Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the LVN to balance the immediate need for comfort and symptom relief for a pediatric patient with the critical responsibility of accurate medication administration and adherence to physician’s orders. The parent’s distress and potential for misinterpretation of the child’s condition add a layer of complexity, necessitating clear communication and professional boundaries. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional approach involves carefully reviewing the physician’s prescription for the prescribed antipyretic, including the exact dosage, route, and frequency. This is correct because it directly aligns with the fundamental ethical and legal duty of the LVN to administer medications safely and accurately as prescribed. Adhering to the written order ensures patient safety, prevents medication errors, and upholds professional accountability. It also provides a clear, objective basis for intervention, mitigating the risk of acting on subjective parental requests that may not be medically indicated or safe. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: Administering a different over-the-counter medication based on the parent’s suggestion, even if it appears similar in purpose, is professionally unacceptable. This constitutes a deviation from the physician’s orders and bypasses the established medical plan of care. It introduces the risk of administering an inappropriate medication, incorrect dosage, or a medication that could interact negatively with other treatments. This failure violates the principle of fidelity to the prescribed treatment and the duty to protect the patient from harm. Giving the prescribed medication without verifying the dosage against the physician’s order is also professionally unacceptable. While the intent might be to provide relief, the absence of verification opens the door to significant medication errors. This oversight neglects the LVN’s responsibility for meticulous medication administration, which includes double-checking dosages to ensure they are within safe and therapeutic ranges for the child’s age and weight. This failure breaches the duty of care and could lead to adverse patient outcomes. Suggesting the parent administer the medication themselves without direct supervision or verification by the LVN is professionally unacceptable. While empowering parents is important, the LVN retains ultimate responsibility for the safe and accurate administration of prescribed medications. Delegating this responsibility without proper oversight or ensuring the parent fully understands and can safely administer the medication as prescribed is a breach of professional duty and could lead to errors or harm. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a systematic approach when faced with medication-related requests or concerns. This involves: 1. Actively listening to and acknowledging the concerns of the patient or caregiver. 2. Consulting the physician’s orders and the patient’s medical record for accurate information. 3. Verifying all aspects of the prescribed medication (drug, dose, route, time, frequency). 4. Communicating clearly and professionally with the physician if clarification or adjustments are needed. 5. Administering medication only as prescribed and verified. 6. Documenting all actions and communications accurately.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the LVN to navigate the complexities of patient diagnosis within their scope of practice, balancing the need for timely intervention with the legal and ethical boundaries of their role. Misinterpreting or overstepping these boundaries can lead to patient harm, legal repercussions, and professional disciplinary action. The pressure to provide answers and the patient’s distress can create an environment where immediate, but potentially inappropriate, diagnostic statements might seem appealing. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional approach involves the LVN recognizing the patient’s symptoms and immediately communicating these observations to the Registered Nurse (RN) or physician. This approach is correct because it adheres strictly to the LVN’s scope of practice, which typically does not include independent diagnosis. LVNs are trained to collect data, report observations, and implement care plans developed by RNs or physicians. By reporting the symptoms, the LVN ensures that a qualified professional can perform the necessary assessment and establish a diagnosis, thereby safeguarding patient well-being and complying with professional standards and state Nurse Practice Acts. This aligns with the ethical principle of non-maleficence by avoiding the potential harm of an incorrect or premature diagnosis. