Infection Control and Fall Prevention: A Nursing Case Study Analysis

This nursing assignment analyzes a case study involving a 50-year-old patient with shingles, focusing on infection control principles and fall prevention strategies. The assignment identifies key infection control measures, such as avoiding contact with others and preventing scratching of rashes, and provides rationales for their implementation. It also explores the relevance of Comprehensive Care Standard 5, emphasizing the need for holistic patient care considering the patient's medical history, including diabetes and muscular degeneration. Furthermore, the assignment outlines fall prevention strategies based on NSQHS standards, including developing and implementing a multifactorial fall prevention plan and referring at-risk patients to appropriate services. The document highlights the importance of a comprehensive approach to patient care, addressing both the immediate health concerns and the patient's overall well-being.

Running head: THE COMMUNICABLE INFECTION SHINGLES
THE COMMUNICABLE INFECTION SHINGLES
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1THE COMMUNICABLE INFECTION SHINGLES
Table of Contents
Question 1 – Selection of the key infection control principles that should be applied to Mrs.
Smith for minimising the transmission of infection to the staffs and other people.........................2
Question 2 – Rationales for the implementation of the two infection controls...............................2
Question 3- Relation of Comprehensive care standard 5 in relation to this case............................3
Question 4 – Fall prevention strategy..............................................................................................3
References........................................................................................................................................5

2THE COMMUNICABLE INFECTION SHINGLES
Question 1 – Selection of the key infection control principles that should be
applied to Mrs. Smith for minimising the transmission of infection to the staffs
and other people
In the given case study, the patients is an old lady of 50 years of age. The medical history
of the patient is showing that she has suffered from chicken pox before. The patient is also
suffering from type II diabetes since the last 15 years and also muscular degeneration. Presently
the integument inspection has revealed that the patient is having pinkish or reddish dots in the
regions of the abdomen. Even the blisters have fluids intact within them. The patient is suffering
from sensation of burning and has also complained of pain. The patient is suffering from shingles
caused by Varicella zoster. This is a very infectious disease and spreads from one person easily.
In the present case, one way by which the infection control can be prevented is by avoiding
touching to other persons. If the patient do not touch to other persons, then the disease will not
spreads (Lecrenier et al., 2018). Another way of preventing the infection is not touching or
scratching the rashes because if the fluid comes out then the infection can spreads to other parts
of the body and from there to other persons (Chakravarty, 2017).
Question 2 – Rationales for the implementation of the two infection controls
In the given case study, it is seen that after the patient has fallen down, her husband made
a call to the ambulance for taking her to the emergency department. The patient has developed
rash in the whole abdominal region, so if the treatment is not started now then her health
condition may worse. The two ways of infection control measures that are mentioned are
avoiding touching to other persons and avoid starching of the rashes. These two infection control
principles are chosen because the patient is going to get admitted in the hospital and the
causative agent of this disease is Varicella zoster, the same causative agent of chicken pox. Even
the symptoms of shingles is also quite similar with the symptoms of chicken pox. The rationale
behind the patient not to touch other patients because after many years of chicken pox, the virus
remains inactive in the tissues of the nerve near the brain and the spinal cord. After many years
the virus may get active again and cause shingles (Rullán et al., 2017). So in the hospital many
patients are admitted, if in case the infection gets spread to one of the patient then there is a
chance of all the patients to get infected. The rationale behind not to scratch the infected area and

