SOLUTION: SNUG 301 Managing deterioration | My Assignment Tutor

SNUG 301 ManagingdeteriorationASSESSMENTS AUTUMN 2021 SCHOOL OF NURSINGFACULTY OF SCIENCE, MEDICINE & HEALTH2SNUG301Assessment DetailsOVERVIEW Assessment itemForm of AssessmentDue dateReturn/Feedback due datesWeightingAssessment 1Online quiz X 3Quiz 1* Opens Thursday11th February (Week 2) at0800 hours and closes at2000 hours.Quiz 2 Opens Thursday1st April (Week9) at 0800hours and closes at 2000hours.Quiz 3 Opens Thursday29th April (Week12) at 0800hours and closes at 2000hours.*this is also your formativeassessmentOn completion30% (3 X 10% )Assessment 2Case studyThursday 8th April, 1700hrs(Week 10)Within 15 workingdays of submissiondate40%Assessment 3MedicationCalculationCompetency(Mastery)Thursday 15th April(Week 11)Upon completionSatisfactory/unsatisfactoryAssessment 4ReflectionThursday 3rd June, 1700 hrs(Week 17 )Declaration of results30%Assessment 5OSCA –communication andpatient assessment(Mastery)7th to 11th June(OSCA Week)Upon completionSatisfactory/unsatisfactoryTotal marks100% 3 Assessment 1Online QuizDue dateQuiz 1 – Content from teaching weeks 1 and 2. Opens Thursday 11th February (Week 2) at0800 hours and closes at 2000 hours.Quiz 2 – Opens Thursday 1st April (Week9) at 0800 hours and closes at 2000 hours.Quiz 3 – Opens Thursday 29th April (Week 12) at 0800 hours and closes at 2000 hours.Weighting3 X 10%SubmissionOnlineType of CollaborationIndividual AssessmentLength40 minsDetailsEach quiz contributes 10% to the final quiz total of 30% in this assessment.Students need to attempt ALL quizzes to complete this assessment.The quiz will be open to students between 0800-2000 hours on a set day (see above).Each student will complete a unique quiz from a question bank.Students will have 40 minutes to complete each Quiz.Only one attempt is permitted.Quiz settings will include automatic submission when the time expires.Quiz 1 – questions will be based on online content from Modules 1 and 2.Quiz 2 – questions will be based on online content from Modules 3 and 4.Quiz 3 – questions will be based on online content from Modules 5-8.Note:The quiz closes strictly at the time noted above: any student who has not attempted andsubmitted their quiz will receive zero (0) marks. The quiz will NOT REOPEN, and no alternativeassessment will be set without extenuating circumstances and an approved AC.Style and format20 questions.Questions may be multi-choice questions or True/False questionsSubject Learning Outcomes1. Connect early and late warning signs of the deteriorating person to underlyingpathophysiology and psychiatry.3. Develop an immediate plan of care to address the sudden deterioration in health.4. Effectively communicate with members of the interdisciplinary team in a simulatedscenario involving a person with sudden health deterioration. 4 Assessment 2Case studyDue dateThursday 8th April, 1700hrs (Week 10 )Weighting40%SubmissionSubmit an electronic copy of your assignment via upload to eLearning.Please refer to detailed information regarding submission of assignments on the subject’seLearning site.Type of CollaborationIndividual AssessmentLength2000 wordsDetailsStudents will apply their clinical reasoning skills and critically examine a case study where aperson experiences a deterioration in clinical conditionThere will be three (3) case studies to choose from.Students are expected to demonstrate clinical reasoning skills through discussion ofpathophysiology, monitoring and treatment, as well as incorporating the role of theregistered nurse.Style and formatReport with headingsAPA 7 referencing system. A summary of the APA 7 can be accessed on the Library website athttps://uow.libguides.com/refcite/apa-7Subject Learning Outcomes1. Connect early and late warning signs of the deteriorating person to underlyingpathophysiology and psychiatry;2. Apply a systematic person-centred approach to assessing sudden deterioration;3. Develop an immediate plan of care to address the sudden deterioration in health;4. Effectively communicate with members of the interdisciplinary team in a simulated scenarioinvolving a person with sudden health deterioration;5. Defend the necessity for rapid response and standardised assessment;Marking CriteriaThe marking rubric is on pages 9-12 5 Assessment 3Medication Calculations Competency (mastery)Due dateThursday 15th April (Week 11)WeightingNo weighting (minimum satisfactory level must be achieved)Note:Students must achieve a satisfactory grade in the Calculation Exam prior to attendingworkplace experience commencing May 3 2021. Students will be offered three (3) attempts tocomplete the Calculation ExamSubmissionOnline examType of CollaborationIndividual AssessmentLength1 hourDetailsThe online exam will be undertaken via Med+Safe® (located on the SNUG301 Moodle site)and will comprise of 30 questions.More information will be available on Moodle.Style and formatOnline examSubject Learning Outcomes7. Manage an emergency situation or acute deterioration in a simulated setting. 