CSB454 – Assessment 3

By April 21, 2018Academic Papers

Assessment 3 – Placement – Evidence “Decision Maker”
Task overview

Assessment name

Task snapshot

Placement – Evidence “Decision Maker”

Task description

While on placement, students will demonstrate evidence of skills on clinical reasoning and clinical judgement (e.g. assessment of poorly managed asthma treatment in young patients) in line with the 8-star pharmacist framework and based on the professional competencies.

This is the third in a suite of six units involving a placement experience. This unit will develop your understanding of your role as an effective pharmacist through experiential learning over a two-week period.

Due Date

Week 10, Friday, 11 May submitted via Turnitin in the Blackboard site by 5p.m.

Length

There is a 1 page limit for each of the 3 parts. There is no limit to the length of the other placement task requirements.

Weighting

20%

Individual

Summative

Qualitative rubric (1-7)

1. Critically apply knowledge of advanced pharmaceutical, medication and health knowledge and skills in the wider context.

Individual / Group

Formative / Summative

How will I be assessed

Learning outcomes measured for this task

CSB454 – Assessment 3

Page 1 of 7

What you need to do

What you need to do

During your placement, you will observe and/or participate in a variety of pharmacy operations, with a focus on respiratory, cardiovascular and renal, oncology and immunology, endocrine and reproductive health.

Placement feedback must also be received from the preceptor.

On the first day of your placement, ask for assistance from your preceptor to identify patients that would be suitable for the following task.

Ensure you have the patient’s permission!

  •   Take a BPMH from a patient living with either asthma or COPD.

  •   Explore the patient’s history and experiences living with their respiratory

    condition.

  •   Submit a copy of the BPMH and information you gathered from your

    patient.

    In addition to the standard BPMH questions and other questions to gain insight into their respiratory condition, you must also ascertain: –
    A validated score of the patient’s current symptom control (e.g. Asthma

    Score for asthma; or COPD Assessment Test (CAT) for COPD) – to help you

    answer Part 2A.

How does the patient dispose of their used or unwanted inhalers? – to help

you answer Part 2B.

Part 1: Clinical decision making (1 x A4 page limit)

After you take the BMPH, review the medications the patient is taking for asthma or COPD. Do the medications they have taken align with the clinical guidelines (asthma handbook or COPD-X)?

  •   A. If no – what changes would you recommend to the patient’s medication/treatment regimen per the guidelines (why might the patient’s medication regimen not be the same as the guidelines?). Justify your recommendation.

  •   B. If yes – what would you recommend as the next therapy / next step in the treatment plan if the patient’s condition (asthma / COPD) worsens?

  •   Justify your recommendation.

    Part 2A: Considerations of pharmacoeconomics and sustainability (1 x A4 page limit)

  1. Using the information during your patient interview, consider the patient’s

    level of adherence to their asthma or COPD medicines and their overall

    disease burden considering their respiratory condition.

  2. What are the national statistics, and explain how your patient compares

    against the national statistics on the cost of asthma or COPD, and “contribute” to the burden of disease in terms of:

CSB454 – Assessment 3 Page 2 of 7

 

o Directandindirectcoststothehealthsysteme.g.hospital admissions, medicines (patient and PBS), services through Medicare; and

o Non-financialcostse.g.qualityoflife,prematuredeath

Use the following reports on the cost of asthma and COPD: Asthma:

https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/economics/articles/hidden-cost-

asthma.html
COPD: https://lungfoundation.com.au/wp-

content/uploads/2014/03/2008_alf_access_economic_impact_report.pdf

Part 2B: Based on the answer provided by the patient in terms of how they dispose of their used or unwanted inhalers:
Consider the carbon footprint of their asthma or COPD medicines.
What recommendations could you make to your patient to be more carbon

neutral, and encourage them to adopt sustainable practices?

Part 3: Legal, ethical and managerial decision making (1 x A4 page limit – use the table provided as the template for providing your response).

  

Hypothetically, you are a locum pharmacist doing your first shift at this pharmacy. A 23-year-old student, Jane, comes to your pharmacy requesting an S3 salbutamol inhaler. You review her medication history and it shows that salbutamol has been supplied S3 weekly for the last 6 months by the owner pharmacist. Upon questioning, she states that she uses the “purple” preventer. There is no history of any preventers being dispensed in the last 12 months. She is a regular customer often making big purchases at the pharmacy. You look in your QCPP manual and there is no written protocol regarding the excessive supply of S3 items.

Consider the legal, ethical and managerial decision making perspectives related to this scenario.
Collate the facts (and supporting references) that will help you arrive at your final decision about how you would proceed with this request.

