Care Programme Approach (CPA)
Throughout the therapeutic relationship, the principles of the Care programme approach (CPA) were applied. As Ann was already involved in Mental Health services she already has co-coordinator allocated. Additionally, throughout her hospital she had allocated named nurse, responsible for care planning and implementing CPA reviews. CPA help to facilitated effective metal health assessments, allowing for underpinning of knowledge for care planning and CPA to influential and meaningful exercise. To Make CPA meaningful exercise clear lines of communication to place stronger influence on individuality and flexibility that underpins genuine person centred approach (Morgan, 2014). Communication also allows Ann the opportunity to freely talk about needs and issues she may be experiencing. The CPA allows time for safe environment off the ward where she will not be over heard by another SU. Giving
…show more content…
‘Clinical risk’ refers to possibility/likelihood of behaviour with the potntinol outcome of harming the a patiently directly or being done by patient to others patient (Wellman, 2006). Risk formulation should be on an individual basis using systematic assessment on presenting, predisposing, precipitating, perpetuating and protective factors. Involving collaborative professional judgement, well structures and accurate assessments to be used in CPA (Butler, 2014). Ann risk was identified as very low to herself and others. Reporting never having ideation hurt herself and others. It was determined that Ann main was her vulnerability to exploitation from other people when she is unwell. However, this risk was minimal whilst Ann was in hospital as staff could monitor interactions between other SU to make she was not being out in vulnerable position. As she did not have unescorted leave though out majority of her stay this made risk manageable to
‘Clinical risk’ refers to possibility/likelihood of behaviour with the potntinol outcome of harming the a patiently directly or being done by patient to others patient (Wellman, 2006). Risk formulation should be on an individual basis using systematic assessment on presenting, predisposing, precipitating, perpetuating and protective factors. Involving collaborative professional judgement, well structures and accurate assessments to be used in CPA (Butler, 2014). Ann risk was identified as very low to herself and others. Reporting never having ideation hurt herself and others. It was determined that Ann main was her vulnerability to exploitation from other people when she is unwell. However, this risk was minimal whilst Ann was in hospital as staff could monitor interactions between other SU to make she was not being out in vulnerable position. As she did not have unescorted leave though out majority of her stay this made risk manageable to