Module 3 | Case Study: Negligence
Instructions
Read the case study provided and answer the questions using a Microsoft Word document. Each response should be a minimum of 5 sentences in length, clear and concise, and grammatically correct.
Case Study
A 67-year-old client had an epidural catheter inserted for pain management following a total knee replacement. After successful treatment of an episode of hypotension in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), he was transferred to the medical-surgical unit. The registered nurses assessed the client and delegated direct care to an LPN, although the LPN denied this.
Three hours later, the client experienced nausea and vomiting. The client was found cyanotic and unresponsive 10 minutes later and subsequently died of anoxic encephalopathy. Many facts were disputed among the numerous codefendants and there was poor documentation (Nurses Service Organization, 2012).
Citation: NSO. (n.d.) Nurse case study: Failure to assess and monitor the patient post operatively. (2017). https://www.nso.com/Learning/Artifacts/Legal-Cases/Nurse-Case-Study-Failure-to-adequately-assess-and-monitor-the-patient-post-operatively-resulting-in
Case Study Questions
- What priority assessments were missed, and how could this have been avoided?
- What steps of the nursing process were done inappropriately or missed completely, and why?
- What steps of the delegation were inappropriate, and why?
- What could have been done to prevent this outcome?
Due
- Date: See due date listed at the top of the assignment page.
- Time: By 11:59 p.m. of the assignment due date.
Submission and Assessment Guidelines
- Submit your Microsoft Word document with the questions clearly listed and answered. All of the questions MUST be answered in your document.
- It is expected that your answers are free of grammatical errors and in complete sentences, where appropriate.
- Review the Case Study Rubric for grading criteria.
- This activity is worth 50 points.
Rubric
NUR 333 – Case Study Rubric
NUR 333 – Case Study Rubric
CriteriaRatingsPts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConnections
35 ptsOutstandingEvidence of critical thinking and rationale provided as well as examples and specific details.
25 ptsGoodEvidence of critical thinking and details are mostly specific.
15 ptsProficientEvidence of critical thinking and details provided but usually of a generalized nature.
5 ptsNeeds ImprovementIdea presence is limited or not supported.
0 ptsUnacceptableIdea presence is limited and not supported.
35 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
7.5 ptsOutstandingExceptionally well-presented; ideas are detailed and well-developed.
5 ptsGoodWell-presented; ideas are detailed and mostly well-developed.
4 ptsProficientContent is sound and solid; ideas are present but not particularly developed or supported.
2 ptsNeeds ImprovementContent is slightly reasonable.
0 ptsUnacceptableContent is not sound.
7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAcademic Language
2.5 ptsOutstandingExcellent use and control of language. Superior use of style and variety provided in a professional tone.
2 ptsGoodGood use and control of language. Minor (<2) errors with the use of style, with some variety provided. Professional tone maintained throughout.
1.5 ptsProficientAverage use and control of language. Some (3-5) errors or misuse of style with minimal variety. Professional tone maintained throughout.
1 ptsNeeds ImprovementBelow average use and control of language. Significant (>5) errors or misuse of style, with no variety. Professional tone not maintained throughout assignment.
0 ptsUnacceptableSignificant issues with use and control of language. Style and variety unable to be determined, with no professional tone.
2.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormatting
2.5 ptsOutstandingFormatting follows assignment directions (APA as required), with no errors. Citations provided (if necessary), with no errors.
2 ptsGoodFormatting follows assignment directions (APA as required), with minimal (<2) errors. Citations provided (if necessary), with minimal (<2) errors.
1.5 ptsProficientFormatting mostly follows assignment directions (APA as required), with some (3-5) errors. Citations (if necessary) provided, with some (3-5) errors.
1 ptsNeeds ImprovementFormatting (APA as required) errors (>5) make following the assignment difficult. Citations (if necessary) mostly provided, with significant (>5) errors.
0 ptsUnacceptableFormatting does not follow assignment directions. Significant errors make formatting illegible. Citations (if necessary) do not follow APA format.
2.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholarly/Professional Composition
2.5 ptsOutstandingExpert level of writing with little to no errors.
2 ptsGoodGood level of writing, with minimal (<2) errors.
1.5 ptsProficientAverage level of writing, with some (3-5) errors.
1 ptsNeeds ImprovementBelow average level of writing, with significant (>5) errors.
0 ptsUnacceptableLevel of writing is far below what is expected for scholarly/professional composition.
2.5 pts
Total Points: 50
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!
NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