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach involves the LVN attempting to provide a definitive diagnosis based on their observations. This is professionally unacceptable because it exceeds the LVN’s legal scope of practice. State Nurse Practice Acts clearly delineate the roles and responsibilities of LVNs, and independent diagnosis is generally reserved for physicians and advanced practice nurses. This action could lead to misdiagnosis, delayed appropriate treatment, and potential legal liability for the LVN and the healthcare facility. Another incorrect approach is for the LVN to dismiss the patient’s symptoms or reassure them without further investigation or reporting. This is ethically and professionally unsound as it fails to acknowledge the patient’s distress and potential underlying medical condition. It violates the principle of beneficence, which obligates healthcare providers to act in the patient’s best interest. Furthermore, it neglects the LVN’s responsibility to report significant patient changes or concerns to the appropriate healthcare provider. A third incorrect approach is for the LVN to offer a tentative diagnosis to the patient while awaiting further assessment. While seemingly helpful, this still constitutes practicing beyond the LVN’s scope. Even a tentative diagnosis can be misinterpreted by the patient, leading to anxiety or false reassurance, and it bypasses the established process of diagnostic confirmation by a licensed physician or RN. This can undermine the patient’s trust in the healthcare team and create confusion regarding their care. Professional Reasoning: Professionals facing similar situations should employ a decision-making framework that prioritizes patient safety and adherence to scope of practice. This involves: 1) Accurate observation and data collection of patient signs and symptoms. 2) Immediate and clear communication of these observations to the appropriate supervisor (RN or physician). 3) Understanding and respecting the boundaries of one’s professional license and scope of practice. 4) Prioritizing patient advocacy by ensuring their concerns are heard and addressed by the correct personnel. 5) Maintaining professional integrity by acting ethically and legally at all times.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires balancing the need for efficient patient care delivery with the fundamental ethical and regulatory obligation to provide individualized, patient-centered care. The pressure to optimize processes can inadvertently lead to depersonalization or overlooking unique patient needs, which are critical components of quality nursing practice. Careful judgment is required to ensure that efficiency gains do not compromise the patient’s dignity, autonomy, or well-being. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional practice involves actively engaging the patient in care planning and decision-making, ensuring their preferences and values are integrated into the care process. This approach aligns with the core principles of patient-centered care, which emphasize respect for the patient’s individuality, dignity, and right to self-determination. Regulatory frameworks and ethical guidelines for Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) consistently mandate that care be tailored to the specific needs and preferences of each patient, fostering a collaborative relationship between the nurse and the patient. This ensures that care is not only effective but also meaningful and respectful to the individual receiving it. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach involves standardizing care protocols to the extent that they become rigid and do not allow for individual patient variations or preferences. This fails to meet the regulatory and ethical requirement for individualized care, potentially leading to patient dissatisfaction and suboptimal outcomes because it treats patients as a homogenous group rather than unique individuals with distinct needs and experiences. Another incorrect approach is to prioritize task completion and speed over meaningful patient interaction and communication. While efficiency is important, neglecting to build rapport, actively listen to patient concerns, or involve them in their care plan directly violates the principles of patient-centered care. This can lead to a breakdown in trust, reduced patient adherence to treatment, and a failure to identify subtle but important changes in a patient’s condition. A third incorrect approach is to delegate patient education and preference gathering solely to other team members without direct LVN involvement or oversight. While collaboration is essential, the LVN has a direct responsibility to understand and incorporate the patient’s perspective into their care. Abdicating this responsibility can result in fragmented care and a failure to address the patient’s holistic needs, which is a deviation from professional standards. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that begins with understanding the patient’s unique situation, including their medical history, social context, personal preferences, and cultural background. This understanding should then inform the development and implementation of a care plan that is not only clinically sound but also respects the patient’s autonomy and values. Regular communication, active listening, and patient involvement in decision-making are crucial throughout the care process. When considering process improvements, the primary question should always be: “How can we enhance efficiency without compromising the quality and individualized nature of patient care?”

