Poster & Written Justification

/in /by

Assessment 2, Poster & Written Justification, 2500 words (50%)

AIM:

Registered nurses work with individuals, groups and communities to improve health. One way to do this is to analyse how risks to health can be reduced during changes to natural, social and/ or governmental elements in our society. As clinical leaders, registered nurses are expected to collect information about an emerging health risk from a variety of sources and collate this information into a meaningful analysis with recommendations for a specific audience. The audience for these analyses can be the public, older people or carers of older people, or nurses working in a range of practice contexts. This aim of this assignment requires you to apply your theoretical knowledge gained from modules 1, 2 and 3.

Your poster and written justification (AN INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT) must:

1. Recommend and justify the nursing requirements for older people diagnosed with, or at risk of, complex health conditions and/or cognitive decline; and

2. Evaluate the implications for nursing care related to changes in the environment (natural, social and governmental) that impact the health of older people.

For this task you will create a poster and write a justification supporting your poster inclusions and aesthetic layout.

There are two parts to this assignment. Part 1 is a poster and Part 2 is the written justification.

The total word allocation for this assignment is 2500 words and your written justification needs be a minimum of 1200 words. NOTE: You can decide how you allocate your word limit of 2500 words as long as your justification is no less than 1200 words.

TASK INSTRUCTIONS:

1. Before you begin preparing the poster or justification undertake the following steps:

I. Identify a specific health risk for a specific older adult population (aged over 65 years or over 55 years if Australian First Peoples);

II. Collect information about that specific health risk;

III. Develop a summary of your analysis of that information; and

IV. Identify an audience and make recommendations about risk reduction and treatment for that audience.

This part of the task is consistent with the approach used to collect information for an essay. You DO NOT need to submit your research/preparation materials.

2. Then , for part 1 of the assignment, create a poster to share your learning with the specified audience. The poster must provide credible and relevant information on a specified health risk and be interesting to the target audience. For more information about how to prepare an academic poster, visit the following websites:

New York University, How to Create a Research Poster – Poster Basics
Erren, T.C., Bourne, P.E. (2007). Ten simple rules for a good poster presentation. PLoS Computational Biology 3 (5), e102
Overview: How to design a poster presentation (3:07) – YouTube video
3. Please note that the aesthetic features of the poster are important and purposeful. Be selective and concise with the number and type of words used, and use language that is consistent with the audience. Ensure that claims made are based on evidence from peer-reviewed literature.
4. Next , for part 2 of the assignment you need to develop a justification for your poster. The length of the justification is 1200 words. In this, you will:
i. Provide a rationale and supporting evidence for the selection of the health risk in the specified older adult population, and
ii. Justify your selection of the audience, included content, and aesthetic features.
NOTE: If you wish to use your assignment 1/ Case Study as the basis for this assignment, this is permissible. This will enable you to examine at a deeper level the clinical encounter you analyse in assignment 1.
Additional information:
· Ensure that you use scholarly literature[footnoteRef:1] (digitised readings, research articles, relevant Government reports and text books) that has been predominantly published within the last 5 years. [1: Scholarly or peer-reviewed journal articles are written by scholars or professionals who are experts in their fields, as opposed to literature such as magazine articles, which reflect the tastes of the general public and are often meant as entertainment.]
· Use academic language[footnoteRef:2] and health specific terminology throughout. [2: Everyday language is predominantly subjective. It is mainly used to express opinions based on personal preference or belief rather than evidence. Written academic English is formal. It avoids colloquialisms and slang, which may be subject to local and social variations. Formal language is more precise and stable, and therefore more suitable for the expression of complex ideas and the development of reasoned argumentation.]
· Refer to the marking guidelines when writing your assignment. This will assist you in calculating the weightings of the sections for your assignment.
· You may use headings to organise your work and use the first person in your writing.
Assignment 2, Poster & Written Justification,
Marking Guidelines

CRITERIA POSSIBLE MARK
CRITERION ONE: Poster
· The scope and depth of content in the poster is appropriate for the selected audience (10 marks).
· White space (no words) is used effectively to support the logical flow of the poster information (5 marks).
· The aesthetic features of the poster are appropriate for the audience (5 marks).		 /20
CRITERION TWO: Health Risk
· The rationale for the selection of health risk in the specified older adult population in the written justification is supported using evidence. /10
CRITERION THREE: Research and use of evidence
· The rationale for the selection of poster elements including audience, content and aesthetic features in the written justification is logically developed (10 marks).
· No fewer than 10 different sources from the scholarly literature are sourced (5 marks).		 /15
CRITERION FOUR: Academic Writing & Referencing
· The writing is clear, concise & free of APA (6th ed) errors.
· Word limits for assessment items are strictly adhered to.
· The written justification is well presented, with correct spelling, grammar, and well-constructed sentence and paragraph structure.		 /5
Total Marks
[ weighted at 50%]		 /50

