HCA 322 EDU Experience Tradition/hca322edu.com

HCA 322 Entire Course (2 Set)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Set of Papers for each Assignment (DQ — 1 Set)

HCA 322 Week 1 Assignment Informed Consent (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 1 DQ 1 Ethical Concerns and Considerations

HCA 322 Week 2 Assignment Genetics Information (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 2 DQ 1 Patient Rights

HCA 322 Week 2 DQ 2 Courtroom Drama

HCA 322 Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography HIPAA Privacy Rule (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography DNR (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography Institutional Code of Ethics (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 3 DQ 1 Patient Safety Act

HCA 322 Week 3 DQ 2 Hot Coffee

HCA 322 Week 4 Assignment Stark Law (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 4 DQ 1 Ethical Resource Allocation

HCA 322 Week 5 DQ 1 Compliance Presentation

HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper HIPAA Privacy Rule (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper DNR (2 Papers)

HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper Institutional Code of Ethics (2 Papers)

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 1 Assignment Informed Consent (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Papers

Informed Consent. Review each of the four commonly used consent forms listed below and select one for use in this assignment:

• Anesthesia

• Blood transfusion

• Special procedure

• Surgery

Identify the five requirements within your selected consent form. Explain where and how each element is noted within the actual form itself. Then, analyze the purpose for using consent forms from both the patient’s and organization’s viewpoint.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 1 DQ 1 Ethical Concerns and Considerations

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

Ethical Concerns and Considerations. On Day 1 of this course, your instructor will assign you to one of the three options listed below. For your initial post, address the discussion questions associated with option you were assigned. For your responses, select two classmates who were assigned different options than you. Respond to at least two classmates using the required response prompt for their option (e.g., if your initial post was Option 1, then respond to posts from Option 2 and 3 or if your initial post was Option 2, then respond to posts from Option 1 and 3). Your initial post should be at least 250 words; your response post should be at least 100 words.

Option 1: Internal Review Board (IRB) Case Studies

· • Review each of the six IRB case studies from Yale University.

· • Select one case and describe it in your discussion post. Indicate in your post which case number you are using.

· • Discuss why you believe the determination was made and whether you believe it was the right or wrong decision.

· • Support your view with at least two scholarly sources from the Ashford University Library. Your initial response should be at least 250 words.

Required Response to Option 1: In a substantive post, explain why you agree or disagree with your colleague’s discussion as to whether the determination was right or wrong. Provide additional supportive evidence as to your agreement or disagreement. Your responses should be at least 100 words.

Option 2: Ethics Committee Case Study John, a 32 year-old lawyer, had worried for several years about developing Huntington’s chorea, a neurological disorder that appears in a person’s 30s or 40s, bringing rapid uncontrollable twitching and contractions and progressive, irreversible dementia. It leads to death in about 10 years. John’s mother died from this disease. Huntington’s is autosomal dominant and afflicts 50% of an affected parent’s offspring. John had indicated too many people that he would prefer to die rather than to live and die as his mother had. He was anxious, drank heavily, and had intermittent depression, for which he saw a psychiatrist. Nevertheless, he was still a productive lawyer. John first noticed facial twitching three months ago and two neurologists independently confirmed a diagnosis of Huntington’s. He explained his situation to his psychiatrist and requested help committing suicide.

When the psychiatrist refused, John reassured him that he did not plan to attempt suicide any time soon. However, when he went home, John pinned a note to his shirt to explain his actions and to refuse any medical assistance that might be offered, then, ingested all of his antidepressant medication. His wife, who did not yet know about his diagnosis, found him unconscious and rushed him to the emergency room without removing the note.

· • What should the care team at the emergency room do?

· • Discuss this question using the following topics and analyzing how these issues are applied to the decision made by the emergency room care team. Use at least two scholarly sources to support your discussion. Your initial post should be a minimum of 250 words.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 2 Assignment Genetics Information (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Papers

Genetic Information. Review the following Nondiscrimination Act Case Studies document (available in your online classroom). Include the following in your paper:

• Write a synopsis of the cases included. 
 • Analyze the cases under study in this document. Should the court have invalidated civil rights as they did or did the court make a poor decision? Explain your answer. 
 • Determine the appropriateness of such a decision based upon what GINA (the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act) is expected to do. Your paper must be two to three pages in length, excluding the title and reference pages, and include at least two scholarly sources, not including the course text.