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the LVN to balance patient advocacy, adherence to scope of practice, and effective communication within the healthcare team. The LVN must recognize the limitations of their role while ensuring the patient’s needs are met and that appropriate professional judgment is exercised. Failure to do so can lead to patient harm, ethical breaches, and regulatory violations. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional practice involves the LVN accurately documenting their assessment findings and then communicating these findings to the registered nurse (RN) or physician. This approach is correct because it aligns with the LVN’s scope of practice, which typically includes data collection and reporting, but not independent diagnosis or treatment planning. By documenting and reporting, the LVN ensures that critical information is shared with the appropriate healthcare provider who can then initiate further assessment and intervention. This upholds the principle of patient safety and collaborative care, as mandated by nursing practice acts and ethical guidelines that emphasize clear communication and appropriate delegation of responsibilities. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach involves the LVN attempting to interpret the assessment findings and suggest a specific medical diagnosis or treatment plan to the patient. This is professionally unacceptable because it exceeds the LVN’s scope of practice. LVNs are not licensed to diagnose medical conditions or prescribe treatments; these responsibilities fall under the purview of physicians and advanced practice nurses. Such an action could lead to misdiagnosis, delayed or inappropriate treatment, and potential harm to the patient, violating the ethical duty to practice within one’s competence. Another incorrect approach is for the LVN to dismiss the patient’s reported symptoms as insignificant without further investigation or reporting. This is professionally unacceptable as it demonstrates a failure to adequately assess and advocate for the patient. All reported symptoms, especially those that are new or worsening, require thorough assessment and communication to the appropriate healthcare provider. Ignoring patient concerns can lead to missed diagnoses, delayed interventions, and a breach of the nurse’s ethical obligation to provide competent and compassionate care. A further incorrect approach involves the LVN documenting their personal opinion or assumptions about the patient’s condition rather than objective assessment findings. This is professionally unacceptable because it introduces bias into the patient’s record and can mislead other healthcare professionals. Nursing documentation must be factual, objective, and based on observable data and patient reports. Subjective opinions or assumptions, without supporting evidence, do not contribute to effective patient care and can compromise the integrity of the medical record. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that prioritizes patient safety and adherence to professional standards. This involves: 1) Thoroughly assessing the patient within the scope of their role. 2) Objectively documenting all findings. 3) Communicating critical information to the appropriate supervisor or physician in a timely manner. 4) Understanding and respecting the boundaries of their professional license and scope of practice. 5) Advocating for the patient by ensuring their concerns are heard and addressed by the appropriate members of the healthcare team.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the LVN to balance the patient’s immediate comfort and perceived needs with the objective medical assessment of their condition and the established care plan. The patient’s subjective report of feeling “cold” might stem from various factors, including anxiety, a minor environmental change, or a symptom of a more significant physiological imbalance. The LVN must avoid making assumptions and instead employ a systematic approach to ensure patient safety and adherence to professional standards. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional practice involves a systematic assessment to determine the underlying cause of the patient’s sensation of cold. This approach prioritizes patient safety by first verifying vital signs, which are objective indicators of physiological status and crucial for assessing homeostasis. Following this, a targeted assessment of the patient’s skin temperature and a review of recent intake and output can provide further clues. This methodical process ensures that interventions are based on accurate data and address the root cause, rather than just the symptom, aligning with the LVN’s responsibility to provide safe and effective care as outlined by the Nurse Practice Act and ethical nursing principles that emphasize patient well-being and evidence-based practice. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: Interpreting the patient’s statement of feeling cold as solely an environmental issue and immediately adjusting the room temperature or providing an extra blanket without assessing vital signs is an ethical and regulatory failure. This approach bypasses essential objective data collection, potentially masking a serious underlying condition such as hypothermia or a circulatory problem. It prioritizes subjective comfort over physiological stability, which can lead to delayed diagnosis and treatment, violating the LVN’s duty of care. Assuming the patient is experiencing anxiety and offering reassurance without a physical assessment is also professionally inadequate. While emotional support is important, it does not replace the need for a comprehensive physiological evaluation. This approach neglects the possibility of a physical cause for the sensation of cold and could lead to the patient’s condition worsening undetected, contravening the LVN’s obligation to assess and report changes in patient status. Administering a warm beverage without assessing vital signs or understanding the patient’s fluid status or potential contraindications (e.g., dysphagia, specific medical conditions) is a risky intervention. This action addresses a symptom without a proper diagnosis and could potentially be harmful, such as exacerbating fluid overload or posing a choking hazard, thereby failing to uphold the standard of care and patient safety. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should utilize a systematic decision-making framework that begins with a thorough patient assessment. This includes gathering subjective data (what the patient reports) and objective data (vital signs, physical examination findings). Based on this data, the LVN should formulate a differential diagnosis, considering potential causes for the reported symptom. Interventions should then be selected based on the most likely diagnosis and the established care plan, with continuous monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions and identify any changes in the patient’s condition. This iterative process ensures that care is individualized, safe, and evidence-based.

