I'm seeking a comprehensive self-reflective practice report for physiotherapy. The written report should be in moderate detail (3-5 pages) and encompass: - Case studies of patients - Personal experiences and growth - Theoretical concepts and applications Ideal skills and experience: - Background in physiotherapy as a orthopaedic physio assistant - Strong reflective writing skills - Ability to integrate theory with practice Task: Write two reflective accounts on professional ethics and academic transition using different reflective framework for a physiotherapy assistant in orthopaedic ward who stated integrated masters in physiotherapy Word Count: Two accounts of 1100 words each (+/- 10%) + 200-300 word conclusion - 50% of module grade Task Overview: This assessment requires you to write two reflective accounts: Reflect on an experience that demonstrates your ability to adhere to HCPC ethical standards using the Gibbs reflective cycle Reflect on your transition to higher education using the 'What, So What, Now What' framework Conclude with a paragraph comparing your experience with both reflective frameworks Example Reflective Writing The following text shows some of the stylistic features of this type of writing. It has third-person style writing with academic referencing in-text, particularly at the beginning and end (there could be a few more citations at the end to make it better). It refers to Gibbs' Cycle and references it. There could even be some sentences in the end section that reflect on the use of reflection and the use of Gibbs as well. This reflective account will use Gibbs' Reflective Cycle (1988) to analyse a challenging encounter with a patient who was reluctant to accept clinical advice. As a student paramedic, navigating the delicate balance between patient autonomy and clinical recommendation in the community presents a complex professional challenge. Gibbs' model provides a structured framework to learn from this experience, and my analysis will be explicitly linked to the HCPC Standards of Conduct, Performance and Ethics to ground my learning firmly in the principles of professional practice. Description My crew was called to the home of an elderly gentleman, whom I will refer to as Mr. Jones, following a neighbour's concern about a fall. We found Mr. Jones on the floor, alert and oriented but with a visible deformity to his right hip. He was in clear pain but was adamant that he did not want to go to the hospital, stating, "I just need help back to my chair. Hospitals are where old people go to die." My clinical mentor conducted a primary survey and explained the high likelihood of a fractured neck of femur, outlining the significant risks of refusing treatment. Despite this, Mr. Jones, who demonstrably had the capacity to make this decision, reiterated his refusal. Our subsequent actions involved ensuring he was as comfortable and safe as possible on the floor with pillows and blankets, facilitating a conversation with his GP via phone, and arranging for his neighbour to have a key and check on him regularly. We concluded the visit by leaving a leaflet with clear safety advice and documenting the event thoroughly. Feelings Initially, I felt a strong sense of frustration and clinical anxiety. My training had emphasised the "load and go" principle for such serious injuries, and my instinct was to override his wishes for his own perceived safety. I felt a tangible conflict between my ingrained sense of duty of care and his right to self-determination. I was also concerned about how we would be perceived by our colleagues for "leaving a patient on the floor." However, as my mentor calmly and respectfully engaged with Mr. Jones, my feelings shifted towards a respect for his courage and a degree of professional unease, as I recognised that my initial reaction was somewhat paternalistic. After we departed, I was left with a lingering worry about his welfare. Evaluation The positive aspects of this experience were rooted in my mentor's exemplary practice. She upheld HCPC Standard 1, which mandates promoting and protecting the interests of service users, by prioritising Mr. Jones's autonomy and views. Our thorough capacity assessment ensured we adhered to legal and ethical frameworks, aligning with HCPC Standard 2 on appropriate and effective communication. Furthermore, creating a robust safety net by involving his GP and neighbour demonstrated a clear commitment to HCPC Standard 8, which requires open communication with service users about risks and safety. On the other hand, the challenging aspect was my initial internal reaction, which was judgemental and failed to fully respect the principle of patient-centred care from the outset. The situation also felt professionally risky, as there was a potential for a negative outcome that could be misconstrued as a failure in our duty of care. Analysis This incident was a pivotal lesson in the practical application of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the limits of professional influence. It forced me to reconcile the sometimes-competing demands of the HCPC standards. I understood that a patient with capacity has an absolute right to refuse treatment, even if the decision is unwise, which directly relates to HCPC Standard 3 on recognising and respecting the roles of service users in their own care. The analysis reveals that in this specific case, respecting his autonomy was the primary method of protecting his interests, as defined by Standard 1, because it upheld his fundamental rights. The team's effective practice demonstrated that safety in such scenarios is not about enforcing clinical compliance but is achieved through meticulous risk assessment, empathetic communication, and the creation of collaborative safety plans. My initial feelings highlight a common challenge for students: the transition from a purely clinical, problem-solving mindset to a more holistic, ethical-practitioner model. Conclusion In conclusion, the clinical team's actions were appropriate and professionally defensible. Upon reflection, however, I wonder if we could have explored the root of his fear of hospitals more deeply. Spending more time discussing what a hospital admission might involve could have potentially alleviated some of his anxieties. We might also have more proactively explored intermediate options, such as a referral to a community falls team or a hospital-at-home service, before fully accepting his refusal. While we acted correctly, a more in-depth exploration of these alternatives may have uncovered a mutually agreeable solution. Action Plan If a similar situation arises in the future, I will take several specific steps to develop my practice. I will begin by proactively managing my own biases, consciously checking any paternalistic instincts at the outset and reminding myself that my role is to advise and support, not to command. I plan to enhance my communication by using more open-ended questions to better understand the patient's values and fears, moving beyond the immediate clinical problem. I also intend to expand my knowledge of community care pathways so I can suggest these as potential compromises, thereby demonstrating a more flexible and patient-centred approach. Finally, I will ensure my documentation is meticulous in recording the capacity assessment, the specific risks communicated, and the safety netting provided, as this written record is the crucial evidence of our professional and ethical decision-making. This reflection, guided by Gibbs' cycle, has been invaluable in moving my practice towards a more robust and patient-centred model.