A Case Critique Of Starnes Vs. Galey Case Study

AT1 PART A: Case Critique CNA756 Foundations of Perioperative Nursing Theory Starnes Vs Galey case study.

Introduction Introduction Kelly et al. (2020) defined breach of duty as the failure to satisfy the requisite standard of care by omissions or acts that cause harm to a person. For instance, a breach of duty of care can lead to negligence such as incorrect site surgery, which is one of the concerns in the hospitals worldwide (Healy, 2019; Yonash & Taylor, 2020). However, implementing perioperative standards of practice in the Australian settings, has been shown to lower the incidences of incorrect surgical site and can be prevented (Healy, 2019). Legal issue (Breach of duty resulting in negligence) Legal issues (Breach of duty resulting
explains that, before any invasive procedure, patient comprehension is crucial to enable effective and accurate informed consent. Based on facts from the case, the plaintiff understood all the information discussed by Dr. Galey at the pre-examination appointment and that Mr. Starnes verbalised that the left knee was worse than the right and they agreed to fix the left knee and consented to the treatment. In addition, the ambulatory nurse, Paquette, conducted an initial phone interview before the surgery and Mr. Starnes confirmed that he consented to a left knee arthroscopy. Moreover, before surgery, consent was rechecked by a perioperative nurse, McMullen, and Mr. Starnes permitted the nurse to prepare his left knee by shaving it. Then, postoperatively, the patient verbalised an understanding of his discharge instructions and was sent home on November 6, 2013, without any concerns or complaints. Based on the facts, Dr. Galey, Nurse Fik, Nurse McMullen, and Nurse Paquette have obtained informed consent numerous times pre-, intra, and postoperatively with the plaintiff confirming the left knee as the operative site booked for surgery. Glaser et al. (2020) and Talevski et al. (2020) highlight that valid informed consent is defined as patients who have consented, signed, and comprehended all pertinent facts, and gave their free will to authorised healthcare professionals to provide treatment. It is a fact
For instance, this involves ensuring the protocols of checking patients' identifiers, standardised checklists, and timeout sheets following the 3Cs protocol. Additionally, this standard of care outlined a five-step standard procedure that had to be followed and completed before surgical intervention. Firstly, check the signed consent form and the patient confirms understanding of relevant information provided by the surgeon. Secondly, standardised operative site marking with and confirming patient identifiers by registered nurses against the consent form. The fourth step involves undertaking a team time out inside the theatre and the patient verbally confirms that all information is accurate. Lastly, ensure that the diagnostic radiological images are always available on the day of surgery to confirm the operative site is correct. Talevski et al. (2020) strongly suggests that the teach-back technique would be beneficial for both patients and medical practitioners as it clears ambiguity by checking patients’ understanding. Therefore, it increases patients' active participation in the plan of care and minimizes surgical errors (Talevski et al.,