Selected scenario<\/strong><\/h2>\nA colleague calls and demands for drugs to be taken for her. You are self-sufficient, but do not have the medical experience of your mate. Anyway, you write the drug. \u00a0The ethical, as well as legal implications of the scenario on all stakeholders such as the prescriber, pharmacist, patient, and patient\u2019s family, discuss as follow:<\/p>\n
Nurse Practitioner<\/strong>: A nurse who uses medications without performing the requisite testing, evaluation and legal consequences such as absence, as needed by the medical code of ethics, such as the Colorado \u201cMedical Practice Act,\u201d breaches the code and is unprofessional\u00a0(Sabatino & Pruchnicki, 2017). The NP who prescribes medication for a friend without a medical background fears jeopardizing his permit since adverse reactions can turn fatal. A nurse has the ethical obligation to prescribe the best medication, but only after a medical exam and evaluation.<\/p>\nPharmacist<\/strong>:\u00a0 In mediation, a pharmacy dealer who carries out a prescription does not presume that the prescriber has made an examination, nor that the practitioner is ethically and legitimately liable for the background before the order is submitted. Thus, loading the Rx with the pharmacist\u2019s chance of losing the license while knowing his clinical background.<\/p>\nPatient and family:<\/strong> Prescribing drugs to a patient is morally and technically permissible whether a patient may not have an awareness of his or her background, evaluation and allergies. Therefore the patient and the relatives will bring court charges against the nurse and pharmacy firm should any incident take place.<\/em><\/p>\nStrategies to Guide Decision making <\/strong><\/h2>\nThe first strategy is to call the patient before prescribing medication and to make an appropriate date for a medical evaluation to reach the condition. Medical testing and an assessment may lead to the patient\u2019s medical condition and, therefore, to the required medication\u00a0(Musellim & Borekci, 2017). \u00a0\u00a0<\/em>In medical and personal interactions, faulty and incorrect prescribe inaccurate medications, less frequent usage for preventive treatment, loss of medical satisfactions, and escalated aggressive incidents against healthcare providers, maybe the result of a patient\u2019s evaluation over a short duration of time. The patient assessment period could have been influenced too gradually or too rapidly.<\/p>\nThe second strategy is to do the clinical examination before administering medication to assess the condition of the patient. Clinical trials are study experiments in which patients actively undergo experimental therapeutic techniques, techniques or measures in order to avoid, diagnose, cure or control various conditions or diseases\u00a0(Rosenthal & Burchum, 2020). Some studies consider how people react to a new procedure and what side effects may be created. The third method is to implement a prescriptive decision-making process by looking at the patient\u2019s family members and their prior fitness. The prescriptive method of educated judgment aid approaches describes a variety of strategies to enable citizens to think differently about a decision.<\/p>\n
Process of Writing Prescriptions<\/strong><\/h2>\nThere are important things that physicians should consider before writing medications. Relevant elements must also be considered. Again, it is necessary to remember that there are norms in various countries. The criteria specify that the details on medications are provided. Both medications usually tend to use a vocabulary the consumer can understand such that they can learn quickly how to take medicine. Secondly, it is important to write clearly in writing while writing the medication (Solanki & Shah, 2015). Third, it is necessary to determine the duration of usage of the medication and the days the patient is supposed to take. Additional detail used is subject to local drug laws. With the exponential advancement of technology, electronic prescribing will continue to reduce the cost-effectiveness of drug mistakes. Electronic prescribing is an efficient means of eliminating medication errors. The continuous dependency on handwriting writing is one of the factors that have made medication mistakes inevitable (Nickless & Davies, 2016). Handwritten prescriptions might be negligible. Problems like this can be overcome by technology-based prescribing, as this will help to reduce drug mistakes.<\/p>\n
References<\/h2>\n
Musellim, B., & Borekci, S. (2017). What should be the appropriate minimal duration for patient examination and evaluation in pulmonary outpatient clinics? Annals of Thoracic Medicine, 12<\/em>(3), 177\u2013182. doi:10.4103\/atm.ATM_396_16<\/p>\nNickless, G., & Davies, R. (2016). How to take an accurate and detailed medication history. The Pharmaceutical Journal<\/em>.<\/p>\nRosenthal, L., & Burchum, J. (2020). Lehne\u2019s Pharmacotherapeutics for Advanced Practice Nurses and Physician Assistants.<\/em> Elsevier – Health Sciences Division.<\/p>\nSabatino, J. A., & Pruchnicki, M. C. (2017). Improving prescribing practices: A pharmacist-led educational intervention for nurse practitioner students. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 29<\/em>(5), 248-254. doi:10.1002\/2327-6924.12446<\/p>\nSolanki, N. D., & Shah, C. (2015). Prescription audit in outpatient department of multispecialty hospital in western India: an observational study. International Journal of Clinical Trials<\/em>, 14-19.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Rubric Detail<\/h2>\n
\n\n\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\nExcellent <\/strong><\/td>\nGood <\/strong><\/td>\nFair <\/strong><\/td>\nPoor <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n\n\nExplain the ethical and legal implications of the scenario you selected on all stakeholders involved such as the prescriber, pharmacist, patient, and the patient’s family. <\/strong><\/td>\nPoints Range: 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)<\/p>\n The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail the ethical and legal implications of the scenario selected on all stakeholders involved.<\/p>\n The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations as to how these implications affect the prescriber, pharmacist, patient, and the patient’s family.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)<\/p>\n The response explains the ethical and legal implications of the scenario selected on all stakeholders involved.<\/p>\n The response includes accurate explanations as to how these implications affect the prescriber, pharmacist, patient, and the patient’s family.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 18 (18%) – 19 (19%)<\/p>\n The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the ethical and legal implications of the scenario selected for all stakeholders involved.<\/p>\n The response includes vague explanations as to how these implications affect the prescriber, pharmacist, patient, and the patient’s family.