I need replies for these two assigment with 200 words each one
1.A healthcare proxy refers to an individual assigned a right to make healthcare decisions for a patient or someone unable to speak for themselves. For instance, parents are allowed to make healthcare decisions for their children, while at times, patients with cognitive disabilities can appoint someone to make crucial decisions for them. In other cases, researchers and scientists rely on proxies to provide information regarding their subjects since they cannot interact directly with the study subjects (Bravo et al., 2018). Through this process, the researchers can indirectly derive information from a third party and determine the results’ accuracy. In some cases, such as the hospital setting, doctors can try to understand the association between diseases and their causes by getting information from a parent or a third party. In other situations, the doctor can link the symptoms to other factors, for instance, if many patients are admitted with waterborne diseases that could correlate to environmental factors such as unsanitary water.
This is not to say that the proxy subjective health evaluation is done without the assumptions and, in turn, ramifications that accompany them. A common assumption is that the proxy or parent-led reporting is valid and in tune with the underlying variables or factors being measured. This ensures that accuracy is maintained at all times, and the information the scientists provide can inform their research and future findings (Bastani, 2021). As with the hospital-led proxy, for instance, the assumption is that the information provided by the proxy has not been affected by any other external factors. Suppose a parent informs the doctor that their child is having diarrhea because of dirty water they drank. The assumption made is that the diarrhea is unlikely to be caused by other factors, such as an underlying infection or allergic reaction.
Several ramifications can arise from pro-led subjective health status or evaluation measures for children. For instance, the parents may go through decisional conflict, which means they are uncertain about the best course of action, especially when the interventions are risky, or outcomes are uncertain. This can end up stressing the parties involved and, in turn, delay the entire process. In some settings, such as critical care, the proxy will likely undergo emotional distress, anxiety, and depression as they try to make the best decisions for their loved ones. However, this assumption that decisional conflict may delay the process has been questioned, as in some cases, this would mean that the proxy takes to deliberate and make informed decisions (Shepherd, 2022).
Another common ramification is that errors may result in the findings if the data presented needs to be more accurate. This can lead to findings and interventions that could be better for the patient. It is crucial that all the factors are put into consideration when making informed decisions. In other instances where the patient is old or mentally incapacitated, it is essential to put the psychological aspect into consideration (Kroenke et al., 2022)
2.A complicated and crucial part of healthcare is having substitute subjective health status or evaluation metrics for kids or people who are unable to communicate for themselves. In such cases, healthcare professionals often rely on caregivers, parents, or other individuals close to the patient to provide information about their subjective health status. However, this strategy has underlying presumptions and potential consequences that need to be thoroughly examined.
The caregiver or proxy’s ability to effectively portray the patient’s health state or subjective experience is one of the fundamental assumptions when employing proxy subjective measurements. This presumption is based on the notion that the proxy has a thorough comprehension of the patient’s condition, signs, and requirements. The proxy’s interpretation and the patient’s actual experiences or preferences, however, might differ. This might be the result of disparities in perception, impediments to communication, or prejudices on the part of the proxy.
Another assumption is that the proxy has the best interests of the patient at heart and will act in their favor. While this may generally be the case, there could be situations where the proxy’s own biases, beliefs, or personal interests influence their reporting or decision-making. This can lead to potential inaccuracies or misrepresentation of the patient’s subjective health status.
There are several potential ramifications of relying on proxy subjective measures. Firstly, inaccurate assessments may lead to inappropriate or inadequate interventions or treatments. If the proxy’s report does not fully capture the patient’s true experiences or symptoms, it can result in a misdiagnosis or improper management of their health condition. This can have negative consequences on the patient’s well-being and overall healthcare outcomes.
Additionally, the use of proxy subjective measures may inadvertently undermine the autonomy and agency of the individual. Children or those unable to speak for themselves may have their own unique perspectives, preferences, or priorities that may differ from those of their proxies. Relying solely on proxies without considering the patient’s own voice and experiences can perpetuate a lack of person-centered care and potentially disregard the individual’s preferences and needs.
However, it is important to note that using proxies is often a necessary and practical approach in healthcare contexts where direct patient input is not feasible or reliable. Caregivers or proxies can provide valuable information about the patient’s behavior, physical signs, and overall functioning. Careful attention must be given to establishing strong lines of communication and trust with proxies, ensuring they are well-informed about the patient’s condition and actively involving them in decision-making processes.
To mitigate the limitations and potential ramifications, healthcare professionals should seek to complement proxy subjective measures with triangulation of data from different sources. This can include incorporating objective clinical measures, observations, and, whenever possible, involving the patient directly in the evaluation process (e.g., through age-appropriate assessment tools or involving those with communication impairments through augmentative and alternative communication methods).
In conclusion, it is important to be mindful of the underlying assumptions and potential repercussions when utilizing proxy subjective health status indicators for children or people who are unable to speak for themselves. To guarantee accurate assessments and improve healthcare outcomes, it is crucial to strike a balance between the participation of proxies and direct patient input, triangulation of data, and the promotion of person-centered care.