Your paper and all sources must be formatted and/or cited according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 2 DQ 1 Patient Rights

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

Patient Rights. Your instructor will assign you one of the following options by Day 1 of Week Two. In your initial discussion post, address the questions associated with your assigned option. Include the option number in the subject/title line of your post. You must use at least two scholarly sources in your post. Respond to at least two classmates using the required response prompt for their option (e.g., if your initial post was Option 1, then respond to posts from Option 2 and 3 or if your initial post was Option 2, then respond to posts from Option 1 and 3). Your initial post should be at least 250 words; your response post should be at least 100 words.

Option 1: Patient Rights-Euthanasia For this option, you will take a look at the ethics surrounding euthanasia (intentionally ending a life to relieve pain or suffering) and the right to live versus right to die arguments that were present within the Teri Schiavo and Karen Ann Quinlan cases. To being, view the Craig Ewart at Dignitas (Switzerland), The Terri Schiavo Story, and the Euthanasia-Whose life is it, anyway? videos. Then, research and discuss the topic of euthanasia. For your initial post, pick one case (either Teri Schiavo or Karen Ann Quinlan) and one side of the argument (either right to live or right to die) and explain how you would have handled this particular case differently in order to protect the patient. Your initial post must be a minimum of 250 words.

Option 1 Required Response: Regardless of your personal beliefs, respond to your classmate’s post by considering the opposite side of their argument. Explain what the other side’s logic was in relation to the same case your classmate chose (e.g., if your classmate selected right to live, give the rationale behind the right to die argument for that case). Each response must be a minimum of 100 words.

Option 2: Patient Rights-Assisted Suicide Review the Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s “60 Minutes” Interview video. Research and discuss physician assisted suicide. Pick a side on this argument and explain why you selected that particular side using scholarly research to support your decision. Explain how this view would address the case of Dr. Kevorkian? In your post, explain whether you believe Dr. Kevorkian was a hero or a murderer? (Remember, there is no correct answer to this question…but support your opinion with research and facts). Your initial response should be at least 250 words.

Option 2 Required Response: Regardless of your personal beliefs, respond to your classmate’s post by considering the opposite side of their argument. Explain how this approach would affect the outcome for Dr. Kevorkian. For example, if your classmate responded that Dr. Kevorkian was a hero, respond to their post by explaining the reasoning behind the view that he was a murderer and what that would mean for him. What are the ethical principles behind this point of view? Your response must contain at least 100 words.

Option 3: Patient Rights and Privacy Review the Electronic Health Records: Privacy and Security video. Research and discuss electronic health records (EHR). Explain how EHR are intended to protect the patient. Discuss any barriers that may prevent necessary protections. Your initial response should be at least 250 words.

Option 3 Required Response: Respond to your classmate’s post and explain the concept that EHR might notbe able to fully protect the patient. In what ways could this be better or worse than paper records? Then, refer to the barriers mentioned by your classmate and describe the potential policies that could reduce those barriers. Your response must contain at least 100 words.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 2 DQ 2 Courtroom Drama

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

Courtroom Drama. Your instructor will select one of the following court cases to dramatize in this week’s discussion board. Your instructor will select (or ask for volunteers) one student to be the “plaintiff” and one student to be the “defendant” from the case. The remaining class members will become the jury. The plaintiff and defendant are exempt from response post requirements for this forum. They only need to build a strong case in their favor via their initial video post. Each participant: the plaintiff, defendant, and jury members, will create their initial post using a YouTube video to explain their case and/or reasoning. Review the YouTube Webcam Quick-Start Guide for instructions on how to create a YouTube account and YouTube video post using your computer’s webcam.

Plaintiff (the person or entity who is suing another): Research the case and present evidence as to how you were wronged in the scenario. You must use scholarly sources to support your case and include the legal and ethical violations that occurred. You will support your suit by arguing your case in a 5-minute video to the jury. Post the link to your video in the discussion forum along with your reference list by the end of Day 3.

Defendant (the person or entity who is being sued by the Plaintiff): Research the case and present evidence as to how you did not act against legal and ethical standards. You must use scholarly sources to support your case and why the issue is not a violation. You will support your suit by arguing your case in a 5-minute video to the jury. Post the link to your video in the discussion forum along with your reference list by the end of Day 3.

