In this assignment, you will review the interactive Endocrine Thyroid Case Study patient scenario and analyze the data to determine the health status of the patient. You will need a minimum of two evidence-based practice articles to include clinical practice guidelines, as well as the course textbook.

• Use the NU641 Endocrine Thyroid Case Study Questions (Word) document to complete the case study assignment.
• Follow the requirements posted in the rubric.
• This case study should be three to five pages, excluding title and references pages.

All papers must conform to the most recent APA standards.

RUBRIC

Clinical Case Study Rubric

Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.

Clinical Case Study Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary
Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced
Meets ExpectationsIntermediate
Needs ImprovementNovice
InadequateTotal PointsContent of Clinical Case StudyThe writer demonstrates a well-articulated understanding of the case study subject matter in a clear, complex, and informative manner. The case study content and theories are well developed and linked to the course content, assignment requirements, and practical experience. The case study includes relevant material that fulfills all objectives of the assignment.

Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials.

all instruction requirements noted

30 pointsThe writer demonstrates an understanding of the subject matter, and the components of the case study are accurately represented with evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role content. Course materials and scholarly resources are present to support required concepts. The paper includes relevant material that fulfills all objectives of the case study.

Cites two references.

Most instruction requirements are noted.

26 pointsThe writer demonstrates a moderate understanding of the subject matter. as evidenced by components of the case study and use of evidence-based practice, theory, or role-development. Course content is present but missing depth and or development.

Cites one reference.

23 pointsAbsent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

Significant content of case study is vague, inaccurately portrayed, or missing.

No references cited.

Submits assignment late.

20 points30Analysis and Synthesis of Case Study Content and Meaning with Content Related to Preventative GuidelinesThrough critical analysis, the submitted case study provides an accurate, clear, concise, and complete summary of the scenario.

Information from scholarly resources is synthesized, providing new information or insight related to the context of the assignment by providing both supportive and alternative information or viewpoints

Includes all major and minor relevant risk factors based on standard preventative guidelines for age and gender and treatment/follow-up plans.

all instruction requirements noted.

30 pointsCase study is complete, providing evidence of further synthesis of course content via scholarly resources.

Information is synthesized to help fulfill the case study requirements. The content supports at least one viewpoint.

Submission provides clarification of the assignment by correctly answering all posed questions within the instructions.

Includes all major risk factors and most minor relevant risk factors based on standard preventative guidelines for age and gender (i.e.’ to two minor risk factors are missing and/or one incorrect treatment plan).

Most instruction requirements are noted.

26 pointsLacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference supports the content without adding any new information or insight. Case study content may be confusing or unclear, and the summary may be incomplete.

Risk factors are partially complete (i.e., missing one to two major risk factors or three to four minor risk factors, or two incorrect treatment plans).

Missing some instruction requirements.

23 pointsSubmission is primarily a summation of the assignment without further synthesis of course content or analysis of the scenario.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

Multiple risk factors missing (e.g., three major risk or five to six minor risk factors or three incorrect treatment plans, or four or more major risk factors or seven or more minor risk factors or four or more incorrect treatment plans).

Scholarly reference(s) are incorrect or inappropriate for the topic case.

Missing several instruction requirements.

Submits assignment late.

20 points30Application of Knowledge To Clinical Aspect of Patient EncounterThe summary of the case study provides validated information via scholarly resources that offer a multidisciplinary approach to the scenario provided.

The student’s application in practice is accurate and plausible, and additional scholarly resources supporting the application are provided.

all questions posed within the assignment are answered correctly in a well-developed manner, applying knowledge with citations for validation.

Includes all relevant subjective and objective data; diagnostic testing; routine care to be provided; patient education; anticipatory guidance; review of previous diagnostics; and follow-up of acute concern and chronic health issues, etc.—based on assignment instructions.

all instruction requirements noted.

30 pointsA summary of the study, findings, and knowledge gained from the assignment is presented.

Student indicates how the information will be used within their professional practice.

all questions posed by the study are answered correctly.

Includes most of the routine content (subjective and objective data; diagnostic testing; routine care to be provided; education; anticipatory guidance; review of previous diagnostics; and follow-up) (is missing two minor details or one major detail).

Most instruction requirements are noted.

26 pointsComponents of the case study are summarized with minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development, thus presenting a more superficial analysis of content between the assignment and the broader course content. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and or development.

Student’s explanation of how the information will be used within their professional practice is vague or incomplete.

One of the questions posed is not answered and/or one of the questions is answered incorrectly.

Includes some of the routine content (subjective and objective data; diagnostic testing; routine care to be provided; education; anticipatory guidance; review of previous diagnostics; and follow-up) (is missing three minor details or two major details).

