This paper discusses the unsatisfactory professional conduct displayed by the Clinical Specialist nurse (CNS) in the provided case study. There are four main points of conduct that need to be discussed firstly the lack of an appropriate assessment of the patient’s condition being undertaken. Secondly the obvious lack of appropriate documentation that was recorded during and after the consultation. Thirdly the fact the medical officer (MO) was never informed nor did any requests be made for the doctor to examine the patient. Finally the illegal dispensing of an S11 prescription drug that being the Panadeine Forte the CNS gave to the client at the hospital and the packet she dispensed for him to take home. The nurse did not “practise in a safe and competent Manner” (2013, p. 2), “in accordance with the standards of the profession and broader health system” (2013, p. 2) nor did she”practise and conduct herself in accordance with the laws relevant to the profession and practice of nursing” (2013, p. 2). These are Statements 1, 2 and 3 consecutively of the code of professional conduct for nurses in Australia.
Unsatisfactory professional conduct can be defined as any practice under taken by a health professional which is deemed considerably below the standards expected of said professionals training and experience or includes any violations of National law, and/or breaches of the code of professional conduct for Nurses and Midwives in Australia (2013, p. 2) (Professional standards) (Definition of Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct and Professional Misconduct). In this case the CNS stated she had around twenty years’ experience in Emergency Nursing including taking an advanced trauma course (2012, p. 8)Thereby not acting within her scope of practice and below her expected training and experience level presented a breach in her professional standards as a nurse.
When the client presented to her emergency department on the night in question the CNS undertook a rudimentary examine where she as stated in the case study she observed that the calf was dusky in colour (2012, p. 8)but she also admits she did no further examinations including but not limited to standard observations such as blood pressure, heart rate and respiratory observations, (2012, p. 13) neither did she obtain a past health history on anything other than the that of the femoral-popliteal bypass surgery and vascular surgeon visit three weeks earlier (2012, pp. 8-9).
The nurse made an assumption that the injury occurred at the beach and thereby treated it as a suspected musculoskeletal injury so did not complete an n accurate and detailed assessment of the injury. In doing so she was lapse in her duty as a health care professional and so acted unprofessionally toward her client in that she did not offer him an accurate unbiased examination. (2012, pp. 14-15)
In failure to document thoroughly and accurately the observations taken, any decisions to why a MO was not contacted...