due 10-11-23 @10am

WEEK 5

This paper will have three parts addressing two important pieces of legislation related to the right of individuals to make health care decisions for themselves.

Part I

The Advance Health Care Directive 

Locate a copy of an advanced directive (AD) that complies with the laws of the state in which you work. The organization in which you work should have a copy of an advance directive that is given to patients. If not, download your state's Advance Directives here 

http://www.caringinfo.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3289.Links to an external site.

Complete the advance directive for yourself.  
Do not turn in your AD with your paper. The AD is for your personal use.

In your paper, Part I:

1. Identify where you obtained the AD and explain its compliance with state law.

2. Conduct research (1-2 sources) to learn more about the AD in your state and explain how it works.   

3. Discuss how easy or difficult it was to complete the AD. Your comments should be specific and both objective and
 subjective. For example, when you state your personal feelings, you must relate them to the literature (textbook and research) that discusses this process and the difficulties that many people face when completing an advance directive.

(Cite/ reference any sources you use to explore these questions, including your texts.)

Part II

Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) Form

1. What is a 

Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) formLinks to an external site.
?

POLST: Portable medical orders for seriously ill or frail individuals

2. When should this form be completed?

3. Who can complete the form?

4. Who needs to sign the form to make it a legal document?

(Cite/reference any sources you use to explore these questions, including your texts.)

Part III

Tie the two first sections together by writing a summary and conclusion.

This section should address:

1. the differences between an Advance Health Care Directive and the POLST,

2. the RN's important role in assuring the patient's right to autonomy in choosing the healthcare interventions the patient does or does not want.

____________________________________________

Use current APA Style.

The paper should be between 3-5 pages in length excluding the title and reference page(s). 

Cite and reference the course text and at least two (2) additional appropriate professional sources.   

NURS_521_DE – Feild Activity Paper

NURS_521_DE – Feild Activity Paper
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent	50 to >43.5 pts Meets Expectations Content is clear, thorough, and organized effectively. Main points are well supported. Meets all of the criteria of the written assignment. 43.5 to >37.5 pts Approaches Expectations Content is somewhat clear, thorough, and organized effectively. Some points are well supported. Meets most of the criteria of the written assignment. 37.5 to >29.5 pts Below Expectations Content is generally unclear, not thorough, and organized ineffectively. Main points are not well supported. Meets only a few of the criteria of the written assignment. 29.5 to >0 pts Does Not Meet Expectations Content is disconnected, unorganized, and does not meet the criteria of the written assignment.	50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity and Coherence	50 to >43.5 pts Meets Expectations Writing flows smoothly from one idea to another. Writer has taken pains to assist the reader in following the logic of the ideas expressed. 43.5 to >37.5 pts Approaches Expectations Sentences are mostly structured to communicate ideas clearly. Transitions between paragraphs make the writer’s points easy to follow. 37.5 to >29.5 pts Below Expectations Sentence structure and word choice sometimes interfere with clarity of content and distract the reader. 29.5 to >0 pts Does Not Meet Expectations Poor sentence structure, sentences do not make sense; no clarity evident in the paper.	50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferences and Citations Within the Body of the Paper	12.5 to >10.88 pts Meets Expectations The required number of scholarly references is used and cited skillfully throughout the paper. 10.88 to >9.38 pts Approaches Expectations The required number of scholarly references is used but some may not be cited accurately or skillfully throughout the paper. 9.38 to >7.38 pts Below Expectations The required number of scholarly references is not used and most are not cited accurately or skillfully throughout the paper. 7.38 to >0 pts Does Not Meet Expectations References or citations are not included in the body of the paper and writing indicates none were used.	12.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics and APA	12.5 to >10.88 pts Meets Expectations The assignment consistently follows current APA format and is free from errors in formatting, citation, and references. No grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. All sources are cited and referenced correctly. 10.88 to >9.38 pts Approaches Expectations The assignment consistently follows current APA format with only isolated and inconsistent mistakes and/or has a few grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. Most sources are cited and referenced correctly. 9.38 to >7.38 pts Below Expectations The assignment generally follows current APA format with several mistakes and grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. Most sources are cited and referenced incorrectly. 7.38 to >0 pts Does Not Meet Expectations The assignment does not follow current APA format and/or has many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. Sources are missing.	12.5 pts
Total Points: 125

provide further suggestions on how their database search might be improved. use 2 sources 

The PICO(T) question is, “Among hospitalized patients, does using two identifiers compared to one reduce medical errors?” My clinical issue of interest is the reduction of medical errors. Medical errors are gaps in care that bear potential or actual capacity to harm the patient, such as inaccurate diagnosis and incomplete diagnosis (Aljabari & Kadhim, 2021). These have the ripple effect of inappropriate investigations and treatment, then adverse care outcomes (Aljabari & Kadhim, 2021). Some solutions to medical errors include proper identification of patients, thorough history taking, and comprehensive physical examination. One evidence-based method for patient identification is using two identifiers rather than one (Mroz et al., 2019). Therefore, I am prompted to investigate whether using two identifiers compared to one among hospitalized patients reduces medical errors.

Search results discussion 

Regarding my search results, 19,600 articles appeared on the initial original search. As I added search terms such as two identifiers, one identifier, medical errors, and hospitalized patients using Boolean operators such as AND, NOT, and AND NOT, the number of articles appearing kept reducing. At first, they declined to 18,500, then to 17,200, and so on, in a declining trend.

Strategies to optimize database search on my PICO(T) question 

There are several strategies I can apply to optimize how effective a database search is while searching my PICO(T) question. These include having a specific search question, using Boolean operators, using more specific keywords, and using fewer synonyms (Degbelo & Teka, 2019). An example of a particular question is a PICO(T) question, which narrows down to a particular population, intervention, control, outcome, and timing. A more specific example is my PICO(T) question that reads, “Among hospitalized patients, does the use of two identifiers compared to one identifier reduce medical errors?” Besides, examples of Boolean operators are OR, AND, NOT, and AND NOT (Degbelo & Teka, 2019). Specific keywords, like particular search questions, direct the search further, optimizing it to give the best results. An example of keywords in my case includes “hospitalized patients,” “two identifiers,” “one identifier,” and “reduce medical errors.” Lastly, using fewer synonyms helps fetch more search results, broadening your search outcome and choosing relevant resources (Degbelo & Teka, 2019). Applying such strategies helps to make the search process more effective and thorough.

References

Aljabari, S., & Kadhim, Z. (2021). Common barriers to reporting medical errors. The Scientific World Journal, 2021, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6494889Links to an external site.

Degbelo, A., & Teka, B. B. (2019). Spatial search strategies for Open Government Data. Proceedings of the 13th Workshop on Geographic Information Retrieval. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371140.3371142Links to an external site.

Mroz, J. E., Borkowski, N., Keiser, N., Kennel, V., Payne, S., & Shuffler, M. (2019). Learning from medical error: Current directions in research and practice on medical error prevention. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2019(1), 18084. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2019.18084symposiumLinks to an external site.  

An advocacy letter is a way to influence the ideas and views of legislators or
decision makers within an organization. It allows the writer to maintain contact
with the legislator or decision maker, to keep the issue high on the priority list when
the writer cannot meet with them personally.