Cited one reference.

Missing some instruction requirements.

23 pointsAbsent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

Content of case study is inaccurately portrayed or missing.

Student’s explanation of how the information will be used within their professional practice is not feasible or appropriate, or student fails to explain how the information will be used within their personal practice.

Omits routine content (subjective and objective data; diagnostic testing; routine care to be provided; education; anticipatory guidance; review of previous diagnostics; and follow-up) (is missing four to five minor details or three major details or six or more minor details or four or more major details.

Two or more questions are not answered and/or are answered incorrectly.

No references cited.

Missing several instruction requirements.

Submits post late.

20 points30OrganizationWell-organized content with a clear and complex purpose statement and content argument. Writing is concise, with a logical flow of ideas.

5 pointsOrganized content with an informative purpose statement, supportive content, and summary statement. Argument content is developed, with minimal issues in content flow.

4 pointsPoor organization and flow of ideas distract from content. Narrative is difficult to follow and frequently causes reader to reread work.

Purpose statement is noted.

3 pointsIllogical flow of ideas. Prose rambles. Purpose statement is unclear or missing.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

No purpose statement.

Submits assignment late.

2 points5APA, Grammar, and SpellingCorrect APA formatting with no errors.

The writer correctly identifies reading audience, as demonstrated by appropriate language (avoids jargon and simplifies complex concepts appropriately).

Writing is concise, in active voice, and avoids awkward transitions and overuse of conjunctions.

There are no spelling, punctuation, or word-usage errors.

5 pointsCorrect and consistent APA formatting of references and cites all references used.

No more than two unique APA errors.

The writer demonstrates correct usage of formal English language in sentence construction. Variation in sentence structure and word usage promotes readability.

There are minimal to no grammar, punctuation, or word-usage errors.

4 pointsThree to four unique APA formatting errors.

The writer occasionally uses awkward sentence construction or overuses/inappropriately uses complex sentence structure. Problems with word usage (evidence of incorrect use of thesaurus) and punctuation persist, often causing some difficulties with grammar. Some words, transitional phrases, and conjunctions are overused.

Multiple grammar, punctuation, or word usage errors.

3 pointsFive or more unique formatting errors, or no attempt to format in APA.

The writer demonstrates limited understanding of formal written language use; writing is colloquial (conforms to spoken language).

The writer struggles with limited vocabulary and has difficulty conveying meaning such that only the broadest, most general messages are presented.

Grammar and punctuation are consistently incorrect. Spelling errors are numerous.

2 points5Total Points100 

1. Directly respond to at least one classmate in a way that extends meaningful discussions, adds new information, and/or offers alternative perspectives.

  The comparative analysis makes it likely to recognize strategies and actions related to several countries. Comparing the healthcare system performance of other countries by utilizing regulated performance data can offer standards and other effective insights into enhancing healthcare (Schneider et al., 2017). Comparing various countries can present new ideas and new methods of accomplishing things. Also, comparison increases the inaugural logic’s analytical power, such as determining if a country’s lucrative policy will work for another and increase the analytical explanation capability. Comparisons are good research; however, caution should be exercised because what might work well with one country may not benefit the other, and policy integration will likely require alteration. Acknowledging another country’s framework and civilization is vital when analyzing a health system, recommending health system reforms, and clarifying the statistics (Healy, 2003). The foundation for comparative analysis has two functions; it develops a list of study classifications that range from a health structure analysis down to a very comprehensive study of a specific component. This conceptual foundation assists in taking contrasts with various countries’ health systems to permit researchers and policy-makers to assess assumptions and study what works and why. 

References

Healy, J. (2003). Analysing health care systems performance: the story behind the statistics. AUST NZJ. Public Health. 2003;27(6):642-4. Doi:10.1111/j. 1467-842x.2003.tb00613.x.

Schneider, E., Sarnak, D., Squires, D., Shah, A., Doty, M. (2017). Mirror, Mirror 2017: International comparison reflects flaws and opportunities for better U.S. health care. Retrieved from https://interactives.commonwealthfund.org/2017/july/mirror-mirror/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIiaT88JOn3AIVhsDACh2rkw2sEAAYASAEEgL9p_D_BwE

1) Minimum 10  full pages (Follow the 3 x 3 rule: minimum three paragraphs per part)

Part 1: minimum 3 full pages 

Part 2: minimum 3 full pages 

Part 3: minimum 4 full pages

2)¨******APA norms, please use headers

          All paragraphs must be narrative and cited in the text- each paragraphs

          Bulleted responses are not accepted

          Dont write in the first person 

          Dont copy and pase the questions.