This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) to balance the immediate physical needs of the patient with their psychosocial and spiritual well-being, which are integral components of a holistic approach to care. The patient’s distress over a missed religious observance, coupled with their physical discomfort, necessitates a nuanced response that acknowledges both aspects of their suffering. Careful judgment is required to prioritize interventions that promote healing and comfort in a comprehensive manner. The best approach involves acknowledging the patient’s distress regarding the missed religious observance and exploring ways to support their spiritual needs within the scope of practice and facility policy. This includes active listening, validating their feelings, and collaborating with the patient and the healthcare team to find solutions, such as arranging for a chaplain visit or facilitating a private prayer time if feasible and appropriate. This approach is correct because it directly addresses the patient’s stated emotional and spiritual distress, recognizing that these factors significantly impact their overall well-being and recovery. Adhering to ethical principles of patient-centered care, respect for autonomy, and beneficence mandates that the LVN consider the patient’s values and beliefs. Supporting spiritual needs is a recognized aspect of holistic nursing care, contributing to improved patient satisfaction and potentially faster recovery by reducing stress and promoting a sense of peace. An incorrect approach would be to dismiss the patient’s concerns about the missed religious observance as secondary to their physical pain, focusing solely on pain management. This fails to recognize the interconnectedness of physical, emotional, and spiritual health. Ethically, it disregards the patient’s values and beliefs, potentially leading to feelings of alienation and a lack of trust in the care provided. It violates the principle of holistic care by treating the patient as a collection of symptoms rather than a whole person. Another incorrect approach would be to promise to arrange for a specific religious ritual without confirming its feasibility or obtaining necessary approvals. This could lead to unmet expectations and further disappointment for the patient. It also oversteps the LVN’s scope of practice if it involves actions that require a chaplain or other specialized personnel, potentially creating a breach of professional boundaries and facility protocols. A third incorrect approach would be to suggest that the patient’s spiritual concerns are not the responsibility of the healthcare team. This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of holistic care and the role of the LVN in supporting the patient’s overall well-being. It neglects the ethical obligation to provide compassionate and comprehensive care that addresses all dimensions of a patient’s health. Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that begins with a thorough assessment of the patient’s presenting problem, encompassing physical, emotional, social, and spiritual dimensions. This involves active listening and open-ended questioning to understand the patient’s perspective and priorities. Following assessment, the LVN should identify potential interventions that align with the patient’s values and preferences, considering their impact on overall well-being. Collaboration with the interdisciplinary team, including physicians, social workers, and spiritual care providers, is crucial to develop a comprehensive and individualized care plan. Finally, ongoing evaluation of the patient’s response to interventions and adjustment of the care plan as needed ensures that care remains patient-centered and holistic.

This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) to navigate a patient’s deeply held cultural beliefs that may conflict with standard medical recommendations. The LVN must balance the patient’s right to self-determination and cultural expression with the professional obligation to provide safe and effective care. Careful judgment is required to avoid imposing personal biases or dismissing the patient’s cultural identity, which could lead to a breakdown in trust and non-adherence to treatment. The best professional approach involves actively seeking to understand the patient’s cultural practices and beliefs related to their health and treatment. This includes open-ended communication, active listening, and a willingness to explore how these beliefs might be integrated into the care plan without compromising safety or efficacy. The LVN should collaborate with the patient, their family (if appropriate and with patient consent), and the healthcare team to find mutually agreeable solutions. This approach aligns with ethical principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence, and is supported by professional nursing standards that emphasize culturally competent care. An incorrect approach would be to dismiss the patient’s beliefs as irrelevant or superstitious and proceed with the standard treatment plan without further discussion or accommodation. This fails to acknowledge the patient’s autonomy and cultural identity, potentially leading to distress, mistrust, and refusal of care. Ethically, this demonstrates a lack of respect and can be considered paternalistic. Another incorrect approach would be to avoid the cultural aspect altogether and focus solely on the medical condition, hoping the patient will eventually comply. This passive approach neglects the opportunity to build rapport and address potential barriers to care stemming from cultural misunderstandings. It fails to uphold the LVN’s responsibility to advocate for the patient’s holistic well-being. A third incorrect approach would be to impose a solution based on the LVN’s own cultural understanding or assumptions about what is “best” for the patient, without genuine inquiry into the patient’s specific beliefs and values. This can lead to culturally insensitive care and further alienate the patient. Professionals should use a decision-making framework that prioritizes patient-centered care and cultural humility. This involves: 1. Recognizing one’s own cultural biases. 2. Actively seeking to understand the patient’s cultural perspective. 3. Assessing the impact of cultural beliefs on health practices and treatment adherence. 4. Collaborating with the patient and healthcare team to develop a culturally sensitive and medically sound care plan. 5. Continuously evaluating and adapting the plan as needed.

