diff_months: 4

Patient Deterioration in the Clinical Setting NURS20170

Flat 50% Off Order New Solution
Added on: 2025-05-12 07:22:14
Order Code: LD526184
Question Task Id: 0

Unit Code: NURS20170

Unit Title: Patient Deterioration in the Clinical Setting

Assessment 1

Type: Written Case Study

Due Date: 4pm (AEST), Wednesday 30th April 2025 (Week 7)

Extensions: Available as per policy

Return Date: Wednesday 21st May 2025

Weighting: 100%

Length: 1000 words +/-10% (excluding reference list)

Unit Coordinator/s: Dr Amy-Louise Byrne

Learning outcomes assessed



  1. Interpret and explain physiological and psychosocial clinical parameters indicating patient deterioration.

  1. Communicate effectively with interdisciplinary health teams, the patient and family to accurately transfer and escalate critical information.

  1. Initiate and evaluate nursing interventions based on clinical assessment and diagnostic results to optimise patient outcomes.

  1. Analyse a person-centred care approach to the deteriorating patient through critical self-reflection of professional practice.



Aim

The aim of this assessment is for you to demonstrate your knowledge, understanding and critical thinking about clinical deterioration using a case study.

Instructions

Read the case study below and associated clinical documentation. Please follow the steps below to write your academic essay and complete the assessment task.



  1. Using the case study provided below, choose one sign of clinical deterioration. Using relevant up-to- date evidence, discuss why this is occurring and why this is an indicator of deterioration with specific reference to pathophysiology (approximately 200 words).

  1. Critique the ISBAR script provided in the case study and identify two (2) areas that can be improved to facilitate safe patient transfer of care. Using relevant and contemporary evidence, discuss how the communication can be improved to facilitate patient safety (approximately 300 words).

  1. Recommend one nurse-led intervention and support this with relevant contemporary evidence, to improve patient outcomes (approximately 200 words).

  1. Reflect upon your learning from the case study. Identify one area within the case study in which person-centred care needs to be improved. Using relevant and contemporary literature, reflect upon the role of person-centred care and how it can improve communication and patient outcomes. Reflect upon how you will embed this learning into your future practice. Use the what, so what, now what framework for this reflection (approximately 300 words).



Case Study:

Max is a 22-year-old man who lives at home with his parents. Max is an apprentice roofer, and he works full time. Max is an active person who plays for the local soccer team. He has no medical history, is a social drinker and occasional smoker.

Max was at work on a hot day and was assisting a colleague to move sheeting to the roof via a ladder. Max misjudged the ladder step, lost his footing and fell onto the ground below, from a height of approximately 2 metres. Max landed on his shoulder and hit the left side of his head. Max was dazed but reports that he did not lose consciousness. Max stayed as still as possible, and his work colleagues called for an ambulance.

The ambulance team assessed Max, who reported no history. Max was orientated to time and place, though was anxious about the situation and potentially missing work. The assessment from the ambulance was as follows:

A- Patent

B- Rapid, respiratory rate 27 bpm, oxygen saturation 96% on room air

C- Capillary refill 2 seconds, blood pressure 135/76 mmHg, heart rate 110 bpm and regular

D- Alert and orientated GCS 15, blood glucose level 4.2mmol

E- Dressed appropriately for the weather, temperature 37 degrees Celsius.

The ambulance team applied a cervical collar as a precaution and transported Max to the regional hospital nearby. At the rural hospital, the following ISBAR handover was provided to hospital staff, away from Max.

I The patient here is Max. Hes a young fella who was mucking about on the ladder and fell from a height of about 2 metres.

S His work mates were all in a flap when we arrived, not managing the situation well. When we arrived, he was laying on the ground and you could see they were uncomfortable. I think hes hurt their pride more than their head.

B Max doesnt have any other medical history. Max states that he didnt lose consciousness; his work mates werent much help in that respect. Max states that he hit his shoulder first, the left side of head.

A Breathing is a little fast. Oxygen is fine. GCS is 15, orientated to time and place, was more worried about going back to work than anything. All the other observations are written down if you want them.

R So hes here to be checked over, I guess. I think one of his work mates is here too. Theyve been asking me to call his mum, but I didnt do that, didnt have time.

