.
The Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) found evidence of substandard care. Students are required to read The Aged Care Royal Commission report summary (https://agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/final-report-executive-summary.pdf (Links to an external site.)), discuss a patient safety issue identified, suggest risk frameworks that could promote better outcomes in relation to the clinical issue identified and reflect on their learning. Part 1 Students are required to identify a patient safety issue raised in the Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) in relation to substandard care and explore the issue in a discussion board post on the 10193 Clinical Governance Canvas site. Students are required to define the safety issue and discuss the negative impacts for the affected person/family, health care workers and health care facility, providing evidence and statistics. Students will also make recommendations about evidence informed risk management frameworks that could be used to promote improved outcomes in relation to the patient safety issue identified. The post will include a APA7th edition formatted reference list, and be 500 words (including intext references, not including reference list). Part 2 Students are required to respond to a peer’s Aged Care Royal Commission substandard care discussion post with a written reflection on what you have learned and how this insight connects with your experience (Word count: Maximum 500 words). Other requirements: Any resources utilised should be referenced with a Reference list provided at the end of the discussion post. As with all academic assessments, students are required to comply with the University's policy and procedure for assessment items, inclusive of ensuring academic integrity of their work. All work must be the students original work. Any suspicions of academic misconduct will be referred to the ADE as per university policy. This Assessment addresses the following Unit Learning Outcomes: 1.Examine the critical role of nursing in clinical governance; 4.Discuss and describe the use of risk frameworks to aid identification and amelioration of clinical risk; 6.Critically analyse the role of nurses in advocating for improved patient outcomes. and related graduate attributes include: 1. UC graduates are professional. UC graduates can: 1.1 employ up-to-date and relevant knowledge and skills; 1.2 communicate effectively; 1.3 use creativity, critical thinking, analysis and research skills to solve theoretical and real-world problems; 1.5 display initiative and drive, and use their organisation skills to plan and manage their workload; 1.6 take pride in their professional and personal integrity; 2. UC graduates are global citizens. UC graduates can: 2.1 think globally about issues in their profession; 2.5 make creative use of technology in their learning and professional lives; 3. UC graduates are lifelong learners. UC graduates can: 3.1 reflect on their own practice, updating and adapting their knowledge and skills for continual professional and academic development; and 3.4 evaluate and adopt new technology. Rubric Clinical Governance Assignment 2: Discussion Board Post and Reflection Clinical Governance Assignment 2: Discussion Board Post and Reflection Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeIdentification of a patient safety issue Identification of a patient safety issue raised in the Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) in relation to substandard care 5 Pts Excellent Excellent articulation of identified patient safety issue raised in the Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) in relation to substandard care 3.75 Pts Very good Very good articulation of identified patient safety issue raised in the Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) in relation to substandard care 3.25 Pts Good Good articulation of identified patient safety issue raised in the Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) in relation to substandard care 2.5 Pts Satisfactory Satisfactory articulation of identified patient safety issue raised in the Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) in relation to substandard care 0 Pts Unsatisfactory: Does not adequately articulate a patient safety issue raised in the Aged Care Royal Commission (2021) in relation to substandard care 5 pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeSafety issue discussed Safety issue discussed including the negative impacts for the client, health care workers and health care facility; providing evidence and statistics. 10 Pts Excellent Excellent discussion in relation to the safety issue identified including the negative impacts for the client, health care workers and health care facility with evidence and statistics provided 7.5 Pts Very good Very good discussion in relation to the safety issue identified including the negative impacts for the client, health care workers and health care facility with evidence and statistics provided 6.5 Pts Good Good discussion in relation to the safety issue identified including the negative impacts for the client, health care workers and health care facility with evidence and statistics provided 5 Pts Adequate Adequate discussion in relation to the safety issue identified including the negative impacts for the client, health care workers and health care facility with evidence and statistics provided 0 Pts Unsatisfactory Does not adequately discuss the safety issue identified and / or the negative impacts for the client, health care workers and health care facility, and / or no evidence / statistics provided 10 pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeIdentification of risk frameworks Identification of risk frameworks that can be used to promote better outcomes in relation to the clinical issue identified 10 Pts Excellent Excellent identification of risk frameworks that can be used to promote better outcomes in relation to the clinical issue identified 7.5 Pts Very good Very good identification of risk frameworks that can be used to promote better outcomes in relation to the clinical issue identified 6.5 Pts Good Good identification of risk frameworks that can be used to promote better outcomes in relation to the clinical issue identified 5 Pts Adequate Adequate identification of risk frameworks that can be used to promote better outcomes in relation to the clinical issue identified 0 Pts Unsatisfactory Does not identify risk frameworks that could be used to promote better outcomes in relation to the clinical issue identified 10 pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeWritten reflection Written reflection response to a peer’s Aged Care Royal Commission substandard care discussion post 10 Pts Excellent Excellent written reflection response to a peer’s Aged Care Royal Commission substandard care discussion post 7.5 Pts Very good Very good written reflection response to a peer’s Aged Care Royal Commission substandard care discussion post 6.5 Pts Good Good written reflection response to a peer’s Aged Care Royal Commission substandard care discussion post 5 Pts Adequate Adequate written reflection response to a peer’s Aged Care Royal Commission substandard care discussion post 0 Pts Unsatisfactory Does not provide a written reflection response to a peer’s Aged Care Royal Commission substandard care discussion post or not well articulated / developed. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeWriting / Word count and referencing: Resources cited and referenced with correct APA referencing style. Word limit adhered to; Correct grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax 10 Pts Excellent Relevant, contemporary and appropriate literature resourced and utilised with no errors in referencing, word limit adhered to, no writing errors 7.5 Pts Very good Very good: Appropriate literature resourced and utilised with minor errors in referencing, word limit adhered to, minor writing errors 6.5 Pts Good Appropriate literature resourced and utilised with some errors in referencing, word limit adhered to; some writing errors 5 Pts Adequate Literature resourced and utilised but many errors errors in referencing, word limit adhered to; many writing errors 0 Pts Unsatisfactory Little or no literature resourced and / Incorrect referencing style. / word count no adhered to / inappropriate language used. 10 pts Total points: 45