BC 346 Assuring the Quality-of-Care Discussion
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
BC 346 Assuring the Quality-of-Care Discussion
Select one of the ethical issues listed below. Assume the ethical issue that you select has been brought to your attention as the chief operating officer of a hospital (e.g., breach of patient confidentiality, lack of choices presented to a patient for treatment options, intentional rationing of services to save money, etc.). Then, briefly describe the hypothetical situation and at least one mechanism (remedy) for resolving a breach of the identified ethical issue from a healthcare administrator’s perspective.
Ethical issues (Select One)
Rationing of health services.
Patient privacy and confidentiality.
Patient choice of provider and facilities.
Legal rights of an individual vs. public health perspective to protect society.
Reminder for requirements: a minimum of 250 words (main post) and three scholarly sources.
1,500 word count and there is a total of 6 questions each (not including in-text citation and references as the word count), a minimum of 4 scholarly sources are required in APA format. For the 4 scholarly sources, one from the textbook that’s posted below and the other two from an outside source . Let’s be sure to write it in own work 100% and give appropriately when using someone’s else work. Under no circumstances use any direct quotes. Any directly quoted or copied material will result in a zero for the assignment.
Reference for textbook attached:
Williams, S. J., & Torrens, P. R. (2008). Introduction to health services (7th ed.). Clifton Park, NY: Thomson Delmar Learning.
Knowledge: What are the two key differences between medical / personal ethics and public health ethics?
Comprehension: What do you understand about the conflicting interests (not conflict of interest) between what is good for the greater whole as compared to the good of an individual?
Application: Give an example of a competing priority when the good of society is favored over the good of an individual. Is there a case / example of an instance when the good of the individual is more important than the good of the public? Be specific.
Analysis: What are the root causes of the conflict that can occur between medical / individual ethics and public health ethical standards? Do a comparative analysis on the ethics of privacy between public health ethics and medical ethics
Evaluation: What are the pros and cons of your new idea? How would you convince others that your idea offers a better solution? What are the unintended consequences of your idea?
Synthesis: Offer a new and unique solution that might mitigate the conflicts of interest. Why is your idea new? What are the implications for the benefits of conflict?
BC 346 Assuring the Quality-of-Care Discussion
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow