Clinical Reasoning Cycle

Running head: CLINICAL REASONING CYCLE 1
Clinical Reasoning Cycle
Name
Institutional Affiliation

CLINICAL REASONING CYCLE 2
CLINICAL REASONING CYCLE
Introduction
My care situation involved caring for Mr. Smith who was a sixty-year-old patient waiting
for AAA surgery. I was tasked to assess his current health status. Because I was a nurse
professional nurse first year student, I went via daily interview period which entailed processes
of making decision. My assignment and instruction was to consider using a CRC3. Thus I will
show the steps I took to achieve my goals under the supervision of a nurse I worked in handy
with.
Consider the patient situation (CRC 1)
For the practical and precise decision on the present health condition, it is essential that I
considered all the necessary data about the condition. These include data on the effects, how the
condition appeared and other data. As a professional nurse first year student, I needed to make
some decisions taking into account my judgment and knowledge during several conditions that
can never be sorted with the textbook or research knowledge. The clinical reasoning session
which I went through entail moral reasoning sessions that ultimately helped me consider the
condition of the patient alongside health status before advancing with the process of decisions
making. I generated my clinical reasoning from a caring and concerned position which I
developed to take desired care of my patient alongside advancing my career (Forsberg, Ziegert,
Hult & Fors, 2016). To facilitate data collection, I first developed a rapport with Mr. Smith, and
we became friends. I empathized with his situation, and he got to be open with me and told me
all the things I wanted to know without a challenge. In the case where he could not talk to
explain, I provided him with a paper and a pen to write down. This helped me gather the required
information from the interviews when I realized he had difficulties explaining his conditions.

CLINICAL REASONING CYCLE 3
The 61-year-old man was in the ward waiting to undergo AAA (adnominal aortic aneurysm)
surgical treatment the following day.
Collect cues and information (CRC 2)
Mr. Smith was a 61-year-old patient who had a history of hypertension and under the
beta-blockers in his past life. He was an ordinarily hypertensive individual condition that
required strong consideration. In the course of my session with him, I was mandated to appraise
the collected information and data which included the medical history of Mr. Smith, handover
reports, past investigations reports as well as any previous medical or nursing assessment which
have been carried out. Mr. Smith had a history of hypertension. Mr. Smith also previously used
beta-blockers. His blood pressure (BP) was 141/181 thirty minutes ago.
I undertook a new patient assessment of my patient to gather potential changes which
could have taken place. The fresh data gathered through Mr. Smith’s evaluation showed a BP at
111/61 while his epidural streaming stood at 10ml per hour. The ultimate task within this specific
step was for me to recall knowledge that encompasses recalling past phases and steps my patient
had to go through (Hunter & Arthur, 2016). Here, I evoked knowledge like therapeutics, ethics,
culture, law, pharmacology, and pathophysiology because Mr. Smith’s BP is linked to his fluid
status. His epidurals could drop the blood pressure as they result in vasodilation. Within the
ward, I got standing instructions relevant to running epidural (Koivisto, Multisilta, Niemi,
Katajisto & Eriksson, 2016).
Process information (CRC 3)
In processing the information, I used several steps under the instruction and supervision
of nurse that entailed interpretation, discrimination, relation, a combination of inferring,
matching and prediction session. Under interpretation, I analyzed the information I had gathered