Health Care Complaint Commission

Question: Discuss about the Health Care Complaint Commission. Answer: Introduction: The main motive of this assessment is to facilitate the learning and critical reflection of the student by assisting the student in identifying the application of regulatory framework for nursing and midwifery in professional practices of the nurses (McLean et al.,2015). A complaint of unsatisfactory professional conduct has been chosen to make the nursing students understand the decisions of the professional standard committee. In response to the compliant received by the NSW Health Care Complaint Commission (HCCC) hearing were held (Dean et al., 2014). Discussion Professional conduct is the manner in which a person behaves while doing professional duties. If this behavior is any how not satisfactory to the receiving community then it is called unsatisfactory professional conduct. In general it is expected that when performing their duties and conducting their affairs the nursing professionals will try to uphold exemplary standard of conduct. In this case the unsatisfactory professional conduct is applicable because the patient was admitted on 6th January 2013 with a shortness of breath, diabetes, tachycardia and hypotension and the condition of the patient was deteriorating continuously and over the course of period on 11th January 2013 that is 1720 hours after the admission of the patient the blood pressure of the patient was 89/53, the respiratory rate of her was 40-44 breadths per minute, she also had abdominal pain and diarrhoea. Still the respondent nurse did not document these observation. Though the vital signs of the patient remained in the red zone and it is required to notify a doctor in this circumstances but the respondent did not notify a doctor of the patient about the condition until the locum doctor arrived after 2200 hours. The patient died in the morning of 12th January while she was assessed for transport to Armidale Hospital. Under the section of 139B of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law of New South Wales it was found that the respondent is guilty because the skills, knowledge and judgment performed by the respondent are significantly lower than the standard level. The activities that the nurse or midwife need to be complete in the immediate situation are the nurse or the midwife should immediately provide the patient with oxygen because the respiratory rate of the patient was very low. The patient should also give appropriate diet and medication to increase her blood pressure because her blood pressure was also very low. The patient should be administered with medication for her pain in abdomen and diarrhoea. Also the nurse should recognize the need of the patient and inform the doctor about the condition of the patient. If the condition of the patient is being in the red zone the nurse should immediately do the needful for the recovery of the patient and must try to find out the reason behind the patient being in the red zone. When the condition of the patient is being critically ill then it is better for the nurse not to administer any of the antibiotics or any other medication without getting ensured by the doctor. The NMBA codes and standards are the protocols that a nurse should normally follow while taking care of a patients. There are some NMBA codes and standards that are relevant for this particular situation. The first NMBA code and standard that have relation with this situation is Standard 1 that states a nurse should follow is to think critically and analyze the condition of the patient whether that it is deteriorating or not. The nurse should analyze that situation and use the best available evidence for the betterment of the care. Also the nurse should maintain a comprehensive, accurate and timely documentation of the assessment which the respondent in this case have not fulfilled. The second NMBA code and standard that is relevant for the case is Standard 5 which states a nurse must follow is to develop a plan for nursing practice. The nurse should use the assessment data and the best available evidence to develop and collaboratively construct a plan for the immediate care of the p atient. In this case when the respondent observed that the respiration rate of the patient is falling down then the patient must be administered with oxygen but the respondent did not done anything. Lastly the third NMBA code and standard that have to be followed in this case is Standard 6 which states what a nurse should follow while taking care of the patient is to provide a safe, appropriate and responsive quality nursing practice. The nurse should always try to provide a comprehensive safe, quality practice of care for the patient so that they can achieve the goals and provide a responsive and careful nursing care to the people who need it. However in the above mentioned case the respondent was not at all careful regarding the care of the patient. When it was observed that the condition of the patient was deteriorating the respondent did not do anything even the respondent not notified the doctor about the condition of the patient. The changes in the professional behavior of the respondent that can make a difference in the situation are that the respondent may be more engaged in the duties, the respondent should immediately undertake respective measure when it was found that the condition of the patient was deteriorating, the respondent was very careless regarding the patient care. The patient was not provided with oxygen though her respiratory rate was very low, her blood pressure was also low still she was not administered with any medication, the respondent didnt judge the condition of the patient and the prompt reaction that was very necessary for the betterment of the patient care was not taken by the respondent. The doctor was also not notified by the respondent. The respondent knew that Dr. Haron was not available and the locum doctor will arrive at 2100hours, the only doctor present in the hospital was Dr. Correy but he is the doctor of emergency department. However the respondent does not know whether the doctor of emergency department will be able to examine a patient who is not from the emergency department. Whilst the respondent is given training in the respect of the policy Between the Flags and according to this policy a doctor must be immediately called when a patient is in the red zone. The respondent on justification said that she was not aware of the aspect of the policy. The preparedness for the professional practice that I learned from this case study is that being a nurse I should be very attentive on duty, I must possess some judgement skills so that I can critically analyze the condition of the patient and work according to that so that I can make it quite possible to provide the patient with a better care (Lung Liu, 2016). From the case study I also learned that every signs and symptom of the patient should be documented and notified to the doctors and when the respiratory rate is decreasing the patient should be administered oxygen and if the patient is in the red zone it recommended in the policy of Between the Flags to give a call to the doctor and notify him with the condition of the patient (Hughes et al., 2014). It can be concluded this case study is that the reason behind the death of the patient is the carelessness of the respondent. She doesnt perform her duties and responsibilities with proper attention and care and under the section of 139B of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law of New South Wales the respondent is found guilty for the patient death (Jeffery, 2015). The skills, knowledge and judgment performed by the respondent were significantly below than the standard level. The respondent also not followed the policy of Between the Flags which states that a doctor should be notified about the condition of the patient immediately if the condition of the patient is deteriorating continuously (Sano et al., 2013). Reference: Dean, J., Mahar, P., Loh, E., Ludlow, K. (2013). Duty of care or a matter of conduct: Can a doctor refuse a person in need of urgent medical attention?. Australian family physician, 42(10), 746. Hughes, C., Pain, C., Braithwaite, J., Hillman, K. (2014). Between the flags: implementing a rapid response system at scale. BMJ quality safety, 23(9), 714-717. Jeffery, R. H. (2015). Vaccination and the law. Australian family physician, 44(11), 849. Lung, C. C., Liu, J. Y. W. (2016). How the perspectives of nursing assistants and frail elderly residents on their daily interaction in nursing homes affect their interaction: a qualitative study. BMC geriatrics, 16(1), 1. McLean, A. K., Stewart, C., Kerridge, I. (2015). Untested, unproven, and unethical: the promotion and provision of autologous stem cell therapies in Australia. Stem cell research therapy, 6(1), 1. Sano, M., Richards, R., Sahin, O. (2013). Adapt between the flags: enhancing capacity to cope with climate change and to leverage adaptation.