Care of the Person with Limited Capacity (stroke patient)

 

 

With reference to your practice experience, write a care study to demonstrate critical understanding of caring for a person with limited capacity  Your study should be primarily concerned with the implementation of planned interventions with an analysis of the care delivery. (2000 words/70% of module mark.) (A copy of the care plan can be included as an appendix).

A

 case study is a written description of a problem or situation… which contains the facts of a story arranged in a chronological sequence. The purpose of a case study is to place you in the role of decision-maker, asking you to distinguish pertinent from peripheral facts, to identify central alternatives among several issues competing for attention, and to formulate strategies and policy recommendations. The method provides an opportunity to sharpen problem-solving skills and to improve your ability to think and reason rigorously.   (Sharon A. McDade, 1988, Director of the Institute for Educational Management © President and Fellows of Harvard College)

This assignment should be based on clinical work, with an individual client, that you are involved in during your practice placement in Term 4.  As with all course work, the study must be completely anonymised and no reference should be made to the name of the ward or department, nor the client’s or colleagues’ real identities.  The choice of the client is at the discretion of the student, but should ensure that the interplay between bio-psychosocial factors in clients with limited capacity is demonstrated.  In addition, the student should demonstrate understanding of health promoting and evidenced based interventions.

Please Note: The work must be your original work and will be subjected to electronic screening for plagiarism.  If you are uncertain about what plagiarism is please speak to your tutor and read the information provided on Moodle for this module.

 

On the following page I outline the sections that may be included in the study, with guidance for each.

 

Below is a possible approach to the assignment.  The majority of this assignment should be concerned with an analysis of the care that is delivered.

 Introduction (Briefly summarise the points 1- 3 below,) 300 – 400 words only

  1. Set      the scene
    (Briefly describe the service and its primary function/purpose.)
  2. Describe      briefly the history
    (Patients/Client’s significant physical/mental health history?  What is the patient/client’s past      bio/psycho/social history?  How does      this history relate to this service involvement?)
  3. Describe      briefly the planned intervention(s).

Critical analysis of care implementation and evaluation (main focus of study) 1200-1400 words

  • Present a critical analysis of care implementation giving consideration to some of the following themes. (Eg. How was the planned care delivered? How did the nursing team engage the patient/client and carers in delivering the care plan?  How did the patient/client respond to the delivered care? Did this change the planned approach? How did capacity impact upon the person’s ability to engage and recover? How do these issues interrelate?)

  • What methods were used to evaluate the outcome? (What was the outcome of that evaluation? What was good about care delivery, what could be improved, what else may have been tried?)

Conclusion –  300 – 400 words

  • What      did you learn from this care study?       (What are the implications for your future practice?)

 

  

University of Essex

School of Health and Human Sciences

 

Assessment/Assignment Feedback Sheet = MSc Pre-registration Programmes

 

Student   number/name

 

 
Programme

 

 

MSc Adult & Mental Health   Nursing – Pre Registration

Module   Title

 

HS867— Care   of the Person with Limited Capacity

Assignment   Title

 

Care   Study
Assessor

 

  Date  

 

For a brief explanation of these sections please see the grid attached

Knowledge   and Understanding

– Knowledge base

– Ethical Issues

– Disciplinary

Methodologies

 

30%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cognitive   and Intellectual Skills

– Analysis

– Synthesis

– Evaluation

– Application

 

50%

 

 
Transferable   Skills

  – Learning

Resources

– Communications

– Management of

Information

 

20%

 
Additional  Comments

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mark   awarded:

 

 

 

