Posted: January 21st, 2023

COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

Discussion – Week 1 -COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

A national healthcare issue that immediately comes to mind is the ongoing battle against COVID-19. As states across the country (and countries across the world) entered into various versions of lockdown and stay-at-home orders, medical facilities were also impacted by more than simply treated patients. The entire hospital healthcare plan had to be reevaluated, reassessed, and many aspects of daily operations were impacted. Analyzing who was most at risk, the populations such as the elderly and those with compounding comorbidities was first in-line in assessing how the hospital would interact with and protect these individuals (Long, Vo, & Vuong, 2020). COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion. At the same time, another, perhaps more immediate problem were hospitals being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of patients, the need (and lack of) adequate personal protective equipment, and equipment and staffing shortages (Long, Vo, & Vuong 2020).

BUY A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

For the hospital I work for in particular, I am an Emergency Room Nurse, and as COVID-19 cases began to arrive in our area, there was an overwhelming rush of individuals to our hospital. It didn’t take long for the hospital to realize that we had a major nursing shortage in the ER. While there were other nurses on furlough or shortened hours in other departments, the ER was in a constant state of need. As the volume of patients flooded the emergency room doors, it did not take long to realize the shortage of nurses. Before COVID-19 the hospital system I work for joined a national movement toward seeking higher educated nurses- requiring all nursing staff to obtain their BSN (if they only had their RN) within five years or be terminated (regardless of years of service). Many of those with more than 20 years experience retired, others shifted career fields, or some simply went to other networks that did not have the same requirements. The push for a higher educated staff is not new as is stated in Gerardi, Farmer, and Hoffman (2018); however, this push for higher standards also came at a price in losing experienced and knowledgeable staff that our department, and those across the health care system have acutely felt during this pandemic. COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

The department I work for has tried to manage patient care through not allowing any visitors, if it is a pediatric patient (only one parent at a time), COVID-19 positive patients are placed in isolation rooms with negative pressure, we are given one set of PPE to last us the entire time however, and that has caused a significant amount of controversy as to why we are not able to have adequate equipment. Our ER has hired traveling nurse practitioners (increase need for provider services) nurses, new graduates, and is offering many paid overtime shifts to current staff (Auebach, Staiger, & Buerhaus 2018). We are screened every day about arrival and must document all of our interactions with COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 will not be leaving anytime soon however; and the hospital and health care system as a whole will need to continue to adapt as we work through the months to come. COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

References

Auerbach, D. I., D. O., & Buerhaus, P. I. (2018). Growing ranks of advanced practice clinicians-

Implications for the physician workforce.New England Journal of Medicine, 378(25),

2358-2360.doi:10.1056/NEJMp181869

Gerardi, T., Farmer, P., & Hoffman, B. (2018). Moving closer to the 2020 BSN workforce goal.American Journal of Nursing, 118(2), 43-45. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000530244.15217.aa

Thanh-Long, G., Dinh-Tri Vo., & Quan-Hoang Vuong, (2020). COVID-19: A relook at

Healthcare system and aged populations. Sustainability, 12 (10), 4200.

doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.gardner-webb,edu/10.3390/su12104200

Response

Great insights, True to your statements, with the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic and the volume of patients flooding not only the ER but the great number of hospitals in the health care system, it did not take long to realize the on-going issue of shortage of nurses.

The Registered Nurse Safe Staffing Act of 2013 (H.R. 1821) has been introduced by the ANA to Congress last May 8, 2013 which empowers registered nurses (RNs) to drive staffing and scheduling decisions in hospitals and, consequently, protect patients and improve the quality of care.

Staffing has a direct impact on patient safety. Research has shown that inadequate nurse-patient ratios are linked to higher rates of patient falls, injuries, infections, medications, and even death. Determining the appropriate number and mix of nursing staff is critical to the delivery of quality patient care and positive outcomes.

In addition, as what you have stated, the lack of healthcare providers directly impacts the care able to be given and the quality of life of many patients. The addition of nurse practitioners and physician assistants to the workforce is certainly a viable partial solution.

Likewise, poor management could result to rapid turn-over of staff and contributory to the rapid turnover of staff are pay and benefits, workload and poor relationship with other staff due to intergenerational gap.

The push for a higher educated staff is not new, however, everyone it is a common fact that understaffing is not caused by non-enrollment of nursing students, rather, there is also an existing problem of lack of faculty to teach in the nursing schools because of low wages as compared to the nurses working in clinical practice.

The value hospitals place on their people will have a direct correlation to their commitment, confidence and engagement. Therefore, leaders and managers must enhance the organizational culture and develop orientation programs, provide availability of resources, promote camaraderie empowerment and autonomy among the staff and reinforce these values that are critical to encourage staff’s retention. COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

True to your statements, the organizational management and nursing leaders need to create ways and means in promoting adequate staffing and scheduling, promoting staff accountability and collaboration among the team, uplift the organizational culture, and enhance autonomy and empowerment among frontline staff to ensure safe quality care of patients. Great post!

Response

Great post Marie, I agree I think nobody was prepared for this pandemic nor do I think we are prepared for a second wave either any time soon. I remember thinking it this pandemic will not come to US and if it does we have the resources and supplies to be able to defeat it but I was wrong. The stress of nursing shortage was so bad that I remember when I was working five or six days a week in the ICU. We all know the stress of ICU without a pandemic. The rapid acceleration of transmission, and the lack of preparedness to prevent and treat this virus, the negative impacts of COVID-19 are rippling through every facet of society (Brown & Horesh, 2020). Hospitals did try to accommodate all the patients but it was too much. We did not have enough negative pressure rooms nor did we have enough PPEs, Everything they used to teach us about the spread of infection and PPEs did not apply. Staff would re-use PPEs and N95s because of the shortage. A critical shortage of all of gloves, face masks, air-purifying respirators, goggles, face shields, respirators, and gowns is projected to develop or has already developed in areas of high demand (Desai & Livingston, 2020). COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

References

Brown, A., & Horesh, D., (2020). Traumatic stress in the age of COVID-19: A call to close

critical gaps and adapt to new realities. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research,

Practice, and Policy, 12(4), 331–335. COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/tra0000592

Desai A., & Livingston, E., (2020). Sourcing Personal Protective Equipment During the

COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA. 2020; 323(19):1912–1914. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.5317

Discussion: Review of Current Healthcare Issues

If you were to ask 10 people what they believe to be the most significant issue facing healthcare today, you might get 10 different answers. Escalating costs? Regulation? Technology disruption?

These and many other topics are worthy of discussion. Not surprisingly, much has been said in the research, within the profession, and in the news about these topics. Whether they are issues of finance, quality, workload, or outcomes, there is no shortage of changes to be addressed.

In this Discussion, you examine a national healthcare issue and consider how that issue may impact your work setting. You also analyze how your organization has responded to this issue.

To Prepare:

Review the Resources and select one current national healthcare issue/stressor to focus on.
Reflect on the current national healthcare issue/stressor you selected and think about how this issue/stressor may be addressed in your work setting.

By Day 3 of Week 1

Post a description of the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected for analysis, and explain how the healthcare issue/stressor may impact your work setting. Then, describe how your health system work setting has responded to the healthcare issue/stressor, including a description of what changes may have been implemented. Be specific and provide examples.

By Day 6 of Week 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days who chose a different national healthcare issue/stressor than you selected. Explain how their chosen national healthcare issue/stressor may also impact your work setting and what (if anything) is being done to address the national healthcare issue/stressor.

NURS_6053_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View
List View

	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. COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion 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

Name: NURS_6053_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric COVID-19 NURS 6053 national healthcare issue/stressor discussion

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.