6 Assessment 4ReflectionDue dateThursday 3rd June 1700 hrs (Week 19)Weighting30%SubmissionSubmit an electronic copy of your assignment via upload to eLearning.Please refer to detailed information regarding submission of assignments on the subject’seLearning site.Type of CollaborationIndividual AssessmentLength1500 wordsDetailsStudents will use the Rolfe et al. (2001) Model with specific prompts outlined below to reflecton caring for a person experiencing a deterioration in their conditionEITHER:From the student’s own clinical practice,OR:From the example of caring for a person with a deterioration in their condition provided onMoodle.Descriptive- What?What is the situation? (Did you or should you have recognised indicators of deterioration?)What was my role in the situation?What was I trying to achieve?What actions did I take? Consider specifically:• How did I communicate my concerns- to the person I was caring for/the team?• What assessment skills and clinical treatment and care did I provide?• What person-centred processes (McCormack & McCance, 2017) did I use to supportthe person in my care and others?What was the response of others?What were the consequences? For the person I was caring for? For myself? For others?What feelings did it evoke? In the person I was caring for? In myself? In others?What was good/bad about the experience?Theoretical- So what? Use evidence to support this section of your reflectionSo what does this tell me/ teach me/ imply/ mean about me/ the person I was caring for/ ourrelationship/ my care/ the knowledge and skills I am using/ my attitudes, values and beliefs/the person I was caring fors’ attitudes, values and beliefs/ etc…?So what was going through my mind as I acted?So what did I base my actions on? Consider specifically:• Did your knowledge of the Clinical Reasoning Cycle including your structuredassessment skills and clinical treatment and care inform your actions- explain? 7 • Did the McCormack & McCance (2017) person-centred practice pre-requisitesinform your actions- explain?• Did your professional communication and leadership skills and knowledge informyour actions- explain?So what other knowledge can I bring to this situation?Consider specifically:• Your knowledge of the Clinical Reasoning Cycle including structured assessment skillsand clinical treatment and care• The McCormack & McCance (2017) person-centred pre-requisites• Your professional communication and leadership skills and knowledgeSo what could / should I have done to make it better? For the person I was caring for? Formyself? For others?So what is my new understanding of the situation?So what broader issues arise from the situation?Action-oriented- Now what? Use evidence to support this section of your reflectionWhat would I do differently next time? Now what do I need to do in order to effectivelyrecognise and manage a deterioration of a persons’ condition in the future? Considerspecifically:• Your knowledge of the Clinical Reasoning Cycle including your structured assessmentskills and clinical treatment and care• The McCormack & McCance (2017) person-centred pre-requisites• Your professional communication and leadership skills and knowledgeNow what broader issues do I need to consider if this action is to be successful?Now what would be the consequences of this action?Now what planning is required to activate the new direction?Students are expected to critically reflect on the experience with a focus on the role of theregistered nurse in a health system.Style and formatCritical reflection using the information outlined aboveUse these headings:Descriptive- What?Theoretical- So what?Action-oriented- Now what? 8 APA 7 referencing system. A summary of the APA 7 can be accessed on the Library website athttps://uow.libguides.com/refcite/apa-7 Subject Learning Outcomes2. Apply a systematic person-centred approach to assessing sudden deterioration4. Effectively communicate with members of the interdisciplinary team in a simulatedscenario involving a person with sudden health deteriorationMarking CriteriaThe marking rubric is on pages 13-15 Assessment 5Observed Structured Clinical Assessment (OSCA): Managing deteriorationDue dateJune 7-11 OSCA Week 2021WeightingNo weighting (minimum satisfactory level must be achieved).SubmissionStudents will be expected to nominate an assessment time.Type of CollaborationTeam assessmentLength60 minutesDetailsA student team will receive two case studies and will be expected to detect and manage aclinical deterioration collaboratively.Students will have 10 minutes to examine the documentation and develop a plan.Students will then go into Nursing laboratory (for 30 minutes) and demonstrate their clinicaldecision making and ability to act to detect and manage a clinical deterioration.Students will then debrief outside the laboratory with the Facilitator for 