Marks   out of  (30) <40% (<12) 41% – 49% (12-14) 50% – 59% (15-17) 60% – 69% (18-20) 70% – 79% (21-23) 80% +    (24+)
KNOWLEDGE AND   UNDERSTANDING POOR UNACCEPTABLE SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY GOOD EXCELLENT
Knowledge base: has depth and systematic   understanding of knowledge in specialised /applied areas and can work with   theoretical / research based knowledge at the forefront of their academic   discipline Insufficient   depth or understanding with significant gaps. Inclusion   of some relevant material but with major omissions &/or factual errors. Acceptable   depth of understanding of current theory / research but with some omissions. Comprehensive   understanding with evidence of current theory / research. Detailed,   with depth of understanding and evidence of current theory / research. Exceptional   depth and understanding.
Ethical issues: has the awareness and ability to   engage with  the implications of   ethical dilemmas Insufficient   awareness & ability. Little or no discussion. Evidence   of awareness & ability but limited discussion. Evidence   of awareness & ability to manage implications with evidence of active   debate. Comprehensive   awareness & ability to manage implications & debate. Fully   aware & able to manage implications and debate. Exceptional   awareness & ability to manage implications and debate.
Disciplinary methodologies: has a comprehensive understanding   of techniques / methodologies applicable to their own work (theory or   research-based) Insufficient   understanding with minimal application. Evidence   of understanding with limited application. Acceptable   understanding and application to own work. Comprehensive   understanding and application to own work. Demonstrates   detailed understanding and application to own work. Exceptional   understanding and application to own work.
Marks   out of (50) <40% (<20) 41% – 49% (20-24) 50% – 59% (25-29) 60% – 69% (30-34) 70% – 79% (35-39) 80% +    (40+)
COGNITIVE AND   INTELLECTUAL SKILLS POOR UNACCEPTABLE SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY GOOD EXCELLENT
Analysis: with critical awareness can undertake analysis of   complex, incomplete or contradictory areas of knowledge communicating the   outcome effectively Superficial   awareness, lack of evidence of engagement with complex and contradictory   areas. Evidence   of awareness but lacks evidence of engagement with complex and contradictory   areas. Acceptable   with relevant evidence of analysis and understanding of the complexity of the   areas studied.  Limited communication   of outcome. Comprehensive   analysis involving complex areas of knowledge.  Outcome clearly communicated. Extensive   analysis of complexities and contradictions.    Effective communication of outcome. Exceptional   analysis of complexities and contradictions with matching communication of   outcome.
Synthesis: with critical awareness can synthesise information in a   manner that may be innovative, utilising knowledge or processes from the   forefront of the discipline / practice Insufficient   critical awareness and/or significant gaps in knowledge base. Some   synthesis evident but inadequate critical awareness and/or inappropriate   knowledge base. Satisfactory   evidence of synthesis and innovation. Evidence   of synthesis and innovation that on occasion moves beyond a predictable   format. Evidence   of synthesis and innovation that consistently moves beyond a predictable   format. Wide   ranging evidence of innovation and creativity.

 


 
<40% 41% – 49% 50% – 59% 60% – 69% 70% – 79% 80% +
COGNITIVE AND   INTELLECTUAL SKILLS (continued) POOR UNACCEPTABLE SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY GOOD EXCELLENT
Evaluation:   has a level of conceptual understanding that will allow him/her critically to   evaluate research, advanced scholarship and methodologies and argue   alternative approaches Insufficient evaluation with   significant gaps in conceptual understanding. Some evaluation evident but not   consistent. Consistent evidence of evaluation. Comprehensive evaluation of relevance   and significance. Detailed and extensive evaluation. Exceptional evidence of evaluation.
Application:   can demonstrate initiative and originality in problem solving. Insufficient evidence of application   with significant gaps. Some evidence of application but at   an unacceptable level. Satisfactory application and problem   solving ability.  Awareness of complexity   of context. Able to identify and define complex   problems / solutions. Confident and flexible in identifying   and defining problems / solutions.    Demonstrates innovation and creativity. Exceptional approach to application   and problem solving.
Marks   out of (20) <40% (<8) 41% – 49% (8-9) 50% – 59% (10-11) 60% – 69% (12-13) 70% – 79% (14-15) 80% +    (16+)
TRANSFERABLE   SKILLS POOR UNACCEPTABLE SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY   GOOD EXCELLENT
Learning resources: is able to use full range of learning resources.  Can reference accurately and appropriately. Insufficient use of appropriate   learning resources.  Inaccurate   referencing. Limited use of appropriate learning   resources.  Inaccurate referencing. Satisfactory evidence of a range of   resources.  Accurate / appropriate   referencing. Comprehensive range of   referencing.  Sound referencing. Appropriate selection and extensive   use of relevant resources.  Effective   integration of appropriate references. Excellent and appropriate range of   resources used effectively.
Communications: can engage confidently in academic and professional   communication  with others, reporting   on action clearly, autonomously and competently. Ineffective and / or unclear   expression. Evidence of a lack of confidence in   communication. Acceptable with clear structure and   direction. Clear, concise and professional with   effective signposting of ideas. Excellent communication and   presentation. Exceptional ability to communicate   and structure effectively.
Management of information: can competently undertake research tasks with minimum   guidance. Inadequate with insufficient ability   to undertake research. Can undertake research tasks but with   considerable guidance. Demonstrates ability to undertake   some independent research activity. Sound ability to undertake research   tasks independently. Excellent ability to undertake   research tasks independently. Exceptional ability to undertake   research independently.

 

 

Order your paper now

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply