Hca 322 Enhance teaching / snaptutorial.com

HCA 322 Entire Course (2 Set)
For more classes visit
www.snaptutorial.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)
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

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 initialresponse 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 thedecision made by the
emergency room care team. Use at least two scholarly sources to
support yourdiscussion. Your initial post should be a minimum of 250
words.
· • Review of the topics within this case: − Medical Indications:
There are two diagnoses/prognoses that merit consideration. The
underlying chronic disease of Huntington's has no available treatment
and a bleak long term prognosis. However, there are effective
treatments available for the acute diagnosis of drug overdose.
o How does the chronic diagnosis affect the team’s response to the
acute condition? − Patient Preferences: We know from the patient's
suicide note that he is refusing all medical
treatment. However, what do we know about these statements of
preference? o Weretheyinformed?
oWasthepatientcompetenttomakethatdecision?
The answers to these questions remain unclear, but we do know that
the patient does not have decision making capacity for the present
decision of whether to proceed with the gastric emptying.
o Isthereasurrogatedecision-makeravailable?− Quality of Life: Life
with Huntington's can be difficult with the onset of spasms and
dementia.
John was familiar with the quality of life associated with living with
Huntington's as he watched his mother die of this disease. On the

other hand, John does have a supportive family and continues to be
able to work for the time being.
o
Howshouldthediminishedqualityoflifethatisanticipatedinthefutureaffec
tthe current decision?
− Contextual Features: Several factors in the context of this case are
significant. While the patient has a legal right to refuse treatment, he
is currently unconscious and his surrogate (his wife) is requesting
treatment. There are also certain emergency room obligations to treat
emergent conditions.
o How should the emergency staff weigh the various competing legal
and regulatory duties?
Required Response to Option 2: Review your classmates’ discussion
of the issues that were applied to the decision making process.
Explain whether you agree or disagree with all of the ethical
considerations they provided, and provide additional notations on the
potential positive and negative outcome(s) based on that decision.
Your responses should be at least 100 words.
Option 3: Mission/Vision/Value StatementsFind five hospital or
health care organization’s mission, vision and value statements.
Discuss the ethical concerns and considerations that were or were not
included in these statements. Explain what elements should have been
included or excluded. Use at least two scholarly sources to support
your explanation. Your original post must be a minimum of 250
words.
Required Response to Option 3: Review the mission, vision and value
statements of your classmate’s selected health care organization.
Explain whether you agree or disagree with their assessment of the
ethical concerns and considerations that were included and/or
excluded from the statements. Rewrite one of these statements to
better reflect ethical considerations. Your responses should be at least
100 words.
*******************************************************************************
HCA 322 Week 2 Assignment Genetics
Information (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 InformationNondiscrimination 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

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-EuthanasiaFor 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 SuicideReview 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 PrivacyReview 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
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)
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.
*******************************************************************************
Bibliography HIPAA Privacy Rule (2 Papers)

making?
*******************************************************************************
Bibliography Institutional Code of Ethics (2
Papers)

making?
*******************************************************************************

HCA 322 Week 3 DQ 1 Patient Safety Act
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
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)
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 aqui 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

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
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)
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
*******************************************************************************
HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper HIPAA Privacy
Rule (2 Papers)
This Tutorial contains 2 Final Papers on HIPAA Privacy Rule

Paper.
Center.
· Title of paper
· Student’s name
· Date submitted
*******************************************************************************
HCA 322 Week 5 Final Paper Institutional Code
of Ethics (2 Papers)

This Tutorial contains 2 Final Papers on Institutional Code of Ethics
Paper.
Center.
· Title of paper
· Student’s name
· Date submitted

*******************************************************************************

Hca 322 Enhance teaching / snaptutorial.com

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Hca 322 Enhance teaching / snaptutorial.com

Similar to Hca 322 Enhance teaching / snaptutorial.com (11)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Hca 322 Enhance teaching / snaptutorial.com