Grand Canyon University Health Care Policy Development Paper

  • Post category:Nursing
  • Reading time:9 mins read
  • Post author:

Grand Canyon University Health Care Policy Development Paper

Nursing homework help

Description

1.4 Participate in health care policy development to influence nursing practice and health care.

Research public health issues on the “Climate Change” or “Topics and Issues” pages of the American Public Health Association (APHA) website. Investigate a public health issue related to an environmental issue within the U.S. health care delivery system and examine its effect on a specific population.

Write a 750-1,000-word policy brief that summarizes the issue, explains the effect on the population, and proposes a solution to the issue.

Follow this outline when writing the policy brief:

  1. Describe the policy health issue. Include the following information: (a) what population is affected, (b) at what level does it occur (local, state, or national), and (c) evidence about the issues supported by resources.
  2. Create a problem statement.
  3. Provide suggestions for addressing the health issue caused by the current policy. Describe what steps are required to initiate policy change. Include necessary stakeholders (government officials, administrator) and budget or funding considerations, if applicable.
  4. Discuss the impact on the health care delivery system.

Hello class!

 

Reading the Code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements (2015), one would be forgiven for assuming that nurses are on par with Saints. This document provides the criteria and expectations of the moral and ethical standards of the profession (Goudreau, & Smolenski, 2022). Nurses are to practice their craft with compassion and respect, taking care to include the individual patient, their family, group, and community. The nurse must advocate for their patient as if they were advocating for their own family but respect the autonomy of the patient at the same time. He or she must strive to continually improve the ethical environment and conditions that they work in as well as advance the nursing practice through research and scholarly inquiry, while also helping to eliminate health disparities and integrate principles of social justice into nursing practice (ANA, 2015),

One real-life example of a much-needed policy can be examined in Provision 5. This provision outlines the expectations that nurses owe to themselves the same care and concern that is shown to their patients (ANA, 2015). Last week, the nation (at least those that watch sports or own a television) watched a 24-year-old athlete in peak physical health receive CPR due to Commotio Cordis. Damar Hamlin received CPR in front of the world, leading to the suspension of the football game just minutes into the first quarter due to the emotional distress of his teammates and the opposing team. Many news outlets discussed how emotionally disturbing this scene was and how affected onlookers were watching paramedics save his life. Both teams were taken to their respective locker rooms to debrief and collect themselves, waiting for news about their teammate and the game was rescheduled due to the unprecedented events of that night.

Since this incident, many jokes and satire-laced videos have been made about nurses and how there is little support following participation in a code. It is known that debriefing following a code improves both the technical skills as well as the mental health of healthcare providers (Conrad & Morrison, 2018). However, debriefings following these high-stress events are at the discretion of the facility or department and there is no general policy, requirement, or even encouragement to have or participate in this type of reflection. If nurses are to truly follow Provision 5 and take care of themselves as well as they care for patients, why would something that is known to help providers not be utilized? A policy to help guide these reflections or debriefings may help leaders to know exactly how to care for their staff and reduce a barrier to implementing this intervention, helping to improve the mental health of nursing staff, reduce burnout and moral distress, and improving retention for the facility in which a policy such as this is implemented.

 

Lily Shugart

 

Reference

ANA. (2015). Code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements. ANA, American Nurses Association.

Conrad, & Morrison, R. D. (2018). MP31: Debriefing critical incidents in health care: a review of the evidence. Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine20(S1), S51–S52. https://doi.org/10.1017/cem.2018.185

Goudreau, K. A., & Smolenski, M. C. (2022). Health policy and advanced nursing practice (3rd ed.) Springer.

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100