20 minutes.This will be practiced during the Nursing labs and tutorials across the semester.Style and formatOSCA – simulationSubject Learning Outcomes2. Apply a systematic person-centred approach to assessing sudden deterioration;3. Develop an immediate plan of care to address the sudden deterioration in health;4. Effectively communicate with members of the interdisciplinary team in a simulatedscenario involving a person with sudden health deterioration;6. Critically evaluate and assess a person with sudden health deterioration;Marking CriteriaThe marking criteria for this assessment task are available in eLearning 9 Assessment 4 – Case Study – weight 40% (2000 words)CriteriaHigh Distinction100%Distinction 80%Credit 70%Pass 60%Fail 49%Fail 25%Fail 0%Pathophysiology – 20%Effectivelydescribes thepathophysiological basis of theperson’s currentcondition,incorporatinghistory ofpresenting illnessand health historyComprehensivedescription ofthepathophysiologycontributing todeteriorationincorporatingboth findingsfrom physicalassessment, vitalsigns, and clinicalinvestigationsand evidence oflikelihood ofdeterioration inrelation topresentingillness andtreatment.Credit plusIncorporatesevidence oflikelihood ofdeterioration inrelation topresentingillness andtreatment.Sound descriptionof thepathophysiologycontributing todeteriorationincorporatingfindings fromphysicalassessment, vitalsigns and clinicalinvestigation withhistory ofpresenting illnessand healthhistory.Incomplete butaccuratedescription ofthepathophysiologycontributing todeteriorationwith incompleteincorporation ofassessment orinvestigations,findings andhistory ofpresentingillness andhealth history.Description ofpathophysiologyis brief andinaccurate attimesMinimalinclusion offindings fromassessment andinvestigations,with noinclusion ofhistory ofpresentingillness andhealth history.There is anattempt atdescribingpathophysiologybut it isinaccurate andnot supportedwith evidence.Fails to describepathophysiology.Clinical interventions to address deterioration – 30% 10 Describesimmediate andshort-term clinical*interventions andinvestigations toaddressdeterioration usingcontemporary bestpractice# andperson-centredlanguage*medical, nursing &allied health#Level 1 or 2 evidenceand/or clinicalpractice guidelineswith moderate tostrongrecommendationsProvides acomprehensiveand prioritiseddescription of allimmediate andshort-term clinicalinterventions andinvestigations toaddressdeteriorationusing personcentred language.Strong integrationof contemporarybest practice.Provides a soundcomprehensiveand prioritiseddescription of allimmediate andshort-term clinicalinterventions andinvestigations toaddressdeteriorationusing personcentred language.Sound integrationof contemporarybest practice.Provides a sounddescription ofmost immediateand short-termclinicalinterventions andinvestigations toaddressdeteriorationusing personcentred language.Incorporatessomecontemporarybest practice.Provides anunderdevelopeddescription ofmost clinicalinterventionsandinvestigations.Person-centredlanguage isinconsistent.Limitedintegration ofcontemporarybest practice.Provides a limiteddescription ofshort-term clinicalinterventions andinvestigations.Person-centredlanguage isinconsistentEvidence useddoes not supportcontemporarybest practice.There is anattempt atdescribinginterventions andinvestigations.Person centredlanguage is notused.Evidence useddoes not supportcontemporarybest practice.Does not provide adescription ofshort-term clinicalinterventions andinvestigations.Person-centredlanguage is notused.Makes no attemptto contemporarybest practice.Nursing clinical decision making (CDM) and actions to address deterioration – 30%Describes andprovides rationalefor nursing CDMand actionsspecific to casestudy, includingassessment &monitoring,communicationand nurse-initiatedinterventions usingcontemporary bestProvidescomprehensiveand prioritiseddescription ofnursing CDMactions withdesiredoutcomes, withsophisticateddiscussion ofevidence-basedrationales andProvides a soundand prioritiseddescription ofnursing CDMactions withdesiredoutcomes withevidence-basedrationalesIncludes remedialactions if desiredoutcomes are notProvides a sounddescription ofnursing CDMactions anddesiredoutcomes withevidence-basedrationales.Uses Personcentredlanguage.Provides adescription ofmost nursingCDM actions anddesiredoutcomes withlimited rationalesand evidence.Person-centredlanguage isProvides alimiteddescription ofnursing CDM andactions withoutrationales andevidence.Person-centredlanguage isinconsistent.There is anattempt todescribe nursingCDM and nursingactionsPerson-centredlanguage is notused.Does not providedescription ofnursing CDMactions withoutrationales andevidencePerson-centredlanguage is notused. 