NR 510 Week 4: Organizational Change and Ethical-Legal Influences in Advanced Practice Nursing Case Study Part One

NR 510 Week 4: Organizational Change and Ethical-Legal Influences in Advanced Practice Nursing Case Study Part One

NR 510 Week 4: Organizational Change and Ethical-Legal Influences in Advanced Practice Nursing Case Study Part One

My immediate action is to address the patient’s reason for the visit. According to Mitchell and Oliphant (2016), I have a responsibility to conduct a comprehensive patient interview or consultation before prescribing any medications. While there are ethical issues with what Stephanie did, even though her intentions were good, this must be addressed in private later. Mrs. Smith has already taken a prescribed dose of amoxicillin for her cough. If the amoxicillin has not cleared up the cough, I should not provide her with a refill order just yet. This may have been the wrong medicine to prescribe for a cough in the first place. For one, if Mrs. Smith felt comfortable with Stephanie calling in a prescription order without the doctor’s consent, this may not be the first time she has been prescribed an antibiotic without being checked-out first. Mrs. Smith may have developed a resistance to the antibiotic.  Norris et al. (2013) state antibiotic resistance is a serious, growing threat that causes the bacteria in patients’ bodies to become immune to the antibiotics medicinal properties. Many respiratory conditions are viral infections not bacteria-based illnesses, and Mrs. Smith may not have known that antibiotics only work against bacteria. There are many possible factors as to why Mrs. Smith has developed a chronic cough. I should conduct her physical exam and ask her questions about her cough (when it developed, the type of cough like wet or dry, does the patient smoke, any shortness of breath, has she taken any medication other than amoxicillin to treat the cough). I should then draw Mrs. Smith’s blood to send to lab for testing to determine if she has become resistant to amoxicillin. Also, during her physical, I can see if movement or exertion prompt her to cough. Once the physical has been performed and cough symptoms evaluated, I will take medications, past health history, and any present conditions I have recognized during the physical into consideration then decide on the best cough treatment plan. Once the patient has been taken care of, I will create thorough notes to document the visit, my findings and actions, and Stephanie’s actions then report what has occurred to the primary physician and office manager.

Reference

Mitchell, A., & Oliphant, C. M. (2016). Responsibility for ethical prescribing. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 12(3), A20. Retrieved from DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2016.01.008Links to an external site.

Norris, P., Chamberlain, K., Dew, K., Gabe, J., Hodgetts, D., & Madden, H. (2013). Public beliefs about antibiotics, infection and resistance: A qualitative study. Antibiotics, 2(4), 465-476. doi:10.3390/antibiotics2040465

I agree that this may not have been the first time Stephanie did this. It would seem unlikely to me that she would tell the patient she was doing it without the knowledge of the NP. I feel like it would of been something she may have mentioned that she was going to have the NP call something in. I also agree that if she is requesting more antibiotic then it was possibly the wrong medication for her cough. Perhaps it was just a virus. I know patients are always requesting an antibiotic for any and everything that is wrong with them. I once had a patient insist on an antibiotic for being dehydrated. Even filed a formal complaint to the president of the hospital because she did not receive the antibiotic. With patients being so quick to threaten legal action or complain, it is likely Stephanie did what she did to attempt to keep the patient from complaining.

Instructor Storm,

You asked if having a staff meeting and addressing it with all the MAs would be a better approach than a one on one meeting. For some things I think this may be acceptable, however in this situation I believe that both would be appropriate. If it was me I would have a meeting with all the MAs and a separate meeting with Stephanie. This is not something I feel should be left to a simple warning. This is too serious of a matter. Having one group meeting would be like giving Stephanie the thinking that it was not that serious and she may continue to do this. Next time it could be a stronger medication or something that would cause a bad reaction. So I definitely think disciplinary action is in order. Even if it is just a first offence.