You accept handover from the ambulance service and introduce yourself to Max. Your assessment is completed as follows:

A Patent, speaking in full sentences

B RR 28 bpm, oxygen saturations 96% on room air.

C Blood pressure 140/82 mmHg, blood glucose 4.6 mmol.

D Alert and orientated, GCS 13, is confused to time and place and is asking when the next load of sheeting will arrive.

E Temperature 36 degrees Celsius.

F Heart Rate 120 BPM, Pain 6/10 shoulder pain and a headache.

Literature and references

In this assessment use at least 5 contemporary references (7 years old or less) to support your discussion. You may also use seminal scholarly literature where relevant. Suitable references include peer-reviewed journal articles as well as textbooks and credible websites. When sourcing information, consider the 5 elements of a quality reference: currency, authority, relevance, objectivity, and coverage. Grey literature sourced from the internet must be from reputable websites such as government, university, or peak national bodies: for example, the Australian College of Nursing, the Australian Association of Social Workers, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Note, that websites such as StatPearls, Life in the Fastlane, and Wikipedia are not suitable for this assessment task. Lecture notes are not primary sources of evidence and should not be used in this assessment. All resources, other than web pages and grey literature, must be sources from the CQUniversity library.

Requirements



  • Use a cover page for your assignment that includes in the following order:

    • Student name

    • Student number

    • Unit code and name

    • Assessment type

    • Due date

    • In-text word count

    • Use of Gen AI: Gen AI agenthas been used for editing and proofreading this assessment (insert or delete as applicable).


  • Use a conventional and legible size 12 font, such as Times New Roman, with 2.0 line spacing and 2.54cm page margins (standard pre-set margin in Microsoft Word).

  • Include page numbers on the top right side of each page in a header.

  • Indent the first line of each paragraph 1.27cm (standard pre-set indent in Microsoft Word).

  • An introduction and conclusion are not required for this assessment, instead, use headings to format your work.

  • All questions in the Instructions of this assessment must be attempted and clearly answered to pass this assessment task.

  • Write in the first-person perspective for your reflection, however, write in the third-person perspective when referring to the literature.

  • Use formal academic, discipline specific, professional and inclusive language.

  • Use Microsoft Word English (Australia) spelling and grammar checker.

  • Paraphrase, summarise or quote information acknowledging the original source (referencing) to avoid plagiarism.

  • Follow academic writing conventions: spell out contractions in full; introduce abbreviations and acronyms; spell out numbers for zero through nine and use numerals for numbers 10 and above.

  • All work submitted must be your own work.

  • Start your reference list on a separate page to the body of your assessment.

  • Use the seventh edition American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style. The CQUniversity Academic Learning Centre has an online APA Referencing Style Guide.

  • The word count is considered from the first word of the introduction to the last word of the conclusion. The word count excludes the reference list but includes in-text references and direct quotations.



Resources



  1. You can use unit-provided materials and other credible sources (e.g., journal articles, and books) to reference your The quality and credibility of your sources are important. Please note, that lecture notes are not peer-reviewed primary sources of evidence.

  1. We recommend that you access your discipline-specific Nursing Resource Guide Or the Social Work and Human Services Guide.

  1. You may like to manage your citations and reference Information on how to use academic referencing software (EndNote) is available at the CQUniversity Library website should you wish to learn how to use it.

  1. For information on academic writing and referencing, please visit the Academic Learning Centre Moodle site. The Academic Communication section has many helpful resources, including information for students with English as a second

  1. You may wish to submit a draft to Studiosity.

  1. Submit at least one draft before the due date to review your Turnitin Similarity Score before making a final submission. Instructions are available here.



Academic Integrity



  1. You must abide by the principles of academic integrity (see Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure). Completion of this assessment with another party or sharing of responses is not permitted at any time.

  1. The use of any generative artificial intelligence is permitted for the following purposes:

    • Gen AI content is used to generate general structures.

    • Gen AI content editing.

    • Checking spelling and grammar (for example, Grammarly).




If you use Gen AI to generate ideas, you are required to reference the Gen AI agent as per APA 7th guidelines. If you are using a Gen AI agent for content editing, please complete the declaration on the title page of your assessment. If Gen AI is not used, please delete this declaration.

