NHS-FPX4000_Assessment 3-2

Applying Ethical Principles

Health care professionals face multiple issues including, complex ones that require sound decisions. Successful application of ethical principles makes nurses, physicians, and health leaders responsive to patient demands and issues within the clinical environment. The Missing Needle Protector provides insights into one of the serious mistakes that require leaders to apply ethical behavior, moral judgment, and moral awareness. While Hopewell Hospital made notable improvements in the last two years, a single mistake is enough to destroy reputation and jeopardize the brand financial success.

Review of the Scenario

The Missing Needle Protector highlights one of the sensitive issues that could affect a brand reputation. The events involving the surgical team leaving a needle protector in a patient’s belly remind healthcare professionals about the need for complete adherence to ethical aspects that allow them to optimize care outcomes (Bakhtiari et al., 2020). Like many facilities, Hopewell Hospital is vulnerable to safety and quality concerns caused by few physicians. The few do not meet quality standards and make mistakes that expose patients to severe complications, prolonged hospitalization, extra costs, and risk of premature deaths. While Hopewell Hospital has notable improvements since Straight took over, the presence of a physician experiencing mental and physical decline undermines the facility ability to make sustainable progress towards improving quality and safety of patient care. Delays in reducing Cutrite’s privileges could make the situation worse for Hopewell Hospital. Notably, the case reveals mistakes witnessed in the surgical room such as errors in confirming surgical tools at the end of an operation. The mistake reveals issues such as inefficient information flow, non-compliance with guidelines and routines, and limited attention to the work environment (Sundler et al., 2018).

The operating room supervisor informed the director of clinical services about an error where the team left a plastic needle protector in a patient’s belly. The director sought clarity on the source of the error, which is a gap in adhering to safeguards of counts and records during an operation. Additional conversation with the scrub nurse revealed lapses in proper handling of the syringe by Cutrite. The ethical question arising from the case is making the decision to get the patient back to the surgical room. The director’s decision to engage the Chief of Surgery demonstrates the need for leaders to adhere to ethical principles that enable them to act in the best interests of a patient.

Ethical Issues in the Case Studies

The Missing Needle Protector highlights serious concerns that raise questions about the safety and quality of care. One concern is the likelihood of the surgical team acting negligently by failing to have accurate and complete assessment of items in the surgical pack after the surgery. Discrepancy revealed after reconciling records at the end of the week showed the need for the director of clinical services to ensure that only competent surgeons handle patients. The scrub nurse failure to think about the protective sheath at the conclusion of the surgery also portray gaps in oversight, training, and safety culture. Thus, the ethical issue revolves around the absence of robust risk assessment structures, triggered by the presence of a mentally and physically declining surgeon. Failure to exclude Cutrite from the operation is among the factors that led to the team failing to notice the missing needle protector from the surgical pack.

Ethical Decision-Making Model to Address the Situation

Moral awareness, ethical behavior, and moral judgment determine individual ability to make informed decisions when facing a dilemma. Moral awareness means ability to detect the aspects of a decision that one should make throughout the care process (Raus et al., 2018). The concept makes everyone regardless of their position aware of the implications of negligence and ineffective handling of clinical procedures (Borhani et al., 2021). In the case study, Straight demonstrated moral awareness by acknowledging the implications of a surgical error and the need for informed decisions that match the patient’s interests. Moral judgment reflects individuals’ beliefs about the right and wrong actions for the patient (Capella University, 2022). The concept also implies the motivation to do the right thing.

Straight’s conversations with the scrub nurse, operating room supervisor, and the chief of surgery revealed intentions to uphold the right actions based on accurate and adequate knowledge of the issue and implications on the patient. The director’s commitment to understanding the issue and making an informed decision portray a high level of moral judgment (Capella University, 2022). For ethical behavior, a healthcare professional upholds honesty, dignity, and patients’ rights to optimize care outcomes. In this case, the director acted ethically by demonstrating commitment to protecting the patient’s health and well-being. This way, Straight focus was on ensuring that Jameson was free from life-threatening consequences from leaving the needle protector in her belly.

