Assessment Task 3
Interdisciplinary referral and discussion Value: 20%
Due Date: 18-Sep-2019
Return Date: 16-Oct-2019
Length: 500 words + MP3 recording
Submission method options: EASTS (online)
Task
This assessment comprises two (2) parts.
Part 1: ISBAR referral
Using the patient from Assessment task 2, you are required to verbally execute a clinical handover to
a relevant interdisciplinary health professional using the ISBAR (Identify, Situation, Background,
Assessment and Recommendations) format. This handover must be recorded as a mp3 (audio) file,
not exceeding 2.30 minutes.
ISBAR
I (Identify)- Identify yourself, your position, the patient and who you are talking to.
S (Situation)- State what the main health concern is and the purpose of the handover. B
(Background)- Formulate a clear and concise summary of the important and relevant background
information.
A (Assessment)- Outline relevant nursing assessments that you have conducted and demonstrate an
understanding of the interpretation of the results and how they all relate to each other.
R (Recommendation)- Clearly and concisely outline what recommendations you are making with
regards to the health concern, including an overall plan of care.
Students will be advised via the subject Interact2 site on how best to submit their mp3 file.
Part 2: Assignment help – Discussion
You are required to provide written justification for your chosen interdisciplinary healthcare
professional. This justification must demonstrate your understanding of the importance of
collaborative care in relation to the patient in Assessment task 2.
This part of the assessment task must adhere to the following format:
• Introduction
• Assignment help – Discussion
• Conclusion
• References
While sub-headings can be used to structure this assessment, tables and dot points are not
permitted.
A minimum of two (2) credible and scholarly sources should be used to support your work.
Rationale
This assessment task will assess the following learning outcome/s:
• be able to conduct a comprehensive and systematic nursing assessment of a patient with a
co-morbidity (NMBA 1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 8.1).
• be able to plan nursing care in consultation with individuals/groups, significant others and
the interdisciplinary health care team in the clinical setting (NMBA 1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 8.2,
9.4).
• be able to collaborate with the interdisciplinary health care team to provide comprehensive
nursing care in the clinical setting (NMBA 1.2, 2.2, 2.5, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4, 7.1, 7.4, 8.1, 8.2, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4,
9.5, 10.3).
Collaboration between interdisciplinary team members is a dynamic process reliant on effective
communication and shared-decision making. Students must recognise and understand that
individuals with chronic and complex conditions require interdisciplinary management to ensure
quality patient outcomes.
Criterion HD (85 – 100%) DI (75.84 -84.5%) CR (65 – 74.5%) PS (50 -64.5%) FL (0.49.5%) Mark
Engages in
collaborative
patient carethough
effective
communication
with the
interdisciplinary
healthcare
professional using
therequired
format.
25.5-30
Comprehensively
and concisely
communicates all
relevant patient
information to the
interdisciplinary
team member using
the ISBAR format.
The referral
handover evidences
detailed and
systematic
consideration of the
patient’s healthcare
needs.
The recording is
clearly understood
and submitted in
the required format.
22.5-25
Comprehensively
communicates all
relevant patient
information to the
interdisciplinary
team member using
the ISBAR format.
The referral
handover evidences
thorough
consideration of the
patient’s healthcare
needs.
The recording is
clearly understood
and submitted in
the required format.
19.5-22
Communicates
most ofthe relevant
patientinformation
to the
interdisciplinary
teammemberusing
the ISBARformat.
The referral
handoverevidences
a sound
understanding of
the patient’s
healthcare needs.
The recording is
clearly understood
and submitted in
the required format.
15-19
Communicates key
patientinformation
to the
interdisciplinary
teammemberusing
the ISBARformat.
The referral
handoverevidences
a reasonable
understanding of
the patient’s
healthcare needs.
The recording is
clearly understood
and submitted in
the required format.
0-14.5
Communicates
minimal or
irrelevant patient
information to the
interdisciplinary
team member. The
ISBAR format has
not been used to
communicate
information and/or
incorrectly used.
The referral
handover evidences
an insufficient
understanding of
the patient’s
healthcare needs.
The recording lacks
clarity making it
difficult to
understand and/or
not submitted in
the required format.
