South University Amanda in the Glass Menagerie Analytical Review

  • Post category:Nursing
  • Reading time:7 mins read
  • Post author:

South University Amanda in the Glass Menagerie Analytical Review

Description

Nursing homework help

 

Healthcare Regulations

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) is one of the most critical yet misunderstood regulations in Healthcare. What is Anti Dumping? Who is intended to be protected by this act?

  • Outline what is guaranteed as well as what is not guaranteed within this act.
  • Discuss the fines provided for by the act and include examples of hospitals which have been fined for not complying with this act.
  • Describe and analyze the conditions under which a hospital is permitted to transfer a patient without healthcare coverage.

Use resources from the Week 1 assignment and the following from South University Library as necessary.

Terp, S., Seabury, S. A., Arora, S., Eads, A., Lam, C. N., & Menchine, M. (2017). Enforcement of the emergency medical treatment and Labor act, 2005 to 2014. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 69(2), 155-162.e1. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.05.021

Zuabi, N., Weiss, L. D., & Langdorf, M. I. (2016). Emergency medical treatment and labor act (EMTALA) 2002-15: Review of office of inspector general patient dumping settlements. The Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 17(3), 245-251. doi:10.5811/westjem.2016.3.29705

McDonnell, W. M., Gee, C. A., Mecham, N., Dahl-Olsen, J., & Guenther, E. (2013). Does the emergency medical treatment and labor act affect emergency department use? The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 44(1), 209. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.01.042

To support your work, use your course and textbook readings and also use the South University Online Library. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.

Submission Details:

  • Your assignment should be addressed in a 2- to 3-page document.
  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