Significance of Communication in the Health Care Industry: Analysis of the Case Findings of the Inquest into the Death of Roy Jacobs

Answer

Significance of Communication in the Health Care Industry: Analysis of the Case Findings of the Inquest into the Death of Roy Jacobs

According to Meyer (2016) and Wands (2018), communication ensures that sufficient information is gathered from a patient and care providers are able to give better care services that warrant the patient’s quality of care and health outcomes. This is hinged on the fact that care providers are able to make informed decisions regarding what kind of care, medication, intervention, or pertinent interventions they should give to a patient (Chang, 2019). Taking into consideration the case of Roy Rodney Jacobs, a 46-years-old Aboriginal man who unexpectedly lost his life at the Cherbourg Hospital in 2017, this paper aims at showing that effective communication is necessary between care providers and their patients. To achieve this aim, this paper will determine the veracity of the finding of a report regarding the Inquest into the death Roy Jacob by Coroner which established that: “Failure to recognise and respond to clinical deterioration and non-compliance with early warning and response tools is a recognised issue across the health sector, public and private” (Coroners Court of Queensland (CCQ), 2018, p.35).

Critical Analysis

Delivery of quality healthcare and assurance of patients’ safety ought to be the ultimate objective of all healthcare professionals. Achieving of this goal is highly reliant upon effective communication between healthcare team members. Effective communication along with teamwork will be attained through collaborative practice (Thomson et al., 2015). Collaborative practice refers to multiple healthcare employees from various professional extractions working jointly with families, patients, caregivers, and communities to offer the highest possible quality care. This practice allows healthcare employees to engage any person whose skills assist in achieving health goals (Thomson et al., 2015). However, there are several instances when effective communication is not exhibited among healthcare workers, thus leading to the demise of patients.

There are cases where care providers have acted aptly to identify and respond to their patients’ care needs and this has prevented patients from unexpectedly losing their lives (Fisher et al., 2018). Evidence shows that failure to recognize and respond to patients’ clinical deterioration along with non-compliance occurs across both private and public care provision facilities (Pokorney et al., 2019). Studies have constantly shown that patients often exhibit physiological, emotional, and physical anomalies or distresses before their conditions worsen considerably, leading to the admission of the patients into healthcare facilities for intensive care provision (Kirkendall et al., 2017). Unfortunately, such conditions may result into cardiac arrest and even deaths of the patients if not attended to aptly within good time.

Among the anomalies that patients often exhibit include increased rates of respiration, high blood pressure, severe fever, low oxygen concentration, high rates of heartbeat, little amount of blood, and constant weakening of the body, among other signs and symptoms (Abdolrahimi et al., 2017). Whereas these signs and symptoms are visible in patients upon their admission to care facilities, it has been shown that patients eventually lose their lives out of their care providers’ negligence to recognize and respond to the patients (Barker, 2016; Bartholomew, 2014). Garvey (2015) reasons that when a care provider fails to identify and respond to a patient’s care need, the patient can easily lose his/her life.

Examples of failure to recognize and respond to patients care needs are all over.  In a study by Mathes et al. (2014), it was realized that not all patients’ vital signs had not been measured by their care providers.  Some patients were informed about some of their clients’ critical signs and symptoms. For this reason, the researchers proceeded to do the measurement of the patients whose critical signs were unknown.  The study revealed that of the respondents who took part in the research, only 18% recorded critical symptoms and for more than 39%, care providers were found to be unaware of their health needs and anomalies. From the study, McFarlane et al. (2018) concluded that while patients may exhibit visible critical signs, care providers usually fail to both recognize the signs and symptoms and thus implies that the patients do not get the quality of care they need in good time.

Additionally, out of patients who were admitted in a hospital but never had the Do Not give artificial respiration order who died in the hospital, more than 55% of them showed severe as well as serious symptoms and signs within a span of between 8 and 48 hours before they died, and nearly 35% recorded abnormalities within a span of 2 days before they ultimately died (Nurmi et al., 2015). Evidently, notwithstanding the critical signs and symptoms that were recorded in the patients, there was failure to act aptly and in good time to salvage the patients’ lives.

The above examples are in no way different from the case of Roy Jacobs. The 48-years-old man unexpectedly lost his life on 2017 at the Cherbourg Hospital. According to the inquest into the death Roy, it was revealed that there several missed diagnoses in trying to determine the problem that Roy exhibited. The team established that the nurses who attended to Roy failed to recognize the problem that he was suffering from notwithstanding the many critical signs that Roy exhibited (CCQ, 2018). Owing to the fact that they were unable to correctly identify Roy’s health problem, an appropriate responses was not provided to Roy leading to the continued deterioration of his health condition and this culminated in Roy’s death. 

