Medical Options of Surgery vs Non Surgery Treatment of Colles Fracture
I would like to discuss the options of surgery vs non surgery treatment of a Colles Fracture.
The Case Study: A Critical Analysis of Care (2000 words +/- 10%)
In this part of the assignment you will apply the principles of reflection to critically analyse and evaluate an episode of care you have experienced relating to any type of undifferentiated/undiagnosed minor illness. You should identify your own learning needs and areas for development derived from the case and demonstrate critical analysis and evaluation of these with reference to contemporary literature, research, national policy/guidelines etc. to support your discussion. You should also make some recommendations to improve either your own practice or that of the clinical setting and explore how your role has or will develop in light of your findings.
It is important that your case study is not a referenced description of the case or your actions and you must maintain patient, staff and organisational confidentiality within your work as any breach of confidentiality will result in the awarding of a fail mark.
You are not required to use a reflective model but your case study should include the following sections (the principles of reflection are shown in blue as a guide):
Introduction 10% approx. (What?)
• Briefly introduce your role and the clinical setting – maintaining confidentiality
• Provide an overview of the case including relevant details relating to the history, presenting complaint, assessment and management of the patient.
• Include a brief rationale for why this case has been selected and identify your own learning needs and areas for development derived from the case.
Main Body of assignment 80% approx. (So What?)
• You must critically analyse and evaluate the pivotal aspects of the case that you have identified for further learning and support your arguments with contemporary evidence/literature, research, national guidelines/policy etc. using the Cite Them Right Harvard referencing system.
• You must present a balanced view and not simply identify poor practice – where the care given has been of a high standard this should be identified and celebrated.
• Your discussion must also take into consideration how your analysis will meet the module learning outcomes.
Conclusion 10% approx. (Now What?)
This section should not introduce any new discussion/information, but should summarise the threads of the discussion in the main body. Think about:
• What has been learnt during your critical analysis?
• How will your role/practice develop in light of your findings?
• Make some recommendations to improve either your own practice or that of the clinical setting based on your discussion.
The Reference List
• Compiled using the Cite Them Right Harvard referencing system (online guide available at www.citethemright.com).
• You should demonstrate evidence of widespread reading using relevant and contemporary evidence based literature, research studies, policy etc. used to support the discussion (NB. Websites such as NHS Choices, Web MD and Patient UK are not suitable academic resources).
• You may include any further relevant information relating to the case in the appendices section. The content of the appendices does not count towards the overall word count. If you include case notes these must be transcribed from the originals and must not contain any patient identifiable information.
Other Things to Consider:
• Terminology and abbreviations: you must avoid using slang terms and non-standard abbreviations in your academic writing e.g. abx instead of antibiotic. All terms you wish to abbreviate should be written in full with the abbreviation afterwards in brackets when you first include them in the work, following this the abbreviation can be used.
• Spelling and grammar: spelling errors and poor grammar must be corrected before submission as this detracts from the overall value of the work and does not reflect undergraduate level writing.
• Format: avoid using several small paragraphs when writing; only start a new paragraph when the subject under discussion changes.
• Word count: you are permitted to stray no more than 10% above or below the word count without penalty; however going above/below this limit will have an impact on the mark awarded.
• Word count exclusions: headings/sub-headings, in-text references, contents of tables, appendices or the final reference list do not count towards the overall word count and should be deducted from the overall total.