Saturday, February 29, 2020

Case Study of Diagnosis of Neutropenia Patient

Case Study of Diagnosis of Neutropenia Patient A 45 year old physically fit patient was admitted to hospital following several visits to his General Practitioner (GP) where is was complaining of decreased appetite, constipation, fever, chills, headaches, cramping, vertigo and respiratory problems after experiencing some hay fever like symptoms one week ago. He was commenced on Roxithromycin 150mg b.d and his GP ordered blood tests that showed his had neutropenia (low white cell count) (Harris et al 2006, p 1185) and thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) (Harris et al 2006, p. 1704). Two days later he was not feeling any better and the GP ordered a chest x-ray (CXR) which the patient to have bilateral pneumonia he was than admitted to the hospital. This essay will identify important events that took place during the patient’s admission to hospital and discuss three of these events in detail with contemporary evidence to support the writer’s discussion. The essay will than look what has been learnt through this case study in relation to future professional practice as a new graduate registered nurse in accordance with the Australian Nursing & Midwifery Council (ANMC) competency standards. Day 2 Why did the patient not received oxygen until his saturation got to 70% there is no mention of the treatment plan to or from nursing staff. Later that day the patient was transferred to main ward, the nursing staff raised the issue that the patient needed to be in the intensive care unit (ICU), the patient was reviewed by Respiratory Physician and was decided to not to transfer patient to ICU. This patient required close monitoring due to saturation decrease and as a newly registered nurse we do not have the experience or the time to monitor this patient in a ward environment (ANMC 2006) competency Professional Practice. Patient safety, patient advocacy. Day 5 The patient was noted to be still febrile and was ordered another CXR as the Computed Tomography Scan (CT scan) was not preformed, why had this pa tient not had the CT scan that was ordered (ANMC 2006) competency Professional Practice. Team communication strategies, chain of command. Later that day it was also noted that the patient had a PR Bleed and a referral was made to the gastroenterologist. No mention of cause or any investigation taken place to assess the PR bleed no blood tests were ordered to determine patient’s status. Patient advocacy, patient safety. Day 6 Respiratory Physician saw the patient and noted he had severe bilateral pneumonia, possible bone marrow suppression and anaemia of an unknown cause, no communication between medical officers as the patient had a PR bleed the day before and is neutropenic and thrombocytopenic. The Respiratory Physician requested an infectious diseases review. Patient advocacy, conflict management, documentation. Day 7 It was documented again that the patient had low saturations and was febrile. He was seen by the Infectious Diseases Specialist and was ordered more tests an d a lung biopsy. The lung biopsy was considered to be of high risk due to the patient’s condition by a Thoracic Surgeon. If this patient was a high risk why was he not in ICU as requested by the nursing staff? Conflict management, chain of command, patient advocacy.

Thursday, February 13, 2020

Week 2 assignment Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Week 2 assignment - Research Paper Example In Brown, Sorrell, McClaren, Sharma and Creswell (2006), the scenario of waiting for a liver transplant is highlighted. The research problem entails studying the meaning that people with liver failure ascribe to the experience of waiting for a transplant (Brown, Sorrell, McClaren, Sharma, & Creswell, 2006). The ethical issues that arise in this respect include whether a liver transplant should be undertaken, whether livers should be donated, and whether beneficiaries of donated livers should be charged for them. The individual and social take to this matter and its link to healthcare procedures remain critical ethical concerns. The purpose of and the questions that guided the study by Brown, Sorrell, McClaren, Sharma, and Creswell in 2006 revolve around liver transplant and the waiting time to have that procedure undertaken. The arising ethical concerns in this regard entail the right to invade patient privacy on the debate, professional principles involved, and commercialization of transplant procedures. It is fundamental to note that saving patients’ lives is moral. In the context of data collection, access to data followed the required protocol, and where data access was restricted the authors of the article resorted to alternative sources. Interviews were conducted that aided the gathering of first-hand information (Brown, Sorrell, McClaren, Sharma, & Creswell, 2006). Analysis and interpretation of data were also characterized by ethical concerns. The interpretation of data was intended to communicate the outcome of the study. The healthcare sector has its trends in liver transplants, and the analysis and interpretation of data had to take this into account. The result of the study could either compromise or be consistent with the already known trends. Accounting for what is right and moral in liver transplantation without jeopardizing the fundamental

Saturday, February 1, 2020

The Salomon Vs A Salomon Company Limited Case Essay

The Salomon Vs A Salomon Company Limited Case - Essay Example The irony is that just after the incorporation of business into the private limited company, an array of strikes started in the shoe making industry thus compelled the government to diversify its orders to other contractors in order to ensure uninterrupted supply of boots and shoes to the government. To meet the financial losses and to rehabilitate the company back to business borrowed pounds 5,000 from Mr. Edmund Broderip (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd). Alternatively, the company assigned debentures of the same amount. The loan was acquired on a nominal interest against mortgage of property of the business entity (French, 2009). The losses of the company come to such an impasse that it was not in a position even to pay off the interest amount. Keeping in view the situation, the said creditor sued the company to foreclose the assets of the company. The company went into liquidation (French, 2009). The creditor got back his money from the liquidator. Mr. Salomon received back his secu rity which was held by the liquidator (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd). Later on, the liquidator and Mr. Salomon as defendant counter claimed since debentures become ineffective as a result of the fraudulent transaction. Therefore, liquidator pleaded for all the money back that was invested in the business of Private Limited Company since its formation, revalidation of business contract with the government, call back the payable amount plus void of debentures (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd).... Edmund Broderip (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd). Alternatively, the company assigned debentures of the same amount. The loan was acquired on a nominal interest against mortgage of property of the business entity (French, 2009). The losses of the company come to such an impasse that it was not in a position even to pay off the interest amount. Keeping in view the situation, the said creditor sued the company to foreclose the assets of the company. The company went into liquidation (French, 2009). The creditor got back his money from liquidator. Mr. Salomon received back his security which was held by the liquidator (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd). Later on the liquidator and Mr. Salomon as defendant counter claimed since debentures become ineffective as a result of fraudulent transaction. Therefore, liquidator pleaded for all the money back that was invested in the business of Private Limited Company since its formation, revalidation of business contract with the government, call back t he payable amount plus void of debentures (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd). Initially the High Court accepted the claim of Mr. Edmund Broderip. According to Justice Williams â€Å"it was undisputed that 20,000 shares were fully paid up and the company had a right to indemnity against Mr. Salomon. He said the signatories of the memorandum were mere dummies; the company was just Mr. Salomon in another form, an alias, his agent. Therefore, it was entitled to indemnity from the principal.† The claim was materialized accordingly (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd). While confirming the decisions of Justice Williams on the grounds that Mr. Salomon had misused the authority, responsibility, perks that bestowed upon the genuine shareholders and