Read the following scenario and then reflect upon the actions it portrays.
Last module, the chairperson of your hospital’s Peer Review Committee (PRC) passed you in the hallway and said, “I’m glad I ran into you. You’re going to be peer-reviewed.” The chairperson continued, saying, “Your manager found out that you called the Texas Department of State Health Services two months ago and reported that LVNs were being allowed to do the complete initial assessment on patients. Also, you made some medication errors over the past couple of months. I’ll let you know when the meeting is to occur.”
You heard nothing more about the PRC meeting. Today, the chairperson came to you and told you that you had been reported to the Texas Board of Nursing. She said, “It was just felt by the work group that you are a troublemaker and lack the skills to practice due to your med errors. I’m also giving you a ‘heads up’ that you are going to be put on suspension for at least three days by your unit manager.”
Applying Rule 217.19, what, if any, violations of the rule occurred in the above scenario?
- No, the scenario does not describe violations of Rule 217.19. Explain which parts of the scenario might cause questions, but why they are not violations of Rule 217.19. You will lose major points if explanation with critical thinking is not provided. (If you believe that violations did occur, leave this space blank and proceed to the next section.)
- Yes, violations occurred. First, review your learning about incident-based peer review. First, list the criteria from Rule 217.19 that were violated. Then following that, explain how each criterion was violated.
