| Category | Assignment | Subject | Nursing |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Middlesex University London | Module Title | MHN3803 Knowledge in Mental Health |
| Word Count | 5000words ±10% |
|---|---|
| Assessment Type | Summative |
| Academic Year | 2024-25 |
Students will be expected to demonstrate achievement of all the intended learning outcomes through critical appraisal of the evidence/research of an identified aspect of care management of individuals with complex care provision observed in their field of practice and a written proposal for a quality improvement (QI) initiative to improve practice ((5000words ±10%).
On completion of this module, the successful student will be able to:
1. Critically appraise the evidence/research you find regarding the care management of individuals with complex care provision (this can include co-morbidities, several complex health conditions or multiple care /support needs)
2. Critically appraise the evidence/research you find regarding supporting patients and their families with complex problems (including supporting them to manage their physical and mental health needs and make choices about their care
3. Critically apply knowledge and understanding of bio-psycho-social nursing and clinical decision making in mental health nursing practice.
4. Critically apply knowledge and understanding of the professional, ethical and legal concepts relating to the complex care needs of the patient, families and the actions of the multidisciplinary team about healthcare provision.
5. Exhibit critical insight into the coordination of care for the individual with complex care needs and concerns, which may arise with the quality of care, proposing a quality improvement initiative to improve practice and nursing knowledge in the context of mental health nursing. (By completing the proposal, you are covering this.)
The starting point to identify a QI initiative is to reflect on your clinical practice experiences. Have you observed that a particular aspect of the care could be improved/changed, and how you might achieve this? This will be your identified quality improvement initiative.
Please state the title of your QI initiative
(Recommended word limit is 150 words, excluding from the word count). This section should be done last to ensure that all components are captured from the proposal.
Provide a background of the problem (problem description) - a written summary of the complex care provision needs from your field of practice that also identifies the proposed QI initiative. When writing this section, you will need to consider what the problem is that you are addressing. Who is affected? When is it a problem, and what factors contribute to the problem? Why does it matter? How does it affect the patients/service users and their relatives/carers or staff? This aspect will address relevant knowledge and understanding of bio-psychosocial nursing and scientific principles in relation to clinical decisions of your identified problem. You must also address any professional, ethical and legal concepts related to your identified problem.
Critical appraisal of the evidence/literature related to the identified proposed QI initiative to set the scene and provide evidence of what is known about your identified problem in the literature, clinical practice. The literature review should address background information on your problem; existing evidence that this is a problem; evidence, if any, of how your identified problem is currently addressed; evidence about what does/does not work. This section of the work should conclude with what you have identified within the literature and what your observations are from practice that led you to wanting to propose an improvement/change, i.e. ‘how do you know an improvement needs to be made?’ The literature review is the underpinning evidence to justify the proposed QI initiative.
“The Model for Improvement” approach can be used to help structure the proposal, as it also incorporates the PDSA cycle, which you will need to use
i. Aim - define the aim of the QI initiative - what do you want to accomplish and why? You will also need to address your specific goals for improvement. Make sure your aim is SMART, well-defined and at a minimum describes the target population, the desired improvement and the targeted time frame.
ii. Key stakeholders (interested parties) - Identify key stakeholders who will benefit; think, what might be the impact and why? Key stakeholders would be groups and individuals who may be impacted or affected by your proposed QI initiative, or they may be influential in determining the success or failure of the proposed QI initiative.
iii. Method - a description of the change(s) you want to introduce. What are you going to do differently to generate an improvement? You will need to consider how the proposed change(s) may lead to improvement and the evidence base that underpins the proposed change(s). What implementation strategies will you use to introduce and support your change(s)? Implementation strategies are the methods or techniques used to introduce and sustain a change (King’s Improvement Science:2018), For e.g. delivering educational sessions, distributing printed materials such as leaflets that you will create, and championing by influential people.
iv. Establishing measures - how will you conduct regular measurement/assessment to establish that a change is an improvement? Please note that this is the proposal stage, and you will not be actively undertaking a project to gather baseline data, but you will need to explain the rationale for collecting baseline data. Explain how you collect the data, i.e. qualitative (narrative) data or quantitative (numerical) data or both if you were carrying out the project. You should include in this section how the PDSA will be implemented concerning baseline data collection. How you will analyse the data, i.e. an example of the tool you would use, which you can find samples from the Institute for Health Care Improvement.
