Student name and ID number:
Patrick Mbomegue MBO13363243
Section: Comments:
General Score: 23/26
General: Systematic ABCDE approach evident
throughout. Well Done. Professional approach to
patient evident (PPE/Dignity acknowledged) but
sometimes you were also sometimes using
jargon/phrases that caused Sofia to worry e.g.
‘that is very low – alarming..’ – please have a think
about how you can develop this aspect of your
practice. Small inaccuracy on NEWs2 chart –
Air/Oxygen not charted– please review for future
practice.
Airway Score: 3 /6
Airway: Partial assessment of airway, but you
could have gone further here to evaluate e.g.
assessing for gurgling/snoring as well as stridor.
Clear articulation of airway patency based on
verbal response which was good
Breathing Score: 6 /13
Breathing: Relevant data considered & concern
noted. Some appropriate further assessments
suggested but there were no interventions
suggested here. It would be reasonable to check
target SpO2 & prescription with a view to giving
Oxygen therapy in these circumstances. It would
also be sensible to sit Sofia up to facilitate gas
exchange. Please review course materials on
interventions for breathing to develop your
practice.
Circulation Score: 13 /17
Circulation: Relevant data considered & concern
noted. Inaccurate technique for measuring CRT –
please review for future practice. Some
appropriate further assessments & interventions
suggested – e.g. ECG, 2 large cannulas, IVABs –
it would have been good to get the rest of the
Sepsis 6 bundle but you have done well here Well
Done. Please note that we would not usually give
1L/15mins as fluid challenge – this is too much it
would usually be 250-500mls.
Disability Score: 9 /13
Disability: A bit rushed here. Relevant data
considered. Concern acknowledged. Pain
assessment prompted analgesia which was good.
Exposure Score: 6 /7
Exposure: Relevant data considered & able to
pick up additional information during Exposure
about the wound which was good & prompted you
to suggest a wound dressing.
Other Score: 4 /7
Other:
Although explanations were provided to the
patient, it was often done in a way that caused her
to worry. Identified Sepsis as presentation with
some rationale but this would have benefitted
from a bit more development. Well Done
Summary Score: 6 /11
Summary: The SBAR was a bit inconsistent – the
headline was clear ‘NEWs =13’ which was good.
However, the information that you gave to support
was often vague & a bit confusing. You were able
to convey concern about Sepsis, which was good,
but I would recommend giving responders a
definite timeframe to attend within e.g. 10 minutes
rather than ASAP. This is something to keep
practising I think – on a practical note, it may be
worth writing the numbers of the observations
onto the chart so that you don’t doubt yourself in
the moment.
TOTAL SCORE: 70 /100
Overall Comments:
Well Done. A bit rushed but a systematic approach was evident with
relevant data considered in the correct sequence & some appropriate
generic interventions suggested. Breathing was much weaker than
other sections as you did not consider giving Oxygen – this is
something for you to review & develop in your future practice. You
were able to identify Sepsis as the presenting condition which is great
and identify some interventions relating to Sepsis 6 – it would have
been even better if you had remembered CRP, Cultures, VBG for
lactate but you did well here. Well Done. You were able to deliver care
efficiently, but I think this came at the cost of listening to Sofia’s
concerns – think about how you can develop this in future. SBAR
escalation would also benefit from a bit more attention & practice.
Overall, good job – it is evident that you have worked hard & achieved
the learning outcomes for the module.
Marker Name: Catherine Jones
Date: 9.5.24