I am glad that you brought up looking at Stephanie’s reasoning or mindset about the situation. I think you are right that Stephanie was trying to help or avoid a confrontation with the patient, but Stephanie’s decision definitely made the situation worse instead of better. I cracked up about your comments regarding the patient who wrote a letter to the president of the hospital for not receiving an antibiotic for dehydration. That patient should be writing the president a thank you note for your great nursing. What this patient did not realize is that a possible side effect to taking antibiotics is diarrhea. If not monitored properly, diarrhea can cause severe dehydration. Today, patients are so quick to file lawsuits against doctors and nurses if they do not get their way or if the outcome of the medical procedure is not what they expected it to be. Is there a solution to minimizing the number of medical lawsuits filed per year? After researching my own question, I came across an article that discusses the profile of patients most likely to file litigious claims. The article states, respecting patients’ need for information during clinical consultations and disclosing medical errors when they occur is the more patient-centered approach and the best way to lessen the likelihood of a claim (Tsimtsiou, 2014). The point of this statement is that medical staff need to be more forthcoming to patients instead of trying to please them. If Stephanie had politely informed the patient that she would have to wait until her appointment to discuss her refill request for the antibiotic, noted the patient’s file, and forwarded the patient’s request to the NP assigned to the patient, Stephanie would have followed protocol and taken a patient-centered approach. 

References Tsimtsiou, Z., Kirana, P., Hatzimouratidis, K., & Hatzichristou, D. (2014). What is the profile of patients thinking of litigation? Results from the hospitalized and outpatients’ profile and expectations study. Hippokratia, 18(2), 139–143.

Participation for MSN

Threaded Discussion Guiding Principles

The ideas and beliefs underpinning the threaded discussions (TDs) guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The use of TDs provides students with opportunities to contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a safe, caring, and fluid environment that models professional and social interaction. The TD’s ebb and flow is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship. Participation in the TDs generates opportunities for students to actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty. TDs foster the development of members into a community of learners as they share ideas and inquiries, consider perspectives that may be different from their own, and integrate knowledge from other disciplines.

Participation Guidelines

Each weekly threaded discussion is worth up to 25 points. Students must post a minimum of two times in each graded thread. The two posts in each individual thread must be on separate days. The student must provide an answer to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week. If the student does not provide an answer to each graded thread topic (not a response to a student peer) before the Wednesday deadline, 5 points are deducted for each discussion thread in which late entry occurs (up to a 10-point deduction for that week). Subsequent posts, including essential responses to peers, must occur by the Sunday deadline, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.

Direct Quotes

Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in Threaded Discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the Grammar, Syntax, APA category.

Grading Rubric Guidelines

Performance Category	10	9	8	4	0
ScholarlinessDemonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions.	Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisionsEvaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion	Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions.Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion.	Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion.Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic.	Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable	No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions.Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable
Performance Category	10	9	8	4	0
Application of Course Knowledge -Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations	Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources;Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life.	Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources.Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real lifeInteractions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content	Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson.Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real lifeDoes not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson	Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post.Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson contentDoes not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life	Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignoredNo discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life
Performance Category	5	4	3	2	0
Interactive DialogueReplies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days.(5 points possible per graded thread)	Exceeds minimum post requirementsReplies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days.Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peerSummarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.	Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate daysReplies to a question posed by a peerSummarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.	Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days.The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadlineDoes not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty	Has only one post for the weekDiscussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments	Does not post to the threadNo connections are made to the topic
	Minus 1 Point	Minus 2 Point	Minus 3 Point	Minus 4 Point	Minus 5 Point
Grammar, Syntax, APANote: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted.Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition	2-3 errors in APA format.Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors.Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication.	4-5 errors in APA format.Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.Writing style is somewhat focused.	6-7 errors in APA format.Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand.	8-10 errors in APA format.Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand.	Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format.Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.Writing style does not facilitate communication.The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor
	0 points lost				-5 points lost
Total Participation Requirementsper discussion thread	The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day.				The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days
Early Participation Requirementper discussion thread	The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.				The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.

NOTE: To receive credit for a week’s discussion, students may begin posting no earlier than the Sunday immediately before each week opens. Unless otherwise specified, access to most weeks begins on Sunday at 12:01 a.m. MT, and that week’s assignments are due by the next Sunday by 11:59 p.m. MT. Week 8 opens at 12:01 a.m. MT Sunday and closes at 11:59 p.m. MT Wednesday. Any assignments and all discussion requirements must be completed by 11:59 p.m. MT Wednesday of the eighth week.