county area of a northwestern state, the hospital enjoys the fact they are known for their promising reputation among healthcare professionals and the public they serve. Jan Adams is an OR supervisor that has been working there for ten years, as a professional she makes surgeons follow protocol as required and enjoys working with trauma patients. One Friday night, which is the busiest day of the week for the trauma department; the unit was notified that a helicopter was on its way with a 42 year old man who had been in a car accident. Shortly after the patient arrived to the trauma center, the resident and other medical staff noted that he was in very bad physical conditions, needed immediate surgery or otherwise he was going to die. The issue was that the on call surgeon had to be present during the surgery and had not yet arrived, but regardless of the matter and protocol they proceeded with medically treating the patient immediately. The concern is that in doing so they violated medical procedures and put the patients safety at risk, this lead to a long list of ethical issues for example, patient well-being, impaired healthcare professional, adherence to professional codes of ethical conduct, adherence to the organization’s mission statement, ethical standards, and values statements, management’s role and responsibility, failure

During my clinical competency placement, I was working on a surgical ward when a registered nurse on duty asked me to assist Mr. A with his shower. This incident happened on the fifth day of my clinical practice. He was a dementia patient and had undergone right knee total joint replacement. She also informed me that the patient did not like too many people in his room because of his dementia. When I went into his room, his wife was there with him. I talked to the patient about having a shower and getting dressed to look smart and he agreed to have a shower. The patient got out of the bed and walked to the bathroom and sat on the shower chair to have his shower. Then I asked his wife if I needs to stay with him to assist with shower, she said she can help him as she was taking care for him at home since he has been diagnosed with dementia. Therefore, I left the patient with his wife to help with his shower and told her to ring the bell if she needs any help. After some time I left the room, the wife rang the bell. As soon as I entered the room, I heard him shouting at his wife and she started crying and left the hospital. So I had to stay with him. He was very capable of washing himself and I just had to help him wash his back as he requested. After he had washed, I asked him if he was ready to get out of the bath, he started shouting at me.

Whilst on duty on a general ward I was asked by my senior nurse, if I could go down to the pharmacy to pick up some new medication for a new client, who would be needing them at lunch time. On my way to get them, I was approached by another health care assistant who requested my help with a client, who was lying in their own faeces. I therefore felt that the medication could wait, and that my main

Anna is a fifty five year old homeless, unemployed woman who was admitted to the Emergency Room (ER) at Victoria Hospital in London, Ontario for pelvic pain and postmenopausal bleeding. During the nurse’s head-to-toe assessment it was found that the patient also had presenting abdominal distention, prompting her physician to order an X-Ray to determine if a gastrointestinal issue caused this distention. Once this was ruled out, Anna’s physicians continued to search for the underlying cause of her abdominal distention, in addition to her other admitting symptoms. As a result, Anna was admitted to the hospital as an inpatient on the Acute Medicine Unit. The day following admission, Anna went for further testing to hopefully discover the cause of her symptoms. The first test completed was an

Ethical principals are the seed of which nursing flourishes from. Many ethical principals were involved and dishonored in this case such as, justice, autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, confidentiality and fidelity (Burkhardt et al., 2014). I believe justice was the main principal involved as the entire ethical predicament was revolved around unjust behavior and treatment of the residents. The residents were treated poorly and given unequal rights as a causation of their illnesses. Autonomy, an essential piece of human rights was also being violated in this ethical dilemma. The residents did not have any choice or independence in their care or how they were being treated. Beneficence and non-maleficence are significant dynamics of this ethical situation, as the health care providers needed to reflect on how they can have the maximum benefit while diminishing possible damage to the residents (Burkhardt et al., 2014). Our actions as nurses should always be beneficent and non maleficent, continuously being kind, compassionate and doing what is in their best interest as well a removing and preventing harm. Confidentiality is a key component of nursing and it was blatantly being violated as the health care

During the home health observation day, there were several opportunities to observe a variety of patients with varying levels of functioning ability, different illnesses, and different needs and levels of interaction with the nurse. The first patient seen was a seventy-three year old Caucasian female with an ulcer on her right heel. Several weeks prior, she had scratched her left leg and she also had several small wounds on her left leg. The orders were to clean and redress the ulcer. She has a history of end stage renal disease, pneumonia, weakness, diabetes, dialysis, and right hip fracture. Upon entering the home, the patient was found to be sitting in a wheel chair in the living room watching television with her husband close by her side. She greeted the nurse with a smile and began to update her on her current condition. Her heel was “hurting” and she rated her pain an 8 on a scale of 1 to 10. She also had some “swelling” that she could not “get to go away; because, she could not get up and walk. They need to fix my foot so that I can get up and get around.” She told the nurse that she had been to see the doctor “yesterday” and the doctor had given her a written order that she wanted her to see. The order was written for an evaluation for a soft pressure shoe fitting. The nurse read the order to

Power in numbers was the theme at Pig & Prince where Israel Cronk, Director of the Montclair Business Improvement District (BID), hosted a meet and greet. Local entrepreneurs came out to make friends, provide suggestions, join an ad-buy program designed to provide advertising at competitive prices, and to network, while volunteers and community organizers were recognized for their efforts.

Problem 4. Prove that (y^3+z^3 ) x^2+yz^4 is irreducible over C[x,y,z]. Also prove that (y^3+z^3 ) x^2+y^2 z^3 is irreducible.