          Answer the question objectively, do not make introductions to your answers, answer it when you start the paragraph

         Submit 1 document per part

3)****************************** It will be verified by Turnitin (Identify the percentage of exact match of writing with any other resource on the internet and academic sources, including universities and data banks) 

********************************It will be verified by SafeAssign (Identify the percentage of similarity of writing with any other resource on the internet and academic sources, including universities and data banks)

4) Minimum 4 references not older than 5 years

5) Identify your answer with the numbers, according to the question.

Example:

Q 1. Nursing is XXXXX

Q 2. Health is XXXX

6) You must name the files according to the part you are answering: 

Example:

Part 1.doc 

Part 2.doc 

__________________________________________________________________________________

Part 1:

You must  use the information from the earlier the Literature Evaluation (See file 1)   and PICOT question paper (see file 2), and formulate a PICOT question.

1. formulate  a PICOT question addressing the following information. Your question must fullfil all requirements of PICOT question:

Issue: Infection Control and Prevention 

Topics: Cleaning and disinfection; Standards precaution and Cross-contamination

(P) Population of Focus – Oral chemotherapy patients.

(I) Intervention – Develop an educational workflow to coordinate and manage monitoring of labs, imaging and follow up appointments.

(C) Comparison – Current workflow process which has no specific guidelines.  

(O) Outcome – Nurse specialists will have a smooth workflow in process when educating oral chemotherapy patients, which will lead to a more coordinated tracking process for nurses, patients, pharmacists, and providers. 

(T) Time – During the course of patients’ treatment.

PICOT Question

When nurse specialists educate oral chemotherapy patients (P), does a coordinated educational workflow process (I) lead to a more coordinated interdisciplinary communication system (O), when compared to the current process of sporadic and uncoordinated tracking (C), over the course of the patients’ treatment (T)?

Body Assignment

1. Introduction section

2. A comparison of research questions

3. A comparison of sample populations

4. A comparison of the limitations of the study

5. A conclusion section, incorporating recommendations for further researc

Part 2:

Case Study 1: Disorders of Fluid, Electrolyte, and Acid-Base Balance

Amanda is an 18-year-old with anorexia nervosa. She was recently admitted to an eating disorders clinic with a BMI of 13.9, and although she was a voluntary patient, she was reluctant about the treatment. She was convinced that she was overweight because her clothes felt tight on her. She complained that even her hands and feet “were fat.” One of her nurses explained that a protein in her blood was low. The nurse further explained that, as difficult as it may be to believe, eating a normal healthy diet would make the “fat hands and feet” go away.

1. What protein do you suspect the nurse was referring to? 

2. How would a deficiency in this protein contribute to edema?

3. What is the difference between the physiology of pitting and nonpitting edema?

4. Because of her weakened condition, Amanda was moved around the ward in a wheelchair when she was not on bed rest. How does this affect her edematous tissues?

Part 3:

Mr. Smith brings his 4-year-old son to your primary care office. He states the boy has been ill for three days. Mr. Smith indicates that he would like antibiotics so he can send his son back to pre-school the next day.

History – Child began with sneezing, mild cough, and low grade fever of 100 degrees three days ago. All immunizations UTD. Father reports that the child has had only two incidents of URI and no other illnesses.

Social – non-smoking household. Child attends preschool four mornings a week and is insured through his father’s employment. No other siblings in the household.

PE/ROS -T 99, R 20, P 100. Alert, cooperative, in good spirits, well-hydrated. Mildly erythemic throat, no exudate, tonsils +2. Both ears mild pink tympanic membrane with good movement. Lungs clear bilaterally. All other systems WNL.

For the assignment, do the following:

1. Diagnose the child and describe how you arrived at the diagnosis (i.e. how you ruled out other diagnoses).

2. Provide a specific treatment plan for this patient, pharmacologic and/or nonpharmacologic.

3. Provide a communication plan for how the family will be involved in the treatment plan.

4. Provide resources that Mr. Smith could access which would provide information concerning your treatment decisions.

5. Utilize national standards, your pharm and/or patho book and medical or advanced practice professional sources. Do not use patient-facing sources or general nursing texts to support your diagnosis and treatment.

please see attachment 

ATTACHED IS MY DISCUSSION WITH RUBRIC INCLUDED

Needs to be at least 500 words with at least 2 scholarly articles within the past 5 years.  APA format, no plagiarism 

WEEK 7: PICOT FORMULATION

As a practice scholar, the interdisciplinary team you are leading develops the below two practice questions in PICOT format to drive practice change.