Jurors (the remainder of the class): Research the case, as well as the legal and ethical standards surrounding the issues from both sides. View the videos from both the plaintiff and defendant and in your video post, argue for your decision; to rule either in favor of the Plaintiff or Defendant. You will present your decision in a 5-minute video explaining the rationale behind your decision. Post the link to your video in the discussion forum along with your reference list by Day 5.

The Jurors posts are due by Day 5 (Saturday), after viewing the Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s posts from Day 3 (e.g., the Plaintiff and Defendant must post by Day 3 so that the Jurors have time to respond by Day 5).

Juror Response Posts: By the end of Day 7, review the decisions by your fellow jurors. Respond to two jurors — one who ruled in favor of the Plaintiff and one who ruled in favor of the Defendant (e.g., if you ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, you must respond to one juror who ruled in favor of the Defendant and one who ruled in favor of the Plaintiff). Discuss your agreement or disagreement with their decision and present additional facts to support your argument. Your responses must be a minimum of 100 words. The students who portrayed the Plaintiff and the Defendant are exempt from response posts.

Judge: Your instructor will serve as the judge and review all posts, and then present the final decision as decided by the majority of the jurors’ ruling. This ruling will be posted by Day 1 of Week Three. Comments regarding the final ruling are encouraged, and may be made within the discussion forum beyond the close of Week Two.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography DNR (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Annotated Bibliography for 2 Final Papers

Annotated Bibliography. Review the instructions for your Final Paper which are located in Week Five of your online course of in the “Components of Course Evaluation” section of this guide. Select one case which you will be researching for your Final Paper. Provide a brief description of the case you will be researching. Then, find at least six scholarly resources that are connected with the ethical dilemma and/or case- related content. You will use these sources for your Final Paper. Create an Annotated Bibliography that contains these six (or more) sources, not including the course text, as well as the following elements (you may include more than these):

· • APA formatted citation

· • A description of the article:

− What does it address?

− What were the outcomes or conclusions?

• How does this apply to your case study analysis?

− Does it provide insights into an ethical concept?

− Is it a similar case to the one you are analyzing?

− Does it offer suggestions from best practices in ethical decision making?

Your Annotated Bibliography should be a minimum of two pages (excluding the title page). Your Annotated Bibliography will serve as your reference page. Your paper and all sources must be formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Visit the Ashford Writing Center and view this Sample Annotated Bibliography for an example of correct annotated bibliography form.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography HIPAA Privacy Rule (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Annotated Bibliography for 2 Final Papers

Annotated Bibliography. Review the instructions for your Final Paper which are located in Week Five of your online course of in the “Components of Course Evaluation” section of this guide. Select one case which you will be researching for your Final Paper. Provide a brief description of the case you will be researching. Then, find at least six scholarly resources that are connected with the ethical dilemma and/or case- related content. You will use these sources for your Final Paper. Create an Annotated Bibliography that contains these six (or more) sources, not including the course text, as well as the following elements (you may include more than these):

· • APA formatted citation

· • A description of the article:

− What does it address?

− What were the outcomes or conclusions?

• How does this apply to your case study analysis?

− Does it provide insights into an ethical concept?

− Is it a similar case to the one you are analyzing?

− Does it offer suggestions from best practices in ethical decision making?

Your Annotated Bibliography should be a minimum of two pages (excluding the title page). Your Annotated Bibliography will serve as your reference page. Your paper and all sources must be formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Visit the Ashford Writing Center and view this Sample Annotated Bibliography for an example of correct annotated bibliography form.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography Institutional Code of Ethics (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Annotated Bibliography for 2 Final Papers

Annotated Bibliography. Review the instructions for your Final Paper which are located in Week Five of your online course of in the “Components of Course Evaluation” section of this guide. Select one case which you will be researching for your Final Paper. Provide a brief description of the case you will be researching. Then, find at least six scholarly resources that are connected with the ethical dilemma and/or case- related content. You will use these sources for your Final Paper. Create an Annotated Bibliography that contains these six (or more) sources, not including the course text, as well as the following elements (you may include more than these):

· • APA formatted citation

· • A description of the article:

− What does it address?

− What were the outcomes or conclusions?

• How does this apply to your case study analysis?

− Does it provide insights into an ethical concept?