3THE COMMUNICABLE INFECTION SHINGLES
the blisters is that the fluid of the blisters may come out and can spread the infection. The patient
must not also touch other persons in the hospital as the virus from the body of the patient may
spread to both the healthy persons and the unhealthy persons of the hospital. Even the hospital
staffs may also acquire the infection (Tran et al., 2017). To avoid any further infection of the
patient these two infection control procedures should be followed.
Question 3- Relation of Comprehensive care standard 5 in relation to this case
The comprehensive care standard 5 aims in ensuring the patients to receive the
comprehensive care of health which fulfils the needs of the individuals considering the impacts
that the issues have on the life of the patient and their well-being. The comprehensive care is
related with Mrs. Smith because the patient needs total health care including relation to falls,
injuries, mental health, nutrition, cognitive requirements and also the care at the end of the life
(Talarska et al., 2016). The systems that are included in the comprehensive care standards are
integration of the clinical governance, application of the quality improvement systems, making
proper partnerships with the customers, making or designing systems for delivering the
comprehensive care and lastly the collaboration of the teamwork (Prestmo et al., 2015). The
patient in the given case study was not only suffering from shingles but her past medical records
shows that earlier she had suffered from chicken pox and has been suffering from diabetes since
the last 15 years. So not only she needs the treatment of shingles, it should also be kept in mind
that her diabetes remains the same. It is necessary for her to maintain a proper diet. It can be seen
that the patient require a complete and comprehensive care from all respects and so the
comprehensive care standard is related in case of Mrs. Smith.
Question 4 – Fall prevention strategy
The two prevention strategies from falling using the NSQHS standards to prevent further
injury in the present case scenario are-
 Development of multifactorial fall prevention plan and also the implementation of that
plan for addressing the identified risks- In the clinical records of the patient, the
multifactorial fall prevention plan must be mentioned. The appropriateness of the fall
prevention strategy and also the effectiveness must be monitored regularly. If at any
instance the fall prevention strategy is not working properly then again new strategy

4THE COMMUNICABLE INFECTION SHINGLES
should be implemented or modification of the existing strategies are need to be taken.
Actions must be taken to reduce the incidences of falls and minimise the harm to the
patients (Ambrose, Cruz & Paul, 2015).
 Patients who are at risks of falling down must be referred to appropriate services, where
ever available, even at the time when the discharge processes are going on- In the given
case scenario, the patient suddenly has fallen down and was lying on the floor on her
right side. She is also suffering from diabetes mellitus, so chances are there for her to fall
down when the insulin level changes or when hypoglycaemia occurs (Sherrington &
Tiedemann, 2015). So she is always in the risk of falling apart from the present clinical
diagnoses shingles. At the present time, she has fallen down because of her change in
blood pressure and because of the severe pain that she was suffering due to the disease
shingles. She is also an aged person and also is overweight, so chances are there for her
becoming ill at any time and fall down. At the time of discharge of her, proper services
should be given to prevent any incidences of fall and getting harm.

5THE COMMUNICABLE INFECTION SHINGLES
References
Ambrose, A. F., Cruz, L., & Paul, G. (2015). Falls and fractures: a systematic approach to
screening and prevention. Maturitas, 82(1), 85-93.
doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.06.035
Chakravarty, E. F. (2017). Incidence and prevention of herpes zoster reactivation in patients with
autoimmune diseases. Rheumatic Disease Clinics, 43(1), 111-121.
doi.org/10.1016/j.rdc.2016.09.010
Lecrenier, N., Beukelaers, P., Colindres, R., Curran, D., De Kesel, C., De Saegher, J. P., ... &
Normand-Bayle, M. (2018). Development of adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine and
its implications for shingles prevention. Expert review of vaccines, 17(7), 619-634.
doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2018.1495565
Prestmo, A., Hagen, G., Sletvold, O., Helbostad, J. L., Thingstad, P., Taraldsen, K., ... &
Johnsen, L. G. (2015). Comprehensive geriatric care for patients with hip fractures: a
prospective, randomised, controlled trial. The Lancet, 385(9978), 1623-1633.
doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62409-0
Rullán, M., Bulilete, O., Leiva, A., Soler, A., Roca, A., González-Bals, M. J., ... & Llobera, J.
(2017). Efficacy of gabapentin for prevention of postherpetic neuralgia: study protocol
for a randomized controlled clinical trial. Trials, 18(1), 24. doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-
1729-y
Sherrington, C., & Tiedemann, A. (2015). Physiotherapy in the prevention of falls in older
people. Journal of physiotherapy, 61(2), 54-60. doi.org/10.1016/j.jphys.2015.02.011
Talarska, D., Pacholska, R., Strugała, M., & Wieczorowska‐Tobis, K. (2016). Functional
assessment of the elderly with the use of EASY‐Care Standard 2010 and Comprehensive
Geriatric Assessment. Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 30(2), 419-426.
doi.org/10.1111/scs.12241
Tran, C. T., Ducancelle, A., Masson, C., & Lunel-Fabiani, F. (2017). Herpes zoster: risk and
prevention during immunomodulating therapy. Joint Bone Spine, 84(1), 21-27.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2016.04.001