11 practice andperson-centredlanguageremedial actionsif outcomes arenot realized.Uses Personcentredlanguage.realized.Uses Personcentredlanguage.Expression and academic writing 10%Writing is authenticand clearly expressesideas.Uses correct spellingand paragraphstructure throughout.Structured as perUOW assessmentHandbook.Exemplary writingwith very high levelsof authenticity andindependent thought.Ideas are clearlyexpressed.Introductorysentence used at thestart of paragraphs.Main subject matteris developed withineach paragraph.Concluding sentenceused at the end ofparagraphs.Exemplary spelling,grammar and syntaxwith no errors. Meetsall stylerequirements.Evidence of superioracademic writingskills. Authentic andoriginal writing thatclearly synthesisesthe key points of theassignment.Expression is clear.Correct use ofparagraphs.Discussion in eachparagraph providessufficient depth todemonstrateunderstanding.Superior spelling,grammar and syntax10).Sources areinappropriate and/orabsent.In-text referencing maybe absent and/orreference list andcontains major errors(>10).Sources are absent.Absent in-textreferencing and/orreference list. 13 Assessment 5 – Critical reflection – weight 30% (1500 words)CriteriaHigh Distinction100%Distinction 80%Credit 70%Pass 60%Fail 49%Fail 25%Fail 0%Use of reflective model: What 25%Use of the Rolfe et al.(2001) reflectivemodel:What?Description of theeventOutstanding use ofreflective model todescribe a relevantevent.All specificpromptsaddressedthoughtfully.Reflective modelused appropriately todescribe a relevantevent.Some specificpromptsaddressedthoughtfully.Reflective modelused appropriately todescribe a relevantevent.Some specificpromptsaddressed briefly.Reflective modelusedinappropriatelyor weakly whendescribing arelevant event.Specific promptsnot addressedor addressedinappropriately.The reflectivemodel is usedbut it is not usedappropriately toexplore thisevent.The descriptionof the event isunclear.Minimalevidence ofreflectionand/or use ofthe reflectivemodel todescribe arelevant event.No evidence ofreflectionand/or use ofthe reflectivemodel todescribe arelevant event.Use of reflective model: So what 25%Use of the reflectivemodel:So what?Theory and knowledgebuilding level ofreflectionEvidence of learningOutstanding use ofreflective model tocritically analyse arelevant event.All specificpromptsaddressedcritically.Evidence used tosupport alldiscussion.Reflective modelused appropriatelyto criticallyanalyse a relevantevent.Some specificpromptsaddressedthoughtfully.Evidence used tosupport key pointsof reflection.Reflective modelused appropriately toanalyse a relevantevent.Some specificprompts addressedbriefly. Evidence tosupport reflectionbut may be poorquality.Reflective modelused inappropriatelyor weakly to analysea relevant event.Specific prompts notaddressed oraddressedinappropriately.Minimal use ofevidence tosupportreflection.The reflectivemodel is used butit is not usedappropriately toanalyse a relevantevent.The discussion isunclear and notsupported withevidence.Minimal evidenceof reflectionand/or use of thereflective model toanalyse a relevantevent.No evidence ofreflection and/oruse of thereflective model toanalyse a relevantevent. 14 Use of reflective model: Now what 30%Use of reflective model:Now what?Evidence of learning/Considering futureActionsOutstanding use ofreflective model toexplore future actions.All specific promptsaddressed critically.Actions were clear andthoughtful.Evidence used tosupport alldiscussion.Reflective model usedappropriately to explorefuture actions. Somespecific promptsaddressed thoughtfully.Actions were clear andthoughtful.Evidence used tosupport key pointsof reflection.Reflective model usedappropriately to explorefuture actions. Somespecific promptsaddressed briefly.Actions were clear.Evidence to supportreflection but may bepoor quality.Reflective model usedinappropriately orweakly to explore futureactions. Specificprompts not addressedor addressedinappropriately.Minimal use ofevidence tosupport reflection.The reflective modelis used but it is notused appropriatelyto explore futureactions.The discussion isunclear and notsupported withevidence.Minimal evidenceof reflection and/oruse of a reflectivemodel to explorefuture actions.No evidence ofreflection and/oruse of a reflectivemodel to explorefuture actions.Exemplary writing withvery high levels ofauthenticity andindependent thought.Ideas are clearlyexpressed.Introductory sentenceused at the start ofparagraphs. Mainsubject matter isdeveloped within eachparagraph. Concludingsentence used at theend of paragraphs.Exemplary spelling,grammar and syntaxwith no errors. Meetsall style requirements.Evidence of superioracademic writing skills.Authentic and originalwriting that clearlysynthesises the keypoints of theassignment. Expressionis clear.Correct use ofparagraphs. Discussionin each paragraphprovides sufficientdepth to demonstrateunderstanding.Superior spelling,grammar and syntax 10).Sources areinappropriate and/orabsent.In-text referencing maybe absent and/orreference list andcontains major errors(>10).Sources are absent.Absent in-textreferencing and/orreference list.