− Is it a similar case to the one you are analyzing?

− Does it offer suggestions from best practices in ethical decision making?

Your Annotated Bibliography should be a minimum of two pages (excluding the title page). Your Annotated Bibliography will serve as your reference page. Your paper and all sources must be formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Visit the Ashford Writing Center and view this Sample Annotated Bibliography for an example of correct annotated bibliography form.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 3 DQ 1 Patient Safety Act

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

Patient Safety Act. Read the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005. Then, review the information on the Core Measure Sets from The Joint Commission. Pick one of the core measures from the list at the bottom of this webpage and discuss how a hospital would typically put policies and procedures into place in order to ensure that it is following your selected core measure. Utilize at least two scholarly sources, not including the textbook, that contain research regarding how your policy and/or procedure would be put into place in a hospital setting. Your initial post must be a minimum of 250 words.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 3 DQ 2 Hot Coffee

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

Hot Coffee. Watch the series of videos related to the documentary movie Hot Coffee and/or watch the full-length feature film if you are able to procure it. Each of the video clips are approximately five minutes in length. Your initial post must be a minimum of 250 words and utilize at least two scholarly sources, not including the course text. Address the following as you respond:

• Explain whether you believe that our justice system promotes frivolous law suits or protects against them. 
 • Analyze the various elements that people should take into consideration prior to filing a lawsuit that might be perceived as “frivolous.” 
 • Explain the ethical considerations surrounding such lawsuits in the health care arena.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 4 Assignment Stark Law (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Papers

Stark Law. Two physicians, Dr. S. and Dr. V., leased a nuclear camera so that they would no longer have to refer their patients to the local hospital for nuclear imaging. Faced with the prospect of losing over a third of its $2,274,094 in annual gross nuclear medicine revenues, the hospital responded by threatening to revoke the doctors’ admitting privileges. Lengthy negotiations ensued, at the end of which the hospital agreed to sublease the camera from the two physicians; the camera remained at the physicians’ offices but other physicians with privileges at the hospital could use it. Four other local physicians who provided the same or similar services to patients as Drs. S. and V. brought a qui tam action alleging that the sublease violated the Anti-Kickback and Stark Acts and that the defendants falsely certified compliance with those laws in connection with claims submitted to Medicare in violation of the False Claims Act.

Note: This is an actual court case and an internet search may uncover the real case details. You are prohibited from utilizing any source materials associated with this case. Use of any related materials will result in a reduction of points on this assignment. This assignment is being graded based on your ability to critically think on your own and on the comprehension of the knowledge gained from this week’s resources.

Address the following in this assignment:

• Carefully review Chapter 11 of your course text and research Stark law. 
 • Provide a brief synopsis of the case, identifying the key players. 
 • Given the scenario above, analyze whether the actions of Drs. S. and V. violated Stark Law. 
 • Provide solid evidence supporting your decision by utilizing information from the Ashford University Library as well as research pertaining to the Stark law itself (not the particular court case).

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 4 DQ 1 Ethical Resource Allocation

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

Ethical Resource Allocation. Work through the simulation titled Resource Allocation from the end of Chapter 8 of your course text. Review the various options in the simulation, then select “Your Own Option” to type out your own solution to the scenario. You will need to copy and paste your response from “Your Own Option” into the discussion board forum. Here is a brief synopsis of the simulation regarding the hospital’s budget and dilemma: Hospital costs in millions for one year:

• One 35-year-old cancer patient who needs significant time with the doctor, medical supplies, tests, and around the clock care: Cost: 100 
 • Emergency Room operations for daily care and treatment of about 100 people (~365,000/year) Cost: 100 
 • 2 Senior Patients who need hip replacement surgery. Cost: 50 
 • 10 patients (ranging in age from 18 to 45) receiving assistance in your inpatient drug/alcohol rehab unit: 100 
 • An MRI unit that is on the fritz and could die any day. Replacement Cost: 170 
 • One of your two X-ray machines is inoperable and must be replaced: Cost 100 
 • Ambulance drive-in area was damaged and needs to be repaired: Cost: 25 
 • Training needs for nursing staff for certification requirements: Cost: 55 
 • TOTAL: $700 million For this discussion, address the following:

• You have $700 million in expenses and only $500 million to work with. How do allocate your resources? 
 • Who gets treated and who has to wait? 
 • What about your facilities? 
 • Determine what you plan to do and explain your reasoning as well as the ethical considerations behind your decision. Your initial response must be at least 250 words and must use at least two scholarly sources.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 5 DQ 1 Compliance Presentation

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

Compliance Presentation. Imagine that you are a hospital’s compliance officer, and you are charged with making a presentation to your hospital’s board of directors regarding the moral right to healthcare. Your presentation should include at least three of the elements learned throughout this course, which could include, but are not limited to: the Code of Ethics, resource allocation, Stark Law, medical malpractice, and cultural competency. For this discussion, begin by creating a PowerPoint presentation that addresses the issue of the moral right to healthcare. Then, utilize the PowerPoint and create a presentation using a screencast program. Your presentation must utilize at least two scholarly sources. Include your references within the discussion post along with the link to your screencast.

Required Response I Imagine that you are one of the board members listening to your compliance officer’s presentation. Respond with a minimum of 150 words to at least two colleagues’ cases in an appropriate matter by addressing the following:

• Give your overall impression of the presentation. Was it clear and understandable? 
 • Examine at least three key points that were made in the presentation. Did these elements make sense? Could they be accepted by the hospital? 
 • Challenge your colleague regarding his or her presentation by questioning one or more of the key points in the presentation. Your question should not be able to be answered with a yes or no. Use phrases such as, “How can we…” “What do you think the response would be to…” and similar notations.

Required Response II Your classmates will have posted questions to your original post. You are required to respond to their question in a scholarly manner. Use your research to support your response to the comments and question(s) they posed. Your response should be at least 100 words.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper DNR (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Final Papers on DNR

Focus of the Final Paper

Review each of the three case studies from the list below. Select one and address the questions within your selected scenario in your Final Paper.

· • Case Study 1: HIPAA Privacy Rule

· • Case Study 2: DNR

· • Case Study 3: Institutional Code of Ethics

Writing the Final Paper The Final Paper:

1. 1. Must be eight to ten double-spaced pages in length, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

2. 2. Must include a title page with the following:

· Title of paper

· Student’s name

· Course name and number

· Instructor’s name

· Date submitted

1. 3. Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.

2. 4. Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.

3. 5. Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.

4. 6. Must use at least eight scholarly sources (not including the course text) that were published within the last five years, including a minimum of four sources from academic journals found in the Ashford University Library.

5. 7. Must document all sources in APA style, as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

6. 8. Must include a separate reference page, formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper HIPAA Privacy Rule (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Final Papers on HIPAA Privacy Rule

Focus of the Final Paper

Review each of the three case studies from the list below. Select one and address the questions within your selected scenario in your Final Paper.

· • Case Study 1: HIPAA Privacy Rule

· • Case Study 2: DNR

· • Case Study 3: Institutional Code of Ethics

Writing the Final Paper The Final Paper:

1. 1. Must be eight to ten double-spaced pages in length, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

2. 2. Must include a title page with the following:

· Title of paper

· Student’s name

· Course name and number

· Instructor’s name

· Date submitted

1. 3. Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.

2. 4. Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.

3. 5. Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.

4. 6. Must use at least eight scholarly sources (not including the course text) that were published within the last five years, including a minimum of four sources from academic journals found in the Ashford University Library.

5. 7. Must document all sources in APA style, as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

6. 8. Must include a separate reference page, formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

=================================================

HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper Institutional Code of Ethics (2 Papers)

FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT

www.hca322edu.com

This Tutorial contains 2 Final Papers on Institutional Code of Ethics

Focus of the Final Paper

Review each of the three case studies from the list below. Select one and address the questions within your selected scenario in your Final Paper.

· • Case Study 1: HIPAA Privacy Rule

· • Case Study 2: DNR

· • Case Study 3: Institutional Code of Ethics

Writing the Final Paper The Final Paper:

1. 1. Must be eight to ten double-spaced pages in length, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

2. 2. Must include a title page with the following:

· Title of paper

· Student’s name

· Course name and number

· Instructor’s name

· Date submitted

1. 3. Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.

2. 4. Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.

3. 5. Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.

4. 6. Must use at least eight scholarly sources (not including the course text) that were published within the last five years, including a minimum of four sources from academic journals found in the Ashford University Library.

5. 7. Must document all sources in APA style, as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

6. 8. Must include a separate reference page, formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.