This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires balancing a patient’s right to privacy and autonomy with the healthcare team’s need to provide effective care and ensure patient safety. The LVN must navigate potential conflicts between the patient’s expressed wishes and what might be perceived as medically necessary or beneficial by others. Careful judgment is required to uphold patient rights while maintaining professional responsibilities. The best professional approach involves directly addressing the patient’s concerns and preferences while also communicating the importance of the requested information to the family in a way that respects the patient’s privacy. This means the LVN should first speak with the patient to understand the reasons behind their request to withhold information from their spouse. Following this conversation, the LVN should then communicate to the spouse that the patient has specific preferences regarding information sharing and that the LVN is bound by patient confidentiality. The LVN should then facilitate a conversation between the patient and spouse, or offer to relay the patient’s message to the spouse, allowing the patient to control the disclosure of their health information. This approach is correct because it prioritizes the patient’s right to self-determination and confidentiality, which are fundamental ethical principles and often legally protected rights for patients. It respects the patient’s autonomy in deciding who receives information about their health status. An incorrect approach would be to immediately inform the spouse of the patient’s diagnosis and treatment plan without the patient’s explicit consent. This violates the patient’s right to privacy and confidentiality, as health information is protected and should only be shared with authorized individuals or with the patient’s permission. Another incorrect approach would be to dismiss the patient’s request and proceed with informing the spouse, asserting that the spouse is family and therefore entitled to know. This disregards the patient’s autonomy and their right to control their personal health information, even from close family members. Finally, an incorrect approach would be to refuse to communicate with the spouse at all, stating that the LVN cannot discuss the patient’s condition with anyone. While patient confidentiality is paramount, a complete refusal to engage with the family, without attempting to understand the patient’s wishes or facilitate communication, can be detrimental to family support and patient care. Professionals should use a decision-making framework that begins with identifying the core ethical and legal principles at play, such as patient autonomy, confidentiality, and beneficence. They should then gather information by speaking directly with the patient to understand their perspective and wishes. Next, they should consider the relevant policies and legal requirements governing patient privacy and information disclosure. Finally, they should communicate clearly and empathetically with all parties involved, seeking to find a solution that respects the patient’s rights while promoting their well-being and supporting family involvement as directed by the patient.