Justifyyourfinaldecision.

Use the table provided to collate the factors related to each decision-making perspective to clearly illustrate how you came to your final decision.

CSB454 – Assessment 3 Page 3 of 7

Legal perspective Legally, would you supply this product?

Yes or No

List the facts to support your decision (reference where appropriate)

Ethical perspective – Ethically, would you supply this product?

Yes or No

List the facts to support your decision (reference where appropriate)

Managerial perspective – Managerially, would you supply this product?

Yes or No

List the facts to support your decision (reference where appropriate)

Overall decision –Considering all (legal, ethical & managerial) perspectives what is your final decision?

Yes or No

Justify your decision

Resources available to complete task

Use any reference sources you consider relevant e.g. relevant QLD legislations, code of ethics

Submission information

What you need to submit

One Adobe PDF document or Microsoft Word document that contains the following items completed in the following order:
1. Placement attendance form
2. Preceptor feedback form

3. Placement activity sheet
4. Decision maker assessment task.
Your BPMH and patient interview notes
A validated score of the patient’s current symptom control Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
A single reference list using Vancouver referencing

Disclaimer: On submission, you are declaring that, unless otherwise acknowledged, this submission is wholly yours and/or the group’s work and it has not been used and already submitted at any university or institution. I/We understand that this work may be submitted for plagiarism check and consent to this taking place.

CSB454 – Assessment 3 Page 4 of 7

Submission requirements

Moderation

This assessment item will be moderated before marks are released.

Academic Integrity

As a student of the QUT academic community, you are asked to uphold the principles of academic integrity during your course of study. QUT sets expectations and responsibilities of students, more specifically it states that students “adopt an ethical approach to academic work and assessment in accordance with this policy and the Student Code of Conduct (E/2.1)” (MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity).

Students are expected to demonstrate their own understanding and thinking using the ideas provided by ‘others’ to support and inform their work, always making due acknowledgement to the source. While we encourage peer learning, it is not appropriate to share assignments with other students unless your assessment piece has been stated as being a group assignment. If you do share your assignment with another student, and they copy part of or all of your assignment for their submission, this is considered collusion and you may also be reported for academic misconduct. Academic integrity includes self-plagiarism, “the re-use by a student of their own work without appropriate acknowledgement of the source. Students should seek express consent from the unit coordinator prior to re-using their own work in an assessment submission” (MOPP C/5.3.6 Academic Integrity).

If you are unsure and need further information you can find this at http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/C/C_05_03.jsp#C_05_03.06.mdoc

This assessment task must be:

A.

B.

C. D.

Maximum 1xA4 page for each of Part 1, 2 and 3 – anything exceeding these limits will not be read. The BPMH is NOT included in this page limit. Formatting requirements

  • 1.15 line spacing

  • 2.54 cm margins left, right, top, bottom

  • size 11, Arial font

    Use Vancouver referencing for citing academic literature
    Submitted in electronic format as an Adobe PDF document or Microsoft Word document via Turnitin.

CSB454 – Assessment 3

Page 5 of 7

CSB454 | Patient centred care: Respiratory | Assessment 3

Criteria

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

1: Clinical:
Evaluate your patient’s BPMH to recommend and justify a clinical management plan.
(40%)

Insufficient detail in the provided BPMH to support clinical decision making. Did not evaluate BPMH.

No recommendation and justification of clinical management plan. Information factually incorrect or confusing or inadequate & would result in significant and/or immediate patient harm.

Insufficient detail in the provided BPMH to support clinical decision making. Inadequate evaluation of BPMH.

Clinical management plan recommended, but justification is inadequate. Information is factually incorrect or confusing or inadequate & would result in patient harm.

Sufficient detail in the provided BPMH and patient interview to support clinical decision making.

Adequate evaluation of BPMH. Reasonable clinical management plan recommended and justified adequately. Information is factually correct.

Sufficient detail in the provided BPMH and patient interview to support clinical decision making.

Good evaluation of BPMH. Good clinical management plan recommended and justified in a logical and structured manner. The process is observable. Information is factually correct

Sufficient detail in the provided BPMH and patient interview to support clinical decision making.

Excellent evaluation of BPMH. Excellent clinical management plan recommended and justified in a logical and structured manner with considerations of patient centeredness. Information is factually correct. Appropriately detailed, concise, direct and convincing.

2A: Pharmacoeconomics: Explain how your patient compares to the national statistics and contributes to the burden of disease through financial and non-financial costs. (12.5%)

No explanation or demonstrated understanding of the national statistics, nor how your patient compares and contributes to the burden of disease through financial and non-financial costs.

