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

Knowledge and understanding

Your work has covered a range of the module content to address the essay requirements and show knowledge and understanding of the concepts. Understanding of the chosen paper was demonstrated to some extent in the work although your three themes  could have been addressed with more depth.

.

Discussion and analysis

There is a good level of discussion in the work with evidence of some  analysis in aspects of the work. You have presented some good points in the work to show knowledge of research in the work and needed to deveolp this further in the critique which needed more focussed discussion. Where you have discussed the EBP  you have given an example  of how this can be achieved in practice showing that you are linking theory to practice . The discussion on ethics did not fully develop as you  did not clearly ntegrate EBP in the discussions

Evidence of reading

You have presented an extensive reference list of current and up to date sources of literature which is good. However,  there was scope for you to use he evidence more effectively to develop the level of analysis in the work as this was not fully sustained.

Academic style (including referencing, structure, grammar)

Work is written in an acceptable academic style although you do need to pay attention to syntax as some sentences were unclear. Minor omissions evident in the reference list.

Summary

The work has addressed the learning outcomes for the module 

Feed Forward 

  There was potential for the work  to develop further  especially the level of analysis in the work as this was not fully sustained.  As you progress you need to develop your thinking beyond the  the guidlines as they are there to provide a basic guide to start your essay but you need to further develop your work to show higher order thinking. You mainly make statements from the evidence to make a point or give a view. To progress further you need to  apply the evidence through discussion of what the evidence is stating and how it links to concept or arguments being put forward by you.

 Proof read your work for errors with syntax and accuracy of your sources

Please follow the links below for further support.

https://library.roehampton.ac.uk/studytoolkit/studiosity 

https://moodle.roehampton.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=3700 

Signature (marker)

Mariama Seray-Wurie

Date

03/06/2024