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 0 (0%) – 17 (17%)<\/p>\n The response vaguely and inaccurately explains the ethical and legal implications of the scenario selected for all stakeholders involved, or the response is missing.<\/p>\n The response vaguely and inaccurately explains how these implications affect the prescriber, pharmacist, patient, and the patient’s family, or is missing.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \nDescribe strategies to address disclosure and nondisclosure as identified in the scenario selected. Be sure to reference laws specific to your state. <\/strong><\/td>\nPoints Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)<\/p>\n An accurate, detailed, and clear description of strategies to address disclosure and nondisclosure as identified in the scenario selected is provided.<\/p>\n The response includes specific, detailed, and accurate reference to state laws related to the scenario.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)<\/p>\n An accurate description of strategies to address disclosure and nondisclosure as identified in the scenario selected is provided.<\/p>\n The response includes accurate reference to state laws related to the scenario.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)<\/p>\n A vague or inaccurate description of strategies to address disclosure and nondisclosure as identified in the scenario selected is provided.<\/p>\n The response includes inaccurate or vague reference to state laws related to the scenario.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)<\/p>\n A vague and inaccurate description of strategies to address disclosure and nondisclosure as identified in the scenario selected is provided, or is missing.<\/p>\n The response includes vague and inaccurate reference to state laws related to the scenario, or is missing.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \nExplain two strategies that you, as an advanced practice nurse would use to guide your decision making in this scenario, including whether you would disclose your error. Be sure to justify your explanation. <\/strong><\/td>\nPoints Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)<\/p>\n The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail at least two strategies that an advanced practice nurse would use to guide decision making in the scenario.<\/p>\n The response accurately and completely explains whether they would disclose the error, including an accurate, detailed, and clear justification for the explanation provided.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)<\/p>\n The response accurately explains at least two strategies that an advanced practice nurse would use to guide decision making in the scenario.<\/p>\n The response accurately explains whether they would disclose the error, including an accurate justification for the explanation provided.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)<\/p>\n The response inaccurately or vaguely explains at least two strategies that an advanced practice nurse would use to guide decision making in the scenario, or only explains one strategy.<\/p>\n The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether they would disclose the error, including a justification that is vague, inaccurate, or misaligned to the explanation provided.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)<\/p>\n The response inaccurately and vaguely explains only one strategy that an advanced practice nurse would use to guide decision making in the scenario, or is missing.<\/p>\n The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether they would disclose the error, with no justification provided, or is missing.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \nExplain the process of writing prescriptions including strategies to minimize medication errors. <\/strong><\/td>\nPoints Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)<\/p>\n The response provides an accurate, detailed, and thorough explanation of the process of writing prescriptions, including detailed strategies to minimize medication errors.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)<\/p>\n The response provides an accurate explanation of the process of writing prescriptions, including some strategies to minimize medication errors.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)<\/p>\n The response provides an inaccurate or vague explanation of the process of writing prescriptions, including inaccurate or vague strategies to minimize medication errors.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)<\/p>\n The response provides an inaccurate and vague explanation of the process of writing prescriptions, including inaccurate and vague strategies to minimize medication errors, or is missing.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \nWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: \nParagraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. <\/strong><\/td>\nPoints Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)<\/p>\n Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)<\/p>\n Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)<\/p>\n Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%\u201379% of the time.<\/td>\n | Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)<\/p>\n Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \nWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: \nCorrect grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation <\/strong><\/td>\nPoints Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)<\/p>\n Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors<\/td>\n | Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)<\/p>\n Contains a few (1\u20132) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors<\/td>\n | Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)<\/p>\n Contains several (3\u20134) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors<\/td>\n | Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)<\/p>\n Contains many (\u2265 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader\u2019s understanding<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \nWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing,\u00a0margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical\/in-text citations, and reference list. <\/strong><\/td>\nPoints Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)<\/p>\n Uses correct APA format with no errors<\/td>\n | Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)<\/p>\n Contains a few (1\u20132) APA format errors<\/td>\n | Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)<\/p>\n Contains several (3\u20134) APA format errors<\/td>\n | Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)<\/p>\n Contains many (\u2265 5) APA format errors<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \nTotal Points: 100 <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n<\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\nName:\u00a0NURS_6521_Week1_Assignment_Rubric<\/h3>\nClick here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 6512 Assignment 2 Ethical and Legal Implications of Prescribing Drugs IN<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n | | | | | | | | | | | | | |