Submission

Submit your assessment via the unit Moodle site in Microsoft Word format only.

Late penalties of 5% per day of the available mark may be applied as per the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).

Contact TASAC if you experience technical issues submitting your assessment:



  • Phone toll-free 1300 666 620



Marking Criteria

Refer to the marking rubric on the Moodle site for more detail on how marks will be assigned. To achieve a passing grade for this unit you are required to pass this assessment item. If you do not receive a passing grade, you may be eligible for a re-attempt. A re-attempt is where you are given a second opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of one or more of the units learning outcomes before you can progress to new learning or participate in subsequent learning activities. You may be given the opportunity to re-attempt an assessment but will only achieve a mark no greater than the minimum for a pass standard for the assessment. You must: have shown a reasonable attempt to complete the initial assessment task be granted a re-attempt by your Unit Lead/Coordinator make changes to the nominated assessment task which you have failed and resubmit the revised work for marking within seven consecutive days, no assessment extensions will be approved.

Please note: Only one opportunity for a re-attempt is allowed.

Minimum Pass Criteria



  • You must achieve a minimum grade of 50% to pass this assessment.

  • You must achieve a cumulative grade of at least 49.5?ross all assessments to pass this unit.

  • In order to be eligible for a supplementary assessment, all assessment tasks must be reasonably attempted in this unit.

  • You must also complete and pass assessment two to pass this unit.


Key Criteria


High Distinction


84.5100%


Distinction


74.5084.49%


Credit


64.5074.49%


Pass


49.5064.49%


Fail


<49>


TOTAL


Clinical indicator of deterioration


(20%)


(2017)


Identifies and comprehensively discusses one indicator of clinical deterioration with reference to pathophysiology. Argument is comprehensively and logically supported with relevant literature and relates to the case study.


(16.9-15)


Identifies and concisely discusses one indicator of clinical deterioration with reference to pathophysiology. Argument is well supported with relevant literature and relates to the case study.


(14.9-13)


Identifies and clearly discusses one indicator of clinical deterioration with reference to pathophysiology. Argument is supported with relevant literature and relates to the case study.


(12.9-10)


Identifies and discusses one indicator of clinical deterioration with reference to pathophysiology, however, there are some gaps in discussion. Argument is somewhat supported with literature and relates to the case study.


(9.90)


Does not identify or does not adequately identify one indicator of clinical deterioration. Little or no reference to pathophysiology Argument is not supported with literature and/or does not relate to the case study.



Handover critique


(20%)


(2017)


Comprehensively and succinctly critiques ISBAR and identified and comprehensively discusses two areas for improvement. The link to patient safety is concise, clear and logical.


(16.9-15)


Critiques ISBAR in detail and identified and succinctly discusses two areas for improvement. The link to patient safety is clear and logical.


(14.9-13)


Critiques ISBAR and identified and discusses two areas for improvement. The link to patient safety is touched upon.


(12.9-10)


Discusses ISBAR and identified and discusses two areas for improvement. The link to patient safety is attempted.


(9.90)


Does not critique the ISBAR and/or identified and discussed two areas for improvement. The link to patient safety is not appropriate or made.



Recommendations and justification of nurse-led intervention


(20%)


(2017)


Identifies and comprehensively recommends and justifies one nurse-led intervention that is relevant to the case study, and details how this intervention will improve patient outcomes.


(16.9-15)


Identifies, recommends, and justifies one nurse-led intervention that is relevant to the case study, and details how this intervention will improve patient outcomes.


(14.9-13)


Identifies and recommends one nurse led intervention that is relevant to the case study, and details how this intervention will improve patient outcomes. Justification of nurse-led intervention is proposed.


(12.9-10)


Identifies one nurse led intervention that is relevant to the case study, and details how this intervention will improve patient outcomes is attempted. Justification of nurse-led intervention is attempted however further detail is required.


(9.9-0)


Does not identify one relevant nurse led intervention, nor detail of the intervention and the link to improved patient outcomes. Justification of the nurse-led intervention is incorrect or omitted.



Reflection on learning


(20%)


(20-17)


Comprehensively and succinctly reflects on the case study, using the what, so what, what now, framework. Reflects on own practice with appropriate and comprehensive details of how this will be embedded into future practice.


