Case Study Summary
The contextual investigation includes an 85-year-old lady that has been experiencing an ailment. As of late the patient had been set in a nursing care office on the grounds that the family was stressed that the patient was befuddling prescriptions, over-curing herself, and experiencing the absence of sustenance.
Family is involved in the patient’s consideration. Both the child and the doctor concluded that the patient ought not to be given such a lot of torment drugs that would make her not be practical over the course of the day. The patient was endorsed Tylenol like clockwork for torment. In any case, Tylenol didn’t appear to deal with the patient’s aggravation which made the patient experience absence of everyday exercises.
NSG 426 Assessment 4 Ethical and Legal Responsibilities
The patient was in such an excess of agony that the patient couldn’t move around and sitting up in the wheelchair becomes troublesome. Per the patient’s solicitation, she mentioned being put on bed rest and be repositioned regularly. Per the child’s solicitation, he requested that the doctor oversee torment yet limit torment medicine. The girl then again was vexed that her mom’s agony was not being controlled and announced the nursing home to the State Administrative Office.
Legal and Ethical Aspects: The legal aspect of the contextual investigation are carelessness. As per (Lando, 2020), carelessness is the inability to mind or do a request appropriately. Inside the contextual investigation, the patient was disregarded. The patient was experiencing endless torment was rarely controlled. Another legal angle is negligence. As per (Watari, 2020), negligence can comprise of ill-advised treatment with regards to not appropriately treating a patient. For example, the patient for this situation didn’t get the legitimate treatment to deal with her aggravation. The patient is inadequate with regards to the capacity to independence.
NSG 426 Assessment 4 Ethical and Legal Responsibilities
The ethical viewpoint inside the contextual investigation is equity, supporting and giving independence. As indicated by (Dulisse, Fitch and Logan, 2020), equity is giving a similar consideration to the patient paying little mind to maturity, orientation, identity, and religion. The patient was not given the option to voice her own perspective and was not heard. It was the medical attendant’s liability to advocate for the patient and rethink torment and convey to the give when the aggravation was unmanageable.
Regulations: This patient is safeguarded under the nursing home change act [Reference USD18 \l 1033]. The patient has the option to be treated with respect, voice their own perspective, impart openly, the option to take part in their consideration and be completely educated about medicines and plans (Equity, 2018). Inside the contextual investigation, the patient is being dismissed. The patient isn’t being permitted to voice her interests. The doctor isn’t dealing with the patient’s aggravation level sufficiently. The legitimate prescription isn’t being endorsed for the patient because of earlier history with drug the board.
Ethical Principles: The ethical principles that relate to this contextual analysis is absence of advantage, no maleficence, independence, truth-telling and equity. The patient is deficient with regards to beneficences. The doctor isn’t acting for the patient’s sake rather is treating the patient in light of what the family is mentioning. No maleficence, is concerning when the patient starts to encounter dull hesitate stools and retches blood because of a prescription mistake. The doctor has the commitment to not truly hurt the patient.
NSG 426 Assessment 4 Ethical and Legal Responsibilities
Truth-telling is one more ethical rule that is being dismissed inside the contextual analysis. The patient has the option to have an open correspondence with the doctor and be educated regarding the forecast and plans that are set up. Equity is furnishing and treating the patient with similar regard as any remaining patients no matter what their previous clinical history.
Resolution: The case expects that the patient be treated with deference, poise and agony control. The patient’s aggravation isn’t being controlled and expects for torment the executives. Figuring out what is the patient’s open aggravation level will take into account the patient to be most useful over the course of the day. Upholding for the patient when torment isn’t controlled and following the levels of leadership when care isn’t helping the patient.
NSG 426 Assessment 4 Ethical and Legal Responsibilities
Including case the executives and the interdisciplinary group will expand the opportunity of open correspondence among patients, family, and medical services suppliers (Freeth and Vilsmaier, 2020). As indicated by (Aygoren, 2020), with the use of an aggravation device it surveys torment, incitement, quality, transmits or alludes, seriousness, and time otherwise called (PQRST) it will help guide and deal with the patient’s aggravation.
Actions: Checking the patient’s aggravation level. Conveying inside the disciplinary group, including case the executives to address the patient’s requirements. Including the patient to partake and voice their own viewpoint inside their own consideration and treatment. Rethinking the patient’s aggravation level and speaking with the medical services supplier and family when torment isn’t controlled. Monitoring the patient for incidental effects. Teaching the family about tormenting the executives and as well as the patient. Taking into account non-drug specialists like warm packs, back rubs, repositioning, and controlling room temperature to lift torment.
NSG 426 Assessment 4 Ethical and Legal Responsibilities
Resources: Quality control is an incredible source that is accessible to patients. The quality control group is liable for surveying the patient’s mental level and guaranteeing that patients are being incorporated inside their consideration. (Domhoff et al., 2021). As per (Domhoff et al., 2021) quality control will guarantee that staff is accomplished in legitimate patient consideration. Proceeding with schooling and month-to-month gatherings are set up to help and explain specific circumstances that might emerge inside medical services (Domhoff et al., 2021).
Case the board is another extraordinary asset that is accessible to the patient. Case the board meets with the patient frequently to guarantee that the patient is getting the appropriate consideration and treatment (Balard et al., 2016). Case the executives mediate when the patient may not be getting legitimate consideration (Balard et al., 2016).
Conclusion
Torment the executives were dismissed in view of the patient’s previous medical history. The patient experienced because of carelessness, equity and misbehavior. The patient was not given the option to shout out for the benefit of her consideration. The doctor misses the mark on the capacity to permit the patient to be liberated from torment. The attendant missed the mark on the capacity to advocate for the patient. The family was permitted to keep on pursuing clinical choices in regard to tormenting the board without teaching the family on the significance of agony control. With everything taken into account, the person who experienced the most was the patient.
Reference
Aygoren, F. (2020). The effect of PQRST technique on recalling what you read. Ilkogretim (1), 269–285.
https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2020.656796
Online, 19 Balard, F., Gely-Nargeot, M.-C., Corvol, A., Saint-Jean, O., & Somme, D. (2016).
Case management for the elderly with complex needs: cross-linking the views of their role held by elderly people, their informal caregivers and the case managers. BMC Health Services Research, 16(1), 635.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1892-6
Domhoff, D., Seibert, K., Stiefler, S., Wolf-Ostermann, K., & Peschke, D. (2021).
Differences in nursing home admission between functionally defined populations in Germany and the association with quality of health care. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06196-8
Dulisse, B. C., Fitch, C. H., & Logan, M. (2020). No Silver Lining: Evaluating the Need for Consistent and Appropriate Functionality Assessments Among the Increasing and Incarcerated Elderly Population.
Criminal Justice Review (Sage Publications), 45(4), 484–501.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016820939620
Freeth, R., & Vilsmaier, U. (2020). Researching Collaborative Interdisciplinary Teams: Practices and Principles for Navigating Researcher Positionality. Science & Technology Studies, 33(3), 57–72 Lando, H. (2020).
Two Advantages of the Negligence Rule Over Strict Liability when the Parties are Risk Averse. Review of Law & Economics, 16(3), 1–18.
https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2018-0070
Watari, T., Tokuda, Y., Mitsuhashi, S., Otuki, K., Kono, K., Nagai, N., Onigata, K., & Kanda, H. (2020). Factors and impact of physicians’ diagnostic errors in malpractice claims in Japan. PloS One, 15(8), e0237145.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237145
