Reflection on Gibbs Reflective Cycle: Roper, Logan and Tierneys Domains
NRSG 138 ASSESSMENT TASK 3: WRITTEN REFLECTION
This assignment is a reflective piece of work, which is based on the Gibbs Reflective Cycle. Throughout this assignment and under individual headings I have explained by learning, understanding and personal thoughts regarding the course work and the way this has contributed to my philosophy. Moreover, the reflective account of this assignment focuses on my understanding of Roper, Logan and Tierney’s domains relating to Biological, Psychological, Socio-cultural, Politico-economic and Environmental factors and the way this will assist me during practical work scenario. Additionally, I reflected on the model’s contribution during the time I would be practising person-centred care.
Recognition of reactions and personal development (Feelings)
The Gibbs Reflective Cycle came into existence in 1988 in the book by Graham Gibbs called Learning by Doing, practically depicting the learning from personal experiences and its long-lasting impact on our memories (Husebø, O'Regan&Nestel, 2015). I have undertaken to reflect on my experiences conforming to the Gibbs cycle to evaluate the applications of the Roper–Logan–Tierney model of nursing. Figure 1 illustrates the Gibbs reflective cycle and the implementation of the overall process. Published in 1980, the model discusses the Activities of Living or AL as represented in Figure 2.
Figure 1: Gibbs Reflective cycle
(Source: Husebø, O'Regan&Nestel, 2015)
The fundamental activities to be undertaken in order to ‘live’ are primarily outlined in this regards. I have come to understand that though this theory relates to nursing, there are a number of factors involved which play a crucial role in facilitating the living activities of an individual. Through my understanding and comprehension of the Roper–Logan–Tierney model of nursing, I have come to acknowledge its significance in healthcare facilities. This may be supported by the evidence that it has become regulation to conform to the identified pattern in Figure 2 to ascertain the lifespan and living activities performed by a patient (Betterhealth, 2019). However, this theory, in general, thrives to explain the meaning of living. As a student of nursing,it is vital to understand every aspect of the theory, especially considering Personal Care for an individual or a patient.
Figure 2: Roper–Logan–Tierney model of nursing
(Source: Williams, 2017)
Evaluation of learning experience (Evaluation)
The learning of Roper–Logan–Tierney model of nursing indicates that it is a primary or a rudimentary step in nursing. I have been able to identify several factors and consider its significance and application in my experience in nursing through my place of work. I have considered that the effective factors are biological, psychological, environmental, and socio-cultural and politico-economic factors vary in case of every individual, as is noted in the provisions of Personal Care (Ballantyne, 2016). Through my experience, I have been able to formulate the concept of the theory and its relevance in the context of delivering Personal care. I have realised that personal care is dependent on the personal factors, habits, injuries, work of the patient. The aforementioned factors may be regarded to be responsible for shaping the treatment of an individual.
Critical analysis of personal understanding (Description)
The ALs listed as a part of the Roper–Logan–Tierney model is breathing, communication, eating, drinking, elimination, mobilisation, sleeping, maintaining a safe environment and more. All of the above have been identified as crucial components of being alive. I have thus, been able to integrate this theory and its varying contexts in my learning experience. Furthermore, I have noted that assessing the factors of the Roper–Logan–Tierney model can be used for establishing the sleep patterns, the hygiene condition, food habits, and mobility for an individual. In the case of delivering personal care, it is imperative that an overall analysis of the patient is conducted to formulate the treatment plan in accordance with the model identified (Holland & Jenkins, 2019).
Regardless, considering other factors such as the biological and psychological factors can be addressed through treatment or the concepts of nursing. Though I understand the role of biological factors, the impact of socio-cultural and politico-economic conditions differ and may play a notable role in facilitating the sleep patterns, the behaviour or communication, the food habits of an individual. Furthermore, I have evaluated that the environmental aspect covers the hygiene factors determining the individual’s habits which may be used for further treatment and developing an appropriate plan of treatment.
Personal philosophy of nursing and the outcome of reflective learning (Conclusion)
I have come to the conclusion that upon performing a thorough analysis or evaluation of the dependence-independence continuum of the patient, I may be able to establish the improvement or deterioration of a given patient (de Moura et al., 2015). This may be tested against a provided or implemented care plan which is subsequently being followed for the patient. I have noted that the politico-economic factor addresses the political reforms, provision and availability of health reforms, funding and benefits offered by the governmental policies and plans (Holland & Jenkins, 2019). Additionally, I have been able to identify that the socio-cultural factors influence the psychological needs and shape the ideas of needs and requirements of a patient.
Moreover, I have come to a conclusion that the Roper–Logan–Tierney model can be used in various other ways apart from being diminished to a checklist in public and private hospitals in the UK (Stonehouse, 2017). I have come across the notion that there are always certain aspects which nurses find difficult or uneasy to discuss, hence, the patient may also not be comfortable discussing the ALs or ALDs as per the Roper–Logan–Tierney model. However, the contribution of this model for developing a care plan is extensive, as it, helps identify certain patterns. Nevertheless, I would like to mention that there could be no concrete grounds for testing the theory becomes difficult, as the patient may not be entirely honest for the formulation of the care plan.
Linking with personal philosophy and future practice (Action)
Taking my personal philosophy as previously discussed, into account, I would mention that without the five identified factors, the Roper–Logan–Tierney model is flawed. This has also been in par with the statements by Dr Roper, one of the minds behind this model. Considering the entire reflection from my learning and experiences, I would state that my future practice would be to establish this model as a learning model, not just a checklist. Furthermore, I think my personal philosophy remains in alliance with the concepts formed by Dr Roper. For instance, disregarding the ALs is not to be deemedsatisfactory; however, the linking of the ALs with the five identified factors concerned the external environment of the patient may prove beneficial in understanding the patient better (Holland & Jenkins, 2019).
Through the understanding that I have gained from this reflective practice regarding Roper–Logan–Tierney model I can conclude that this model can be used in various other ways apart from being diminished to a checklist in public and private hospitals in the UK. Particularly I think, I would be using this model while approaching person-centred care with respect to developing a care plan is extensive, as it helps identify certain patterns. Moreover, considering the 5 factors of this model, I would take note of the individual nature of each of these factors as person-centred care requires an individual approach for the best care.