(16.9-15)


Concisely reflects, on the case study, using the what, so what, what now, framework. Reflects on own practice with appropriate and clear details of how this will be embedded into future practice.


(14.9-13)


Reflects on the case study, using the what, so what, what now, framework. Reflects on own practice with appropriate details of how this will be embedded into future practice.


(12.9-10)


Some reflection on the case study, some use of the what, so what, what now, framework. Reflects on own practice with some appropriate details of how this will be embedded into future practice.


(9.90)


Limited or no reflection on the case study, and/or the what, so what, what now framework. Little or no reflection on own practice with little or no details of how this will be embedded into future practice.



Professional writing and presentation (10%)


(108.5)


Content is clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. Meticulous presentation of assessment, double-line spaced with 12-point font, and Arial or Times New Roman font. There are no errors in English grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 8, appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied without error. Adheres to the word count.


Writing reflects students own work and adheres to the principles of academic integrity.


(8.47.5)


Content is frequently clear, correct and presented in a logical order demonstrating a good understanding of the topic. Well-presented assessment, double-line spaced with 12-point font, and Arial or Times New Roman font. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 1 error. The language of the discipline is frequently used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 7 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 1 error. Adheres to the word count.



Writing reflects students own work and adheres to the principles of academic integrity.


(7.46.5)


Content is mostly clear, correct and presented in a logical order demonstrating a sound understanding of the topic. Excellent presentation of assessment, double-line spaced with 12-point font Arial or Times New Roman font. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 2 errors. The language of the discipline is mostly used. The assessment is substantiated with at least 6 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 2 errors. Adheres to the word count.


Writing reflects students own work and adheres to the principles of academic integrity.


(6.45)


Content is frequently clear, correct and presented in a logical order demonstrating a reasonable understanding of the topic. Assessment presented with double-line spacing, 12-point font, and Arial or Times New Roman font. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 3 errors. The language of the discipline is used. The assessment is substantiated with 5 contemporary peer-reviewed mostly appropriate journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 3 errors. Adheres to the word count.


Writing reflects students own work and adheres to the principles of academic integrity.


(4.90)


Content is consistently unclear or incorrect and is disorganised demonstrating insufficient understanding of the topic. Poorly presented assessment, double-line spacing, 12-point font, and Arial or Times New Roman font incorrectly or not used. English grammar, spelling and punctuation conventions have ?4 errors. The language of the discipline is infrequently or incorrectly used. The assessment is substantiated with ?4 contemporary peer-reviewed, appropriate journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with ?4 errors. Deviates +/- 10% of the word count.



Writing may not reflect students own work and may not adhere to the principles of academic integrity.



Referencing (10%)


(108.5)


Acknowledges all sources and meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with no errors. Literature cited is published in the last 7 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library.


(8.47.5)


Acknowledges majority of sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 1 error. The majority of literature cited is published in the last 7 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library.


(7.46.5)


Acknowledges most sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 2 errors. Most literature cited has been published in the last 7 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library.


(6.45.0)


Acknowledges sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 3 errors. Some literature cited is published in the last 7 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library.


(4.90)


Multiple sources not acknowledged and/or ?4 APA (7th Edition) referencing errors or references not provided. Some literature cited is published ?7 years and/or not sourced from the CQUniversity library.



TOTAL:


MARKER:


Markers feedback:

  • Uploaded By : Akshita
  • Posted on : May 12th, 2025
  • Downloads : 0
  • Views : 99

Order New Solution

Can't find what you're looking for?

Whatsapp Tap to ChatGet instant assistance

Choose a Plan

Premium

80 USD
  • All in Gold, plus:
  • 30-minute live one-to-one session with an expert
    • Understanding Marking Rubric
    • Understanding task requirements
    • Structuring & Formatting
    • Referencing & Citing
Most
Popular

Gold

30 50 USD
  • Get the Full Used Solution
    (Solution is already submitted and 100% plagiarised.
    Can only be used for reference purposes)
Save 33%

Silver

20 USD
  • Journals
  • Peer-Reviewed Articles
  • Books
  • Various other Data Sources – ProQuest, Informit, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, EBSCO, Exerpta Medica Database, and more