Gibbs Reflective Cycle

Nurses' primary care roles have grown substantially in recent years; nurse prescribing expands the paramount functions of the nurses’ and midwives (Creedon 2010). Nursing roles have been rapidly evolving in Ireland, was implemented in 2007, which stemmed from the publication of the report of the Commission on nursing (Government of Ireland 1998). Evidence suggests that the introduction and roll out of nurse prescribing have increased patient access to medicines and the patients have been satisfied with nurse prescribing (Latter et al. 2005). Nurse prescribers have also welcomed this development and have embraced the extension of their role (Bradley et al. 2005). The prescriptive authority of nurses and midwives was founded on the dual framework

As per NMBI (2015) standards, communication is very important during each step of the medication prescribing process. When healthcare professionals are not communicating effectively, patient safety is at risk for several reasons. Similarly, lack of communication creates situations where medical errors can occur. In this assignment, I will use ‘Gibbs Reflective Cycle (Gibbs 1988) to describe and analyse an episode in relation to a medication incident. The purpose of using Gibbs reflective cycle is to describe the incident and the feelings during the incident. This is followed by evaluating positive and negative aspects of the situation. The sequence of stages will assist me to focus on all aspects of the event and how improvements could occur when faced with a similar situation again. Throughout

When I rushed to her, she had already finished one litre of contrast. Suzan has a background in liver and kidney problems and I realized that the contrast drink could cause her more difficulties. I informed Suzan about the scenario that happened, the anticipating complications and discussed the solutions to prevent further complications. I contacted the team doctor immediately regarding the incident and requested an intravenous infusion be charted to protect her kidneys. Additionally, I advised Suzan to drink plenty of fluids to flush out the contrast from the body. I checked the patient's file and a CT scan (computed tomography) of the abdomen were requested by the consultant on admission and the procedure was done on the previous day. It had appeared that Suzan was booked in for the same investigation twice with no communication between the radiology department and ward staff. This resulted in the patient receiving two litres of contrast in 24 hours. The radiology department was contacted for clarification of the incident. The radiologist was unconcerned and suggested that the contrast was not a problem. However, I expressed my concern to the radiologist to discuss this issue with the concerned radiographer. I filled an incident form and discussed the