Some explanation of the national statistics, but only explains how your patient compares OR only explains how your patient contributes to the burden of disease through financial and non-financial costs.

An adequate explanation of the national statistics, with some attempt at explaining how your patient compares and contributes to the burden of disease through financial and non-financial costs.

Good explanation of the national statistics. Logical and structured explanation of how your patient compares and contributes to the burden of disease through financial and non-financial costs.

Excellent and concise explanation of the national statistics. Demonstrated consideration of patient centeredness, when explaining how your patient compares and contributes to the burden of disease through financial & non- financial costs, in logical & structured explanation manner.

2B: Sustainability:
Explain your patient’s carbon footprint in terms of their asthma or COPD medicines. Provide recommendations to encourage your patient to be more carbon neutral & adopt sustainable practices.
(12.5%)

No consideration nor demonstrated an understanding of your patient’s carbon footprint in terms of their asthma or COPD medicines. No recommendations to encourage your patient to be more carbon neutral & adopt sustainable practices.

Some consideration or demonstrated an understanding of your patient’s carbon footprint in terms of their asthma or COPD medicines. Inadequate or inappropriate recommendations to encourage your patient to be more carbon neutral & adopt sustainable practices; essentially “greenwashing”.

Adequate consideration and demonstrated an understanding of your patient’s carbon footprint in terms of their asthma or COPD medicines. Reasonable but non-specific recommendations to encourage your patient to be more carbon neutral & adopt sustainable practices.

Good understanding of your patient’s carbon footprint in terms of their asthma or COPD medicines. Reasonable, and some attempt at making specific recommendations to encourage your patient to be more carbon neutral & adopt sustainable practices.

Excellent understanding of your patient’s carbon footprint in terms of their asthma or COPD medicines. Reasonable, thoughtful and specific recommendations that take into consideration patient centeredness, to encourage your patient to be more carbon neutral & adopt sustainable practices.

CSB454 – Assessment 3

Page 6 of 7

3: Legal, Ethical & Managerial: Evaluate the legal, ethical and managerial perspectives of the scenario, and use these facts to justify your final decision. (25%)

No evaluation of the legal, ethical and managerial perspectives of the scenario, or uses incorrect facts to justify your final decision.

Some evaluation of the legal, ethical and managerial perspectives of the scenario but does not consider all three perspectives. Uses mostly correct facts to justify your final decision.

Adequate evaluation of the legal, ethical and managerial perspectives of the scenario. Uses correct facts to adequately justify your final decision.

Good evaluation of the legal, ethical and managerial perspectives of the scenario. Uses correct facts to adequately justify your final decision in a logical and structured manner.

Excellent evaluation of the legal, ethical and managerial perspectives of the scenario. Uses correct facts to adequately justify your final decision in a logical and structured manner.

Grammar, referencing & task requirements

(10%)

Unclear or inaccurate English expression, spelling/ grammar /syntax. The inappropriate language used. No references OR rarely use references appropriately, accurately or precisely in the appropriate style.

Submission requirements NOT met.

The assignment was not written clearly. Inaccurate English expression, spelling/ grammar /syntax. The inappropriate language used. Sometimes uses references appropriately, accurately or precisely in the appropriate style.

Submission requirements NOT met.

Mostly correct English expression allowing the meaning to be consistently apparent. Minor errors in spelling/ grammar /syntax. The appropriate language used. Adequate use of appropriate references, precisely and accurately in an appropriate style. Minor inaccuracies.

Submission requirements met

Almost always correct English expression allowing the meaning to be consistently apparent. Minor errors in spelling/ grammar /syntax. The appropriate language used. Good use of appropriate references, precisely and accurately in an appropriate style. Minor inaccuracies.

Submission requirements met

Meaning is enhanced through precise and concise English expression, spelling and grammar. No errors in syntax. Appropriate professional language is used throughout. Consistently good use of appropriate references. Precise and accurate referencing style.

Submission requirements met

Special conditions This unit includes a two-week placement experience. In order to receive a grade in this unit, the unit coordinator must receive competed activity task sheets, feedback sheet completed by the preceptor, and preceptor signoff that placement hours have been satisfactorily completed by the end of week 13 of the semester.
Student misconduct and academic dishonesty can lead to the imposition of penalties. Minor academic misconduct will result in a grade of 0 for the relevant section(s).

CSB454 – Assessment 3

Page 7 of 7

logo

FLAT 20% OFF

Coupon Code - STAY20
ORDER NOW
* Terms & Conditions Apply
close-link
psst...10% Off on your order today with the code NEW10.
Order Now
close-image