In attending to Roy, it is can be deduced that the nurses were negligent and so could not provide sufficient care that was meet for Roy. This is because, notwithstanding the critical conditions that were exhibited by Roy, the nurses who were attending to him worked from assumption that Roy’s clinical focus needed  alcohol intoxication or alcohol withdrawal treatment and medication as opposed to focusing as well upon other possible causes of Roy’s chest pain like cardiac arrest. From past records, the nurses at the Cherbourg Hospital assumed that Roy’s suffering was the outcome of alcohol intoxication and so Roy needed treatments in this line (CCQ, 2018). 

From the report, it can also be seen that while the treatments as well as management that was given to Roy both in the first and second presentations were agreeable by Dr.  Treston Greg, those that were given during the third presentation were far below the management and treatment that was given to Roy. This is because Roy’s critical conditions were sufficiently visible to warrant better treatment and management. However, basing their arguments on drunkards who had visited the facility, the Cherbourg Hospital’s nurses assumed that Roy equally needed to be given some space to relax that he would come back to his mind. As a result of this assumption, CN Gay failed to carry out a chest X-ray examination as had been recommended by Dr. Nhapi on Roy.

Another reason that was associated to the inappropriate clinical care service that was offered to Roy is improper documentation of Roy’s medical progress. For three presentations, the reviewers found out that there was no proper documentation of Roy’s medical information. Dr. Nhapi, for instance, failed to conduct a clinical review on Roy notwithstanding several reminders that he was given by Nurse B (CCQ, 2018). Similarly, Dr. Nhapi, who served in the facility as a senior and experienced care provider, confirmed that he did not know how to use the Queensland Adult Deterioration Detection System (Q-ADDS) chart. This indicates that Dr. Nhapi did not understand how the chart worked and so he could not provide the necessary clinical response to Roy (CCQ, 2018).

Therapeutic Communication and Accountability in Health Care

Principles of collaborative practice require effective and successful communication in an inter-professional team to have a level of knowledge regarding the expertise and roles of other careers in their health care team. It is on this backdrop that WHO advocates for inter-professional education as a means both of skill development and knowledge acquisition for application within medical settings (Abdolrahimi et al., 2017). One form of effective communication among inter-professional team is therapeutic communication (TC). TC refers to the process of using communication techniques to promote the welfare of patients undergoing a health care practice (Fisher et al., 2018). Accountability, conversely, refers to taking responsibility for actions, choices, and decisions taken during a person’s professional practice (Pokorney et al., 2019).

The relationship between TC and accountability in the healthcare industry is very significant. In the process of carrying out their professional activities, nurses and medical practitioners often meet various challenges daily. According to Barker (2016), owing to the demanding nature of patients on nurses, nurses usually face the challenge of balancing between their professional practice and their patients’ clinical needs thus have to balance between their daily increased workloads, organizational requirements, higher acuity patient arrangements/schedules, and greater patient-to-nurse ratio (Garvey, 2015). To be able to meet this challenge, nurses should be ready to take responsibility for broadening their clinical skills and knowledge and continuously employ strong standard proof-based practices that would help them in guiding their individual medical interventions when trying to meet their clients’ needs. McFarlane et al. (2018) reason that progressive medical competency needs robust engagement in undertakings that enhance their opportunities to maintain their clinical knowledge and skills needed in the process of offering distinct health care to their patients.

From the case, the relationship between TC and accountability can be gleaned from the absence of effective communication between Roy and Cherbourg’s care providers. For one reason, the nurses suggest alcohol withdrawal and intoxication for Roy as opposed to attentively listening to Roy to diagnose the correct problem that Roy is suffering from so that the right treatment and management could be provided.  Owing to a lack of TC offered to Roy, it is noted that Roy leaves the hospital without waiting to be attended to effectively. Additionally, during the three presentations, the nurses did not keenly pay attention to Roy to better care provision to Roy. As a result of lack of effective TC, none of the nurses is seen willing to be willing to take accountability regarding the death of Roy, and this is attributed to the fact that there were no records taken regarding Roy’s health condition during each and every presentation. Ultimately, because of ineffective TC and accountability, Roy lost his life.

Conclusion

From the above exposition, this paper concludes that the finding by Coroner as has been discussed in this paper is true.  Similarly, the paper has equally shown that TC and accountability are related to one another and that nurses need to take the two into consideration since they are requisites for quality care provision and enhanced patients’ health outcomes.