Practice Question 1: Does motivational interviewing during a regularly scheduled well-child visit for children between 5-19 years with a BMI of 30 and above as compared to practice as usual, influence BMI, BP, quality of life, and daily physical activity over 8-10 weeks?

• Identify the PICOT elements.
• What are key search terms identified in the practice question?

Conduct a library search using these search terms to locate a research study addressing this practice problem and consider the following.

• What is the research-evidence based intervention addressed in the study?
• What is the quantifiable outcome(s)? How will the outcome(s) be measured? What potential reliable and valid measurements/tools may be used to measure this quantifiable data?
• Is this practice question answerable within 8-10 weeks? Why or why not?

Practice Question 2: In the adult critical care population, does a research-based skin care integrity bundle, compared to standard care, influence the incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries over an 8-10 week time period?

• Identify the PICOT elements.
• What are key search terms identified in the practice question?

Conduct a library search using these search terms to locate a research study addressing this practice problem and consider the following.

• What is the research-evidence based intervention in the study?
• What is the quantifiable outcome(s)? How will the outcome(s) be measured? What potential reliable and valid measurements/tools may be used to measure this quantifiable data?
• Is this practice question answerable within 8-10 weeks? Why or why not?

200 Words…. No references needed!

Pick one of the models-socio-ecological, health belief model, dimensions of wellness, or the domains of active living and apply physical activity to all the levels.

Explain how culture might influence physical activity.

Discuss a health disparity for physical activity.

How can we increase health equity when it comes to being more active?

Create a professional presentation of your evidence-based intervention and change proposal to be disseminated to an interprofessional audience of leaders and stakeholders. Include the intervention, evidence-based literature, objectives, resources needed, anticipated measurable outcomes, and how the intervention would be evaluated. Submit the presentation in LoudCloud for feedback from the instructor.

https://www.homeworkmarket.com/questions/benchmark-capstone-project-change-proposal-19887019

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

After reading chapters 13 and 14, answer the following questions: 

1.      Describe at least three possible reasons that reimbursement is provided for medical procedures for pain relief rather than for comforting strategies that nurses could provide.

2.     Describe two safety risks that could result from the following health problems: hypertension, arthritis, right-sided weakness, and Alzheimer’s disease.

Discussion Protocol

1.   Follow the 3 x 3 rule: minimum three paragraphs per DQ, with a minimum of three sentences each paragraph.

2.   All answers or discussions comments submitted must be in APA format according to Publication Manual American Psychological Association (APA) (6th ed.) 2009, ISBN: 978-1-4338-0561-5

3.   Minimum of two references, not older than 2015.

Scenario:

You are working in a medical facility during the COVID-19 pandemic. The community is experiencing an alarming increase in cases, so you and your co-workers are dealing with additional stress and fatigue from more challenging workloads. There is a growing sense of concern as national attention is focused on your city. Administration is stressing the importance of quality patient care and privacy.

A reporter for the local online news website approaches you to interview you about possible data breech of the hospital’s electronic health record. This includes patient names, diagnoses, and private insurance information that was vulnerable to theft. You suspect the hospital is trying not to report this breech for fear of bad publicity.
 

Choose an ending to the scenario, and construct your paper based on those reflections.

A medication error has harmed a client– THIS IS THE ENDING.

PAPER REQUIREMENTS: 4-5 PAGES WITHOUT TITLE AND REFERENCE PAGE, APA 7, 3 SCHOLARLY ARTICLES FROM THE LAST 5 YEARS 

A) Introduction – 40 points/17% • Catches attention of the reader • States purpose of the paper • Provides a narrative outline of the paper (i.e., the assignment criteria)

B) HIPAA, Legal, and Regulatory Discussion – 40 points/17% • Presents evidence from recent scholarly publications to address the impact of technology on nursing care related to: • Patient privacy and HIPAA standards • Healthcare regulations • Legal guidelines on appropriate use of technology

C) Scenario Ending and Recommendations – 50 points/21% • Selects and presents one scenario ending as the focus of the assignment. • Evaluates the actions taken by healthcare providers as the situation evolved. • Recommends actions that could have been taken to mitigate the circumstances presented in the selected scenario ending. • Supports recommendations with evidence from recent scholarly publications

D) Advantages and Disadvantages – 50 points/21% • Presents evidence from recent scholarly publications to address the impact of technology on nursing care related to: • The advantages of appropriately using technology in healthcare • Risks of technology use in healthcare • Describes professional and ethical principles guiding the appropriate use of technology in healthcare.

E) Conclusion and Reflections – 30 points/12% • Summarizes what new information was learned by completing this assignment. • Reflects on how this new knowledge will impact future behavior as a healthcare professional.

F) Scholarly Writing and APA Format – 30 points/12%