Applying Theory to Practice Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Applying Theory to Practice - Essay Example Applying Theory to Practice Globally the nursing profession was facing a great number of problems in patients. Pain was just one of the many complaints but it was a significant and widespread one. Pain was a physiological complaint which distressed patients by the unpleasant sensation with affective experience (Peterson and Bedrow, 2008). In spite of pain assessment, appropriate management, evaluatory monitoring and educational research having been included in important guidelines like those from the Joint Commission and the National Guidelines ClearingHouse, the under-treatment and negligent management of acute and chronic pain were still evident (Bines and Paice, 2005). The words of Gillaspie (2010) conveyed the depth of the problem: â€Å"The delivery of effective pain management has become a pressing national issue in healthcare†. Patients had a right to be managed for pain relief (Zalon, 2008). The problem of pain management has thereby been identified by me as my practic e problem. The nursing profession has several theories by which the problems in patient care were managed. Similarly I would be employing a theory to execute effective pain management in my hospital. The theory would be logical for application and concurrent with observations made daily. It would be similar to those previously used in successful programs. Past research would have supported this theory (Croyle, 2005). It would contain the highlights of the nursing profession. Foundations for nursing practice would be made. Generation of better knowledge would be remembered. The direction into which the nursing profession was to develop would be indicated. Patient care would be made better, professional growth would be enhanced, interpersonal communications among the nurses would be motivated for improvement, and guidance would evolve for education and research. The multidisciplinary approach to health care would be targeted. Criteria which improved the quality of care would continuou sly be identified. Middle-range theories promoted nursing practice by helping to understand the behavior of the client, suggesting useful interventions and offering credible explanations for the efficacy of the interventions (Peterson and Bedrow, 2008). The practice theory could be built up from the critical reflection of experiences. The purpose of the paper is to identify a middle range theory for my selected practice problem of management of pain and then use a borrowed theory to manage the same symptom of pain. Rationale for selection The commonest reason for patients seeking help from nurses was pain. The unpleasant sensation could cause the patient to even lose consciousness. The overwhelming effect could produce long-term adversities (Peterson and Bedrow, 2008). Wound healing became delayed and the immune system lost its activity. Metastasis of tumor cells could also occur. Acute pain was noticed in wounds or injuries, following surgery, in labor and in sickle cell crisis. Ch ronic pain was evident in skeletal muscle illnesses and gastrointestinal conditions. Hospital procedures like lumbar puncture, venipuncture and removal of chest tubes were accompanied by pain (Peterson and Bedrow). Infants suffered from pain in critically ill conditions or when close to death. The enormous extent of pain faced by the nursing profession was an indication for nurses to learn all the methods of relieving it. Clinical pain had a holistic and emotional

Report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 2

Report - Essay Example The essence of this system of accounting for Non Current assets is that; eventually, these assets have to be replaced and hence the best estimate for the company to use as the replacement cost of wearing away is depreciation. Accounting in the Income Statement Although IFRS has clearly spelt out that costs should be â€Å"capitalized as part of the cost of the asset if future economic benefits are probable and can be reliably measured† (Ernst &Young, 2009, p. 7), the model has not clearly specified clearly, how the units of account, used in long-term assets, should be determined. As such, the determination of a unit of account is based on the discretion of the management, who consider both the asset’s materiality and the intended use in order to fix the appropriate units. In respective of this view, the ‘minor spare parts’ should be considered less material and, therefore, treated as expenses under the Income Statement. The entire ? 5,700 should be accounte d for under this category. The other two categories of costs, including service contract (W4) and depreciation (W2), should be accounted for in the Income Statement since they are expensed. ... or the year ending 30 December 2012 is a sum of the depreciation before the review, of ?30,000 (W5.1) and the depreciation after the review, of ?52, 500 (W5.3). The essence of these calculations, in the context of a change in the original estimate of asset life, is that â€Å" the unamortised depreciable amount of the asset is charged to revenue over the revised remaining useful life.† (Accounting Standard [AS] 6, p. 5). Building X Accounting in the Income Statement Under IFRS (IAS 16), building X is treated as Property Plant and Equipment (PP&E) since it is held for the production of goods and services and it is a Non Current asset. An item under this category is measured at its cost less accumulated depreciation. Alternatively, an entity is at liberty to use revaluation model, considering the asset was revalued. In this respect, a depreciation of ?20,000, ?20,000 and ?40,000 will be accounted for in the Income Statement for the years ending 31 December 2010, 2011, and 2012 r espectively. In addition, the gain on revaluation will be reflected on the Income Statement at ? 1,620,000 (W 8.2). Accounting in the Balance Sheet Following revaluations at 31 December 2011 and 31 December 2012, for ?2 million and ?2.5 million respectively; the value of the cost that will appear in the Balance Sheet is ?1 million, ?1 million, ?2 million and ?2.5 million for the years ending 31 December 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 respectively (W 8.1). The respective accumulated depreciations for the years ending 31 December 2010, 2011, and 2012 will be ?60,000, ?80,000 and ?40,000 respectively. Therefore, the cost after revaluation, which will be accounted for the years ending 31 December 2011, 2012 and 2013 will be ?1,000,000, ?20,000 and ?2,500,000 respectively, all treated under Non Current