/30
Demonstrates
knowledge and
understanding of
the importance
of
interdisciplinary
collaboration in the
42.5-50
Comprehensively and
concisely examines
the significance of
37.5-42
Thoroughly
examines the
significance of
interdisciplinary
32.5-37
Describes the
significance of
interdisciplinary
collaboration
25-32
Outlines the
significance of
interdisciplinary
collaboration. The
0-24.5
Insufficiently
outlines the
significance of
interdisciplinary
/50
management of interdisciplinary collaboration in the primarily in the description is collaboration in the
chronic and collaboration in the context of complex context of complex loosely discussed in context of complex
complex healthcare context of complex
comorbidities.
Examines, justifies
and rationalises how
the chosen
interdisciplinary
team member
contributes to the
management of the
patient.
comorbidities.
Explains and
rationalizes how the
chosen
interdisciplinary
team member
contributes to the
management of the
patient.
comorbidities,
however, further
links could be made.
Describes and
provides sound
rationale for how the
interdisciplinary
team member
contributes to the
management of the
patient.
the context of
complex
comorbidities.
Outlines and
rationalizes how the
interdisciplinary
team member
contributes to the
management of the
patient – the
discussion lacks
details or depth.
comorbidities. The
chosen
interdisciplinary
team member is not
rationalised in
relation to the
patient.
Communicates
effectively using
academic writing
and professional
language.
8.5-10
Formal academic
language
and correct
professional
terminology has
been used
to create a
cohesive, concise
and analytical piece
of
work. The
assessment is
logically
and systematically
structured with
consistent
adherence to
grammatical
conventions. All
presentation
guidelines have been
applied.
7.5-8
Formal academic
language and correct
professional
terminology
has been used to
create a cohesive and
coherent
piece of work. The
assessment is
logically structured
and mostly
adheres to
grammatical
conventions. All
presentation
guidelines have been
applied.
6.5-7
Formal academic
language hasbeen
used
to create a logically
structured and
coherent
piece of work, with
adherence to
grammatical
conventions,
although
some errors remain.
All presentation
guidelines
have been applied.
5-6
Formal academic
language has been
used to create a
partially structured
piece of work.
Paragraphs are
rudimentary andan
attempt has been
made to
adhere to
grammatical
conventions,
although
errors are evident.
Most presentation
guidelines have been
applied.
0-4.5
Formal and informal
language has
been used to create a
partially structured
pieceof work, which
includes multiple
grammaticalerrors
impacting on
the clarity of the
discussion. Most
presentation
guidelines havenot
been applied.
/10
Applies evidence/
information from
credible sources and
with academic
integrity.
8.5-10
The assessment is
supported by 3 or
more appropriate
sources, which have
been evaluated and
synthesized to
support all
assertions.
Help write my thesis – APA referencing
conventions for both
in-text citations and
the reference list
have been accurately
and consistently
applied.
7.5-8
The assessment is
supported by 2 -3
appropriate sources,
which have been
synthesised to
support most
assertions made.
Help write my thesis – APA referencing
conventions for both
in-text citations and
the reference list
have been almost
always accurately
and consistently
applied.
6.5-7
The assessment is
supported by 2-3
appropriate
sources, which have
been incorporated
to support key
points.
Help write my thesis – APA referencing
conventions for
both in-text
citations and the
reference list are
applied with minor
errors evident.
5-6
The assessment is
supported by 2
appropriate sources,
which have been
summarized to
support key points.
An attempt has been
made to adhere to
Help write my thesis – APA referencing
conventions for both
in-text citations and
the reference list,
but with several
errors and
inconsistencies.
0-4.5
The assessment is
supported with
inappropriate or
irrelevant sources.
Less than 2 sources
of information have
been used to
support the
discussion and/or
multiple
unsupported
generalization have
been made.
/10
TURNITIN:
Assessment was
submitted to
TURNITIN by the
subject coordinator,
and indicates
appropriate
attention to editing,
paraphrasing and
referencing of other
people’s work.
Similarity index is
20% or less,
excluding Reference
List
Students can submit
their assessments to
TURNITIN report indicates appropriate attention to editing: paraphrasing and
referencing of other people’s work. Similarity index is 20% or less, excluding
Reference List.
SY
TURNITIN report
indicates high
similarity index
that exceeds 20%,
excluding
Reference List.
The student may
be reported for
academic
misconduct.
US
SY/US
TURNITIN before
uploading to EASTS
