Presidencial Case Study

In the health care system, a multitude of errors occurs on a daily basis. Doctors, nurses, orderly’s, etc., everyone in health care settings has responsibilities that warrant careful attention. This was exhibited in the case study titled ‘An Extended Stay’. In this case study, we are introduced to a middle-aged man in his 60s named Mr. Stanley Londborg. He presented with several health conditions, including a seizure disorder, hypertension (also known as high blood pressure), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Londborg was no stranger to the hospital and was known fairly well by faculty members. Londborg paid a visit to the Emergency Room at the hospital complaining of wheezing and breathing complications. The physician that examined Mr. Londborg yielded his symptoms as an acute worsening of

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

Evaluation is the third stage of Gibbs model of reflection and requires me to state what was good and bad about the event. While reflecting back on the incident I felt that there was one thing which I could have dealt with differently and also some aspects which demonstrated good practice. On the first hand, this incident made me realised that I was part of the team and that I was also involved in positioning and preparing the patient prior to surgery, therefore I had a responsibility to find out from the patient if he had any concerns. On the other hand, I should have communicated to the patient, explaining what I was about to do maybe he would have had the opportunity to raise his problem with the shoulder before lifting his arm. The Health Professions Council (HPC 2008) clearly states that it is the responsibility of an operating department practitioner to ensure that effective communication occurs when delivering patient care. In addition, Psychologist Helmreich, R. (2000) said, `better communication’ is being the most useful way of reducing errors.

If the physician continued to be dissatisfied later in the week and felt that I was now the problem, I would begin by letting the physician know what has been done up to that point to address his original concern. Next, I would apologize that he feels the way he does. Moreover, I would make sure that the director of ambulatory care, my direct supervisor, is aware of the physician’s complaints so they can appropriately investigate and address

Case 15: Take a number 1. What are the facts of this case? The facts of this case are that Dr. Guiles who is self-conscious of his prostate cancer diagnosis is treated horrendously when he finally decides to have surgery ( Buchbinder, Shanks & Buchbinder, 2014). Considering that Dr. Guiles is already sensitive

Wrongful Death Lawsuit Sonja S. Kennedy MHA 622 (NDB 1435A): Health Care Ethics and Law Instructor: Jared Rutlege September 15, 2014 Abstract: 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).

3) Surgeon: Was directly involved in the events leading up to the sentinel event. The surgeon was responsible for all activities taking place in the surgical suite and directly related to the surgery of the pediatric patient. The surgery was completed safely and successfully; however, the surgeon had relevant information in the patient chart at his office yet did not share this information with the hospital. He also did not supply an appropriate or accurate H&P that would have included custodial status for the pediatric patient to the hospital. The surgeon is greatly concerned in the events that lead to the sentinel event and wants to ensure that his patients will be cared for and safe at Nightingale Community Hospital.

(Trying to be Heard Beneficence compounded by nurse-physician communication created ethical problems in this case. Mainly, Joanna’s assessment of Mrs. Kelly being ignored by the resident physician and the nursing supervisor. Joanna worked within the scope and standards of practice, she assessed, evaluated, and monitored her patient’s condition. She then reported her findings to the resident twice, and also sought nursing support from her shift supervisor. After Joanna’s first call to the resident, and her continued concern she needed to advocate in a proactive manner. Continuing her assessment of Mrs. Kelly to include palpation and auscultation could have offered additional clinical information enabling her to articulate the problem to the resident and nursing supervisor.

Look Back Another day of my clinical placement 420 in orthopaedic unit began on July 4, 2015. I received my patient and started to research a patient history and medications. At 0700 a shift report started, I received information that my

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.

A comatose patient has the same rights as to that of a patient that is fully conscious, therefore, should not receive more or less treatment because of their condition. It is fact each patient has a unique situation but that should not hinder them from the care they rightfully deserve.

The scenario was alarming yet gave a realistic view on how non-adherence of procedure, breakdown of communication and the lack of accountability became the triggers for this sentinel event. Since 1996 the Joint Commission as instituted a sentinel event policy that enables hospitals to evaluate and implement corrective action

I returned to the recovery ward, my patient was still hypertensive and tachycardic and I felt by assessing her non-verbal signals of communication that she was still in great discomfort. After 15 minutes of no improvement I returned to theatre to see the anaesthetist, I explained that I was not happy with the patient’s level of pain and requested that he come to the recovery ward to assess the patient. He reluctantly came to the recovery ward and after spending a few minutes assessing the patient agreed that she was in an unacceptable level of pain and prescribed a further 5mg of morphine which I duly gave to the patient in 2.5mg increments. After this the patients heart rate and blood pressure decreased to pre operative levels, she seemed to be more relaxed and eventually fell asleep. After a further period of time spent continually reassessing the patient and when I was satisfied she was comfortable and haemodynamically stable I discharged the patient back to the ward.

Then I was off for two days at work. When I returned, I found out that this patient is improving and has been transferred to medical surgical floor. I went to see her at the medical surgical floor before the start of my shift. I noticed that patient conditioned has

I choice to use the Seven Step Model of a Decision-Making Model for Resolving Ethical Issues in order to define what is ethical in this case study. 1. Gather the Facts Joanna is an experienced nurse taking care of Mrs. Kelly, who was Joanna’s patient many times in the past for her