Registered Nurse Anesthetist

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

Use your knowledge & experience as a Student Registered Nurse Anesthetist and 1-2 professional journal articles to discuss a quality or safety improvement
area at your workplace/clinical area (or, recent/future workplace- if you are not currently employed) that you would like to be the focus of your
Leadership/Quality Improvement Analysis. Try to pick a topic of true interest to you, that you would try to fix or resolve, if you could.
Discuss the problem, risk factors, and what you believe are contributing factors. Also, note whether or not any form of disparity in healthcare may be
contributing to this problem. This is step one of your Leadership/Quality Improvement Analysis. This is step one of a five step discussion.

 

Sample Solution

As a Student Registered Nurse Anesthetist, I am continually striving to improve the quality of care provided to patients in the operating room. One particular area that I think could use more attention is communication between anesthesia providers and surgeons during surgery. This type of communication is vital for ensuring patient safety and optimal outcomes, yet it seems to be lacking in many hospitals (Kiran et al., 2020).

The main issue is that anesthesia practitioners and surgeons often have different levels of experience which can hinder their ability to effectively collaborate on patient care decisions. For instance, inexperienced anesthesiologists may not be aware of all the nuances involved with a particular procedure or conversely, surgeons may not understand why certain precautions need to be taken during the course of a surgery (Fischer & Morris 2018). Additionally, busy operating rooms with multiple procedures being carried out simultaneously can also make it challenging for anesthesia providers and surgeons to find time for meaningful dialogue regarding patient care (Kiran et al., 2020).

To address this issue, one potential solution would involve implementing mandatory pre-surgery briefings between anesthesia practitioners and surgeons where they are able to discuss any special considerations related to the patient’s case as well as review relevant safety protocols (Samuel 2016). Such meetings could also serve as opportunities for both parties to ask questions or voice any concerns they might have before proceeding with surgery. Additionally, dedicating sufficient staffing resources within each hospital’s perioperative team should help ensure surgeries run smoothly by providing adequate coverage in busy times when communication breakdowns are more likely occur due time pressures (Corbett et al., 2019).

In summary, enhancing communication between anesthesia providers and surgeons prior to operations is essential for achieving optimal outcomes while minimizing risk factors associated with poor collaboration. By implementing mandatory pre-surgery briefings along with increasing staffing levels in operating rooms we can create an environment which encourages open dialogue between both teams throughout each procedure.

Keeping with the theme of rationality, the authors of this article have taken a different approach, arguing that actor’s make rational choices when voting. The paper seeks to demonstrate that social preferences are dominant over selfish preferences when at the ballot, that there is a feedback mechanism in rational socially motivated voting which effectively stabilises reasonable voter turnout and that there is a link between the ‘rational social-utility model of voter turnout’ out and the results of socially motivated ‘vote choice’ studies.

 

 

The authors argue against the traditional rational-choice models which assume individuals act selfishly, instead arguing that the rationality assumption can be separated from the selfishness assumption thus revealing that voting can be a rational act and that agents vote according to the expected social consequences. Additionally, agents perceive voting as a potential contribution to the greater good. The result of this theory is that vote choice models should work with social rather than selfish utility functions. By separating social and selfish preferences, which have traditionally thought of as being linked, it becomes clear that voting in large populations is perfectly rational. This is evidenced by small-scale contributions to political campaigns, active participation in opinion polls, increased voter turnout in relation to size and anticipated closeness of an election which are seemingly irrational phenomena considering the scope and significance of a single vote.

Another proposition made by the authors is that agents decide who to vote for based on social consideration. This is evidenced by ‘un-loyal’ strategic voting, voting based on issues which have no direct significance to the voter, but perhaps most importantly on surveys of voter motivations. The findings of these surveys suggest that voters will often voter’s preferences are strongly aligned with their views of what would be most beneficial to the country, rather than their own situation. It can thus be argued that voters think in terms of group and national benefits.

This article, when positioned amongst broader literature, makes some cont

This question has been answered.

Get Answer