Plan: what do you want to do / how/ how often/ who will be involved? How long will it take? How will you gather “before” data?
Will the intervention be carried out on the ward?
Study- evaluation. Includes gathering post-intervention data. Analyse it. Has this worked?
Act. If it has not made a difference, you would need to do another PDSA cycle or as many as are required. If the intervention has made a difference, you will do the thing on an ongoing basis
vi. Governance & ethics -have you identified if there are any ethical and governance issues for the proposed changes? Your proposal should clarify if the changes you are proposing will require approval, and if any ethical issues may arise from the proposed change(s) and how they will be addressed.
Appendix (only if relevant and linked to the work, this could be an example of the data assessment tool)
*Will need to include reference to confidentiality as per the Essential Guide Policy, and the Module Handbooks also make it clear now as standard information ethics and governance
Any tables or images utilised in the main body must be relevant and referenced to the work, and will be included in the word count.
You will be assigned a supervisor from the team who will see you for one session,1:1 and provide feedback on one page of your proposal.
Once you have been informed of your supervisor, please contact them to arrange a meeting. This is extra support and should be utilised!
|
NIP/CYP/MHN 3803 Assignment marking criteria rubric
|
|
Criteria |
Marks |
14-20 |
11-13 |
9-10 |
8 |
0-7 |
|
Breadth, depth and focus of content in relation to the question set for the assignment and all learning outcomes for the module. Word count 5000 ±10% All requirements for essay submitted
|
/20 |
The content clearly addresses all the module learning outcomes to meet the requirements of the module assessment Breadth, depth and focus of the content is sustained throughout with a comprehensive literature review that is well informed with an excellent QI proposal
|
The content addresses all the module learning outcomes to meet the requirements of the module assessment. Breadth, depth and focus of the content throughout is very good with a comprehensive literature review and QI proposal
|
The content addresses all the learning outcomes to a satisfactory level to meet the requirements of the module assessment. Breadth, depth and focus of the content is good but greater focus on reviewing the literature and structuring of the QI proposal is required
|
The content partially addresses the learning outcomes to meet the requirements of the module assessment. Breadth, depth and focus of the content is limited. The literature review and QI proposals is adequate as there are some areas that are quite superficial and not clearly addressed to a satisfactory level.
|
The content has not clearly addressed the learning outcomes to a satisfactory level to meet the requirements of the module assessment. Breadth, depth and focus of the content is inadequate and clearly lacks focus. The literature review is superficial as lacks sustained discussion and the QI proposal is inadequate. |
|
|
|
26-35 |
21-25 |
17-20 |
14-18 |
0-13 |
|
Knowledge and understanding of module content applied competently in the work showing ability to critically analyse relevant concepts, models and arguments.
|
/35 |
The work demonstrates evidence of application of excellent and well informed knowledge and understanding of the module content. There is evidence of higher level of abstract thinking as the work integrates knowledge outside of the module content to construct own meaning and learning. Critical analysis of the relevant issues for proposed QI initiative sustained throughout the work with application of relevant concepts, models and arguments. Clear evidence of synthesis demonstrated in the work |
The work demonstrates evidence of application of a very good level of knowledge and understanding of the module content. Critical analysis of the relevant issues for proposed QI initiative addressed in the work with evidence of discussion of a reasonable amount of information in a meaningful way to show application of relevant concepts, models and arguments. Work shows the beginning of synthesis
|
The work demonstrates evidence of application of a good level of knowledge and understanding of the module content. Critical analysis of the relevant issues for the proposed QI initiative addressed with some application of the relevant concepts, models and argument evident but is not sustained throughout as some aspects of the content not always relevant in the work.
|
The work demonstrates evidence of application of an adequate level of knowledge and understanding of the module content. Limited critical analysis of the relevant issues for the proposed QI initiative. Key concepts, models and arguments have been superficially applied in the work as aspects of the content not relevant or unclear.
|
The work demonstrates evidence of application of an inadequate level of knowledge and understanding of the module content. Relevant issues for the proposed QI initiative are quite simplistic and wholly descriptive. Key concepts, models and arguments have not been adequately applied and/or in some areas there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the issues being discussed with content that is not relevant.