Using effective approaches helps improve safety culture by making the care team aware of the implications of poor information flow, non-adherence with guidelines and routines, and delayed reporting of incidents (Sundler et al., 2018). The approaches also make administrators aware of the risk of allowing physicians with declining physical and mental capacity to handle sensitive situations. On the other hand, non-effective approaches prevent Hopewell Hospital from making meaningful progress towards reinforcing adherence to ethical aspects. In this sense, leaders and members of the care team remain unresponsive to administrative, technical, and human-related lapses in the operating room and other units.

Communication Approaches in the Scenario

Effective communication is a foundation for optimizing care outcomes. In the Missing Needle Protector, the director of clinical services understood the value of active listening and honesty to understand events within the clinical environment. The approach helps leaders create an open environment that encourages members of the care team to explain adverse events, their causes, and interventions appropriate to enhance quality and safety of patient care (Leggett & Price, 2020). Transparency is another vital consideration that allows health leaders to synthesize accurate and complete information on events leading to an error. Individuals are confident sharing their experiences for an in-depth conclusion about gaps and improvements necessary in the clinical environment (Legget & Price, 2020).

The director’s decision to engage parties affected by the issue including the chief of surgery demonstrate effective communication focused on understanding the implications of leaving the protector in the patient’s belly. However, failure to engage Cutrite due to power issues raises questions about the level of interdisciplinary collaboration. In this case, it is challenging to make informed conclusions by neglecting input from parties that had direct contribution to the error. With the experience and burden of responsibility on the Chief of Surgery, it would have been more effective for Straight to have a truthful conversation with the Chief of Surgery. The approach would have initiated honest conversations about the incident. The director had the opportunity to ask critical questions about aspects such as administrative, technical, and human-related changes necessary to enhance safety and quality of care.

Addressing the Issue

The Missing Needle Protector captures one of the adverse outcomes that jeopardize the quality and safety of patient care. Autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice remind healthcare professionals to dedicate themselves to optimizing care outcomes. The principles require the care team to uphold patients’ rights throughout the care process. Respect for autonomy requires the appropriate authorities to disclose complications to a patient (Cardenas, 2020). In this case, Straight is responsible for avoiding deceptive and paternalistic approaches that limit the patient from understanding an error and implications on their health and well-being. The principle of beneficence advocates for appropriate clinical procedures that meet patients’ best interests (Cardenas, 2020).

Doing good for patients means having competent physicians, nurses, and other professionals to enhance quality and safety of patient care. Straight should prevent Cutrite from performing a full range of services to eliminate the risk of catastrophic events in the future. The principle of non-maleficence also reminds professionals to exercise sound judgment.
Protecting a patient from harm means working with a competent care team. The competence makes individuals aware of routines, guidelines, and effective communication appropriate for enhancing quality and safety of care. Finally, justice is a key consideration to ensure that patients have the right standards of surgical care (Bakhtiari et al., 2020). The director should look at maintaining quality and safety standards by ensuring that only em

ployees with adequate training, mental, emotional, and physical capacity, and the right knowledge and skills handle operations. In this case, professionals such as Cutrite should avoid paternalistic attitudes associated with complications for patients. The ethical principles clarify the burden of responsibility and the need for complete adherence to standards for optimizing care outcomes.

Conclusion

Ethical dilemmas test health care professionals’ ability to uphold moral awareness, moral judgment, and ethical behavior in challenging situations. The Missing Needle Protector provides insights into the need for effective communication and problem solving abilities to protect patients from adverse health outcomes. The care team upholds honesty, transparency, and objectivity to make informed decisions on the right pathways to addressing an ethical dilemma. However, failure to engage everyone due to organizational politics limit leaders from making meaningful progress towards designing and implementing sustainable solutions for enhancing quality and safety of patient care.