Quick Intervention Scenarios

The protocol not being followed accurately most likely affected the outcome of Mr. B., if these were being monitored intervention could have been implemented soon and might have changed the outcome. Quick intervention are crucial during an emergent situation. Number of staff working in the ER at the time in this scenario could have resulted in Mr. B.’s outcome. One RN and one LPN hardly seems adequate for the amount of patients and aquity level in this scenario. High quality and safe patient care cannot be provided in a health care facility when faced with inappropriate staff to patient ratio. Also this scenario indicates that a respiratory therapist (RT) was in house and was available, but during a conscious sedation procedure an RT should be closer to the patient (at the …show more content…
B. The attention that should have been given to Mr. B. during and after the sedative procedure is definitely inadequate based on standards of care. The patient to staff ratio is definitely at this point becoming unsafe in an ER setting. The scenario also states the ED lobby is becoming congested. This scenario also indicates the LPN acknowledges the patients alarm regarding low blood pressure and oxygen saturation level, no indication of intervention is done just the alarm is reset and blood pressure rechecked, the scope of practice of the LPN does not include assessment of patient. There is no documentation in this scenario that the LPN advises the RN or a physician an evaluation of Mr. B. is indicated due to low monitor readings of vital signs. The LPN should have notified either the nurse or physician about Mr. B.’s change in vital signs, so that he could have been evaluated and intervention performed to correct the problems right away. The patient load grows rapidly and the staffing level does not change. The scenario indicates multiple patients are awaiting discharge, these patients can become inpatient while the nurse needs to focus on the higher needs patients in the ER