|
|
|
|
26-35 |
21-25 |
17-20 |
14-18 |
0-13 |
|
Discussion shows application of theory to practice effectively utilising evidence/research from a range of relevant sources to show safe critical examination of clinical practice and development of the proposal for change |
/35 |
There is clear extensive integration of relevant evidence/research in the work to show application of theory to practice. Relevant arguments for QI initiative proposal presented with well-informed understanding of theories and safe effective clinical practice. Evidence of broad and relevant reading resources beyond coursework to develop and effectively support the work. |
There is good integration of relevant evidence/research in the work to show application of theory to practice. Relevant arguments for QI initiative proposal presented with good understanding of theories and safe effective clinical practice. Evidence of a good range of relevant reading resources to develop and effectively the work
|
There is integration of relevant evidence/research in the work to show application of theory to practice. Relevant arguments for QI initiative proposal presented with a satisfactory level of understanding of theories and safe clinical practice. Evidence of conventional reading resources to develop and effectively support the work
|
There is limited integration of relevant evidence /research in the work to show application of theory to practice. Relevant arguments for QI initiative proposal presented with limited depth of understanding of theories however, safe clinical practice evident. The work shows evidence of adequate but limited range of reading resources to develop and effectively support the work
|
There is inadequate integration of relevant evidence/research in the work to show application of theory to practice. Relevant arguments for QI initiative proposal poorly presented with limited/lack of depth of understanding of theories and unsafe discussion of clinical practice in the work. The work shows evidence of a very limited range of reading which are either dated or inappropriate resources to develop and effectively support the work |
|
|
|
7-10 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
0-3 |
|
Presentation and organisation of work. Referencing system complies with Harvard referencing and citation style. Similarity score (please indicate) Blue: No matching text Green: One word to 24% matching text Yellow: 25-49% matching text Orange: 50-74% matching text Red: 75-100% matching text |
/10
|
Very well expressed and very good understanding and interpretation of the assessment guidelines. The abstract gives a succinct overview of the proposal which follows through in the main body. Work is fluently written using correct terminology with very good structure and organisation in a logical coherent manner. No evident errors with grammar, spelling and syntax. All key sources cited. Referencing complies with the Harvard referencing and citation style in the work and the reference list.
|
Very well expressed and good understanding and interpretation of the assessment guidelines. The abstract gives a succinct overview of the proposal which follows through in the main body. Structure of the work is logical and coherent using correct terminology. Minor errors with grammar, spelling and syntax in some areas. Most key sources cited. Referencing complies with the Harvard referencing and citation style with minor errors evident in the work and reference list
|
Well expressed and reasonable understanding and interpretation of the assessment guidelines. The abstract needs to be more focussed to reflect the content in the main body. Structure of the work on the whole is good with use of correct terminology. There are aspects of the discussion that lack flow and progression of ideas. Attention needs to be given to grammar, spelling and syntax as errors are evident. Harvard referencing and citation style inconsistent. The referencing in the essay and reference list needs attention as errors are evident.
|
Acceptable expression understanding and interpretation of the assessment guidelines. The abstract needs to be more focussed to reflect content in the main body .A reasonable attempt made to structure the work however, the discussion lacks logical flow and coherence is some areas. It starts off well but deteriorates towards the end with poor links between the paragraphs to bring elements of the work together. Use of correct terminology, spelling, grammar and syntax needs attention as some persistent extensive issues in the work. Harvard referencing and citation style inconsistent. The referencing in the essay and reference list needs attention as extensive flaws and omissions are evident. |
Unclear and confusing expression, understanding and interpretation of the assessment guidelines. The abstract does not follow through in the main body and lacks sufficient information. Structure of the work is disorganised and lacks clear logical flow of discussion. The content lacks direction and purpose. The work is very difficult to understand as many points unclear due to poor spelling, grammar and syntax throughout the work. The work lacks use of correct terminology and where evident this has been misused. Harvard referencing and citation style is incorrect. The referencing in the essay and reference list needs attention as extensive flaws and omissions are evident.
|
|
Total Score %
20 point scale |
/100
/20
|
|
|
Do You Need MHN3803 Assignment for This Question
Order Non-Plagiarized Assignment
If you are stressed about the assignment on MHN3803 Knowledge in Mental Health, then there is no need to worry now! Whether you need Nursing Assignment Help or Marketing Assignment Help, you will get expert guidance and help on report writing services, which will make your concepts strong. We also provide you with free assignment solutions that will help you understand. And the best part? All the content is 100% original, written by PhD expert writers, and is well-researched, so that you get the best quality. So don't delay now, boost your grades with our help!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