1
2

Fetal Abnormality

/in /by
Fetal Abnormality
Write a 750-1000 word analysis of “Case Study: Fetal Abnormality.” Be sure to address the following questions:

  1. Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? Explain.
  2. How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendation for action?
  3. What theory do you agree with? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action?

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

  • Case Study: Fetal Abnormality
    Jessica is a 30-year-old immigrant from Mexico City. She and her husband Marco have been in the U.S. for the last three years and have finally earned enough money to move out of their Aunt Maria’s home and into an apartment of their own. They are both hard workers. Jessica works 50 hours a week at a local restaurant and Marco has been contracting side jobs in construction. Six months before their move to an apartment, Jessica finds out she is pregnant.
    Four months later, Jessica and Marco arrive at the county hospital, a large, public, nonteaching hospital. A preliminary ultrasound indicates a possible abnormality with the fetus. Further scans are conducted and it is determined that the fetus has a rare condition in which it has not developed any arms, and will not likely develop them. There is also a 25% chance that the fetus may have Down syndrome.
    Dr. Wilson, the primary attending physician, is seeing Jessica for the first time, since she and Marco did not receive earlier prenatal care over concerns about finances. Marco insists that Dr. Wilson refrain from telling Jessica the scan results, assuring him that he will tell his wife himself when she is emotionally ready for the news. While Marco and Dr. Wilson are talking in another room, Aunt Maria walks into the room with a distressed look on her face. She can tell that something is wrong and inquires of Dr. Wilson. After hearing of the diagnosis, she walks out of the room wailing loudly and praying aloud.
    Marco and Dr. Wilson continue their discussion, and Dr. Wilson insists that he has an obligation to Jessica as his patient and that she has a right to know the diagnosis of the fetus. He furthermore is intent on discussing all relevant factors and options regarding the next step, including abortion. Marco insists on taking some time to think of how to break the news to Jessica, but Dr. Wilson, frustrated with the direction of the conversation, informs the husband that such a choice is not his to make. Dr. Wilson proceeds back across the hall, where he walks in on Aunt Maria awkwardly praying with Jessica and phoning the priest. At that point, Dr. Wilson gently but briefly informs Jessica of the diagnosis, and lays out the option for abortion as a responsible medical alternative, given the quality of life such a child would have. Jessica looks at him and struggles to hold back her tears.
    Jessica is torn between her hopes of a better socioeconomic position and increased independence, along with her conviction that all life is sacred. Marco will support Jessica in whatever decision she makes, but is finding it difficult not to view the pregnancy and the prospects of a disabled child as a burden and a barrier to their economic security and plans. Dr. Wilson lays out all of the options but clearly makes his view known that abortion is “scientifically” and medically a wise choice in this situation. Aunt Maria pleads with Jessica to follow through with the pregnancy and allow what “God intends” to take place, and urges Jessica to think of her responsibility as a mother.

