IIHS495MBA - Health Care Quality & Risk Management in Healthcare Administration Module Assessment May 2023 Semester Coursework 2 The coursework has the intention to assess the following Learning outcomes: 1. Critically explore the different concepts and models of Quality Assurance (QA) with special reference to healthcare services. 2. Critically assess and effectively apply techniques and methods of total quality management and continuous improvement of healthcare services. 3. Critically assess the techniques and procedures used in risk management with the view to ensuring patient safety in all aspects of healthcare services. 4. Formulate and evaluate Quality improvement Programmes used in healthcare service organizations with a view to maintaining the expected quality standards. Task "A 56-year-old male (Mr. B) arrived at the rural local hospital around 10:00 am. He was accompanied by his 47-year-old wife and their 16-year-old son. The reason for their presence at the hospital was due to trauma that Mr. B’s wife had endured. Mr. B’s wife was assaulted with a wooden pole on her head and back by him. When asked why he had beaten her up, it was due to a trivial disagreement and misunderstanding that had led to a heated argument causing him to raise his hand on his wife 30 minutes before arriving at the hospital. The 16-year-old son, upon hearing the loud noise, rushed to his mother’s aid and intervened. An altercation then happened between the father and son. After the father had smacked him, out of fury, the son had grabbed the wooden pole from his father’s hand and hit him back a couple of times. In this incident, all three were victims of each other’s fury and they sought medical attention at a nearby rural hospital in their hometown. This hospital is a divisional hospital and has minimal facilities. There is only one functioning ambulance, one doctor, and one or two nurses present during a twentyfour-hour period. Only basic care like simple wound dressing could be provided to this family. The hospital is equipped with basic equipment such as a multipara monitor and an ECG machine. Mr. B’s wife had endured a wound on her scalp, often referred to as a scalp laceration, and their son also had wounds, but they were merely a few abrasions on his body, indicating defense injuries. Although Mr. B was being hit by his son, he did not have any bruises or wounds; however, he was found to be hyperventilating on arrival at the hospital. Upon noticing Mr. B’s abnormal breathing pattern, which most likely indicated anxiety or a panic attack, the doctor instructed Mr. B to breathe in and out into a paper bag that had been given to him by the nursing staff at the hospital. While Mr. B was breathing in and out of the paper bag, the doctor decided to suture the scalp laceration of the wife. Apart from Mr. B hyperventilating, he was tachycardic and complained of chest tightness. His vitals on room air were stable; nevertheless, he was connected to low-flow oxygen to provide reassurance about Mr. B’s condition. It was unclear if the blood pressure was measured at the time of presentation at the local hospital. After a while, which seemed like ages, his hyperventilation episode had subsided and he felt fine. Mr. B was a seemingly healthy person who had not been previously diagnosed with any comorbidities and had no previous similar history or presentation. Most importantly, he had not been diagnosed with ischemic heart disease or any evidence as such. He had never visited any clinics recently or in the past and had no recent record of any blood pressure measurements and had not consumed any medications recently. Although he consumed alcohol regularly and was a chain smoker, he had a strong family history of hypertension which he had not revealed at the time of presentation to the local hospital. Later in the afternoon around 12 noon, the medical officer in charge on that day had decided to transfer all three patients to a secondary care facility for further management and continuation of care. The nearest secondary hospital facility is 25 km away and it takes approximately twenty to thirty minutes to reach; it’s called District General Hospital Mannar. Mr. B’s wife and son strongly refused to go in the same ambulance with Mr. B as they were very angry with him. Due to this, the medical officer decided to transfer the wife and son in the only ambulance that was available as they had been injured. Mr. B had been asked to get himself admitted to the secondary care facility on his own as they didn’t have another ambulance to transport them all. The transfer form was given to Mr. B’s hand and he was advised to go to the district general hospital right away. However, Mr. B had decided against it and thought it was best to go home with a friend as he felt fine. Around 2:00 PM, he had experienced a sharp chest pain and had collapsed in his room. His elderly mother, who had been at his home, heard the agony and came to see him. The elderly lady had screamed and called out for help and they were taken back to the same rural local divisional hospital that he previously went to, about thirty minutes or so. Immediately on arrival, the medical staff began the resuscitation protocol and he was urgently transferred to the larger hospital in the Mannar district, the general hospital. At the time of arrival, he was pronounced dead. Due to the unexplained circumstances of his death, the hospital had decided to order an inquest. The medico-legal team was involved in this matter and a postmortem was conducted, which revealed the cause of death as acute myocardial infarction with underlying coronary artery atherosclerosis as a contributory factor. 