This scenario presents a professional challenge due to the conflict between a patient’s expressed wishes and the perceived best interests of the patient, complicated by the potential for harm and the nurse’s legal and ethical obligations. Careful judgment is required to navigate these competing demands while upholding patient autonomy and professional standards. The best professional practice involves a multi-faceted approach that prioritizes open communication, thorough assessment, and collaboration with the healthcare team and the patient’s family. This approach begins with actively listening to the patient’s concerns and understanding the underlying reasons for their refusal of care. It then involves a comprehensive assessment to determine the patient’s capacity to make informed decisions, considering any cognitive impairments or external pressures. If the patient is deemed to have capacity, their autonomy must be respected, and efforts should focus on educating them about the risks and benefits of the recommended treatment and exploring alternative options that align with their values and preferences. If the patient lacks capacity, the nurse must follow established protocols for decision-making by a surrogate or legal guardian, always acting in the patient’s best interest. This approach aligns with the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence, as well as legal requirements regarding informed consent and patient rights. An incorrect approach would be to override the patient’s wishes without a thorough assessment of their capacity or exploring the reasons for their refusal. This disregards the principle of patient autonomy, a cornerstone of ethical nursing practice. Another incorrect approach is to proceed with treatment against the patient’s expressed will, even if the nurse believes it is for their own good, without proper legal and ethical justification, such as a court order or a documented lack of capacity and a surrogate decision-maker acting in the patient’s best interest. This action could constitute battery and a violation of the patient’s rights. Furthermore, failing to involve the interdisciplinary team and the patient’s family in the decision-making process, when appropriate, can lead to fragmented care and missed opportunities to address the patient’s concerns effectively. Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that includes: 1. Gathering information: Understand the patient’s condition, the proposed treatment, and the patient’s expressed wishes and concerns. 2. Assessing capacity: Determine if the patient has the cognitive ability to understand the information and make a reasoned decision. 3. Exploring alternatives: Discuss all available options, including the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the proposed treatment. 4. Consulting: Involve the healthcare team, including physicians, social workers, and ethics committees, as well as the patient’s family or designated surrogate if capacity is questionable or absent. 5. Documenting: Meticulously record all assessments, discussions, decisions, and actions taken. 6. Respecting autonomy: Uphold the patient’s right to make informed decisions about their care, even if those decisions differ from the healthcare team’s recommendations, provided they have capacity.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it involves a direct request for protected health information (PHI) from a patient’s family member, raising immediate concerns about patient privacy and compliance with HIPAA. LVNs must balance the need to be compassionate and helpful to concerned family members with their legal and ethical obligations to protect patient confidentiality. Misjudging this situation could lead to significant legal penalties and damage patient trust. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional approach involves verifying the patient’s consent for disclosure and, if consent is not explicitly given or is unclear, seeking to obtain it or limiting the information shared to what is publicly available or absolutely necessary for immediate care coordination, while always prioritizing the patient’s wishes and privacy rights. This aligns with HIPAA’s Privacy Rule, which permits disclosure of PHI to family members involved in the patient’s care or payment for care, but only to the extent relevant to that involvement, and generally requires the patient’s agreement or opportunity to object. In this case, the LVN should first attempt to ascertain if the patient has authorized this specific disclosure or if the family member is involved in the patient’s care in a way that would permit limited disclosure. If the patient is unable to consent, the LVN should consult with the healthcare team and adhere to facility policy regarding disclosures to family members in such circumstances, which often involves a professional judgment call based on the patient’s best interests and any known preferences. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach is to immediately provide the requested detailed medical information without any verification. This directly violates HIPAA’s Privacy Rule, which mandates that healthcare providers protect the confidentiality of PHI. Disclosing information without the patient’s consent or a valid exception constitutes a breach of privacy and can result in severe penalties for the individual and the healthcare facility. Another incorrect approach is to refuse to speak with the family member at all, even to politely explain the limitations on disclosure or to inquire about the patient’s wishes. While protecting confidentiality is paramount, a complete refusal can be perceived as uncompassionate and may miss an opportunity to gather crucial information about the patient’s care preferences or to facilitate appropriate communication within legal boundaries. This approach fails to uphold the ethical principle of beneficence by not attempting to assist the family in a manner that respects patient privacy. A third incorrect approach is to assume that because the family member is present, they automatically have the right to all medical information. HIPAA does not grant automatic access to PHI for all family members. The right to access and receive information is primarily the patient’s, and disclosures to others are contingent on the patient’s consent or specific circumstances outlined in the regulations. This assumption bypasses the necessary steps to ensure lawful and ethical disclosure. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that prioritizes patient rights and legal compliance. This involves: 1. Identifying the core issue: a request for PHI. 2. Recalling relevant regulations: HIPAA Privacy Rule. 3. Assessing the request against the regulations: Does the request fall under a permitted disclosure? Is patient consent obtained or obtainable? 4. Considering ethical principles: patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence. 5. Consulting policies and supervisors: When in doubt, follow facility protocols and seek guidance from a charge nurse or supervisor. 6. Communicating professionally: Even when unable to disclose information, maintain a professional and empathetic demeanor.