Organizational Systems and Structures Evaluation

/in /by
Project 1: Promoting Health Care Quality  
In this course, you develop a comprehensive Course Project: Promoting Health Care Quality.
To initiate this project, this week you examine the systems and structures of an organization with which you are familiar.
Organizational Systems and Structures Evaluation
When a problem related to health care quality and patient safety arises, there can be an inclination to focus on a specific event rather than to examine the larger context surrounding it. Analyzing the systems and structures within an organization provides a foundation for generating a fuller understanding of how and why the event occurred and for developing strategies to address the underlying issues. Perhaps more importantly, such an analysis can be used to proactively identify potential challenges and improve organizational systems and structures in order to promote positive outcomes. In the first section of your Course Project, you analyze the systems and structures of a health care organization with which you are familiar.
To prepare:  Identify a health care organization with which you are familiar; one that you will be able to sufficiently analyze to complete the full scope of the Course Project.
Select two or more of the following frameworks: o Learning organizations o Complex adaptive systems (CAS) o Clinical microsystems o Good to great o
The 5 Ps You may use the same frameworks that you addressed in this week’s Discussion. 
With these frameworks in mind, analyze the systems and structures of the organization. Be sure to research and consider: o Mission, vision, and values o Strategic plan, goals, and objectives, if possible o Key operational processes and patterns o Information technology use o Organizational priorities and investments, as indicated by financial data.
Section 1: Organizational Systems and Structures Evaluation  As you continue your evaluation of a health care organization, it is essential to pay attention to culture. Organizational culture provides the context in which all interactions and processes occur, and is therefore central to any effort to enact change.  To prepare: •Continue to analyze your selected organization, as indicated in Week 3 (Section 1 of the Course Project). •In addition, consider the ideas and information exchanged in this week’s Discussion. Continue to analyze essential elements of organizational culture and evaluate the influence of culture on the ability to achieve goals within your selected organization.
To complete:  Write a 4- to 5-page paper in which you:
•Provide a description of the organization you selected
•Present your analysis of the organization with attention to:
•Its mission, vision, values
•Strategic plan, goals, and objectives
•Key operational processes and patterns
•Information technology use
•Organizational priorities and investments, as indicated by financial data
•The essential elements of the organization’s culture
•The influence of culture on meeting organizational goals.
Required Readings
Hickey, J. V., & Brosnan, C. A. (2017). Evaluation  of health care quality in for DNPs (2nd  ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.  •Chapter 10, “Evaluation of Patient Care Standards, Guidelines, and Protocols” (pp. 207-226)
•Chapter 12, “Evaluating Populations and Population Health” (pp. 265-280) Chapter 10 reviews methods for using national, local, and organizational standards to evaluate the quality of health care practices. Chapter 12 examines strategies for identifying quality issues through the evaluation of populations.   Sadeghi, S., Barzi, A., Mikhail, O., & Shabot, M. M. (2013). Integrating quality and strategy in health care organizations, Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
•Chapter 3, “General Concepts in Quality” (pp. 45–82) See the six aims for quality
proposed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM).   Bellot, J. (2011). Defining and assessing organizational culture. Nursing Forum, 46(1), 29–37.

Promoting Health Care Quality-  Quality Improvement Issue  

/in /by
Promoting Health Care Quality-  Quality Improvement Issue  
To help you move forward with your Course Project, this week you identify a quality issue that you would like to address and submit a description of this issue for Instructor feedback.   Your proposed issue should reflect a genuine need for improvement within your selected health care organization. Through your Course Project, you will analyze this issue and propose strategies to improve outcome(s), including the redesign of a related process.
To prepare: •Review the six quality improvement aims from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) presented in Chapter 3 of the Sadeghi, Barzi, Mikhail, and Shabot text.
•Conduct a search of the literature to help you identify a specific issue that warrants attention and action to promote quality improvement.
•Consider what you have surmised thus far through your analysis of the organization that you selected. What have you noticed that could help you identify a quality-related need for improvement? For instance:
•What has captured your attention in meetings, reports, and/or daily activities?
•Have you noticed discrepancies between activities in the organization and recommendations in the research literature, quality standards, and/or the organization’s stated policies and procedures?
•If so, what do you think could be the reason(s) for variations or gaps between what you have observed and what is recommended?
•Identify a quality improvement issue that you would like to investigate for this project.
The instructions for this assignment asks for students to identify a quality improvement issue, and provide a description of the issue they wish to pursue. This can be accomplished in 2 paragraphs.
ReferencesHickey, J. V., & Brosnan, C. A. (2017). Evaluation  of health care quality in for DNPs (2nd  ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
•Chapter 10, “Evaluation of Patient Care Standards, Guidelines, and Protocols” (pp. 207-226)
•Chapter 12, “Evaluating Populations and Population Health” (pp. 265-280) Chapter 10 reviews methods for using national, local, and organizational standards to evaluate the quality of health care practices. Chapter 12 examines strategies for identifying quality issues through the evaluation of populations.   Sadeghi, S., Barzi, A., Mikhail, O., & Shabot, M. M. (2013). Integrating quality and strategy in health care organizations, Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
•Chapter 3, “General Concepts in Quality” (pp. 45–82) See the six aims for quality proposed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM).   Bellot, J. (2011). Defining and assessing organizational culture. Nursing Forum, 46(1), 29–37.
https://class.waldenu.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/USW1/201870_27/MS_NURS/NURS_6231/artifacts/USW1_NURS_6231_Week04_Bellot_2011.pdf