1. Briefly explain the root causes of this adverse event. 2. What measures would you immediately take to avoid such an adverse event? 3. What are the long-term measures you will take to fix the system so that such adverse events will not occur?" Word count: 2500 words (plus/minus 10%) Weighting: 50% Due Date: 20/08/2023 Method of Submission: On IIHS Moodle. MBA in Health Administration – Coventry University (UK) MODULAR CODE AND TOPIC ASSIGNMENT TOPIC Name of the Student : Coventry Registration Number : IIHS Registration Number : NIC : Telephone Number : E-mail Address : Current Semester : Date of submission : Total word count (2500) : Facilitator’s Name : Name of Marker/Moderator: Areas of strength: Areas for improvement: General comments (word limits/confidentiality/anonymity issues): Marks: Date: Signature: Postgraduate Assessment Marking Criteria % Excellent 72, 75, 78 82, 85, 88 90, 95, 100 Very Good 62, 65, 68 Good 52, 55, 58 Pass 42, 45, 48 FAIL 35, 30, 25, 20,10, 0 ANSWER The student addresses the question fully, including excellent summaries, critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation. At the higher end the assignment may demonstrate originality and creativity. COHERENCE The entire work is clearly structured, addresses the topic authoritatively, is based on extensive and critically informed background reading, and is also succinct. ARGUMENT A clear and convincing line of critical and evaluative argument is demonstrated throughout. A degree of originality and insight should also be present, supported by evidence of wider reading, some of which goes beyond the recommended reading. EVIDENCE Demonstrates creativity and some originality in the selection and presentation of evidence. Provides thorough critical analysis of seminal work, and an informed knowledge of theoretical positions. All evidence cited is correctly referenced in the text as well as in the References. The evidence selected is of high quality, and goes beyond the recommended reading. It is presented in a well organised way, and most claims are supported by relevant evidence that has been critically appraised. Some relevant evidence is presented which is generally well organised and there is evidence of some critical appraisal. For the most part accurate referencing of the text and reference list. The question is addressed authoritatively, with evidence of additional reading and an emphasis on analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The evidence is presented clearly in relation to the question set. There is a sound structure which clearly links sections, and ensures arguments are fully articulated and supported. For the most part the question is addressed. There is evidence of an understanding of most of the issues and the relevant literature, though there may be some omissions. Evidence of some analysis, synthesis and evaluation. A good structure but relationships between some statements and sections may not always be fully articulated. Some sections are descriptive rather than evaluative. A clear and convincing line of argument is presented, and it is fully supported by a critical evaluation of sources. Some evidence of originality and insight may be present supported by evidence of wide reading There is demonstration of the ability to provide some clear and structured arguments, but there is little evidence of originality. Evidence of reading from appropriate sources with some critical evaluation. Some aspects of the question are addressed. A limited amount of relevant material is included, though is sometimes poorly presented. Limited evidence of analysis, synthesis and evaluation Fails to answer the question or to address the topic appropriately, and is not presented at PG level. Structure lacks coherence, relationships between statements and sections are not always articulated. The majority of work is descriptive rather than evaluative. Some arguments are produced, but there is limited critical analysis or reference to an appropriate range of sources. Some evidence is included but this is limited. Omissions and errors in referencing are evident. Poor structure. There are few clear links between statements or sections, and the assignment is descriptive. Little convincing or supported argument is presented, demonstrated a limited understanding of the topic. Minimal reference is made to relevant and supportive evidence, with little indication of wider reading. Poor referencing.
