LAB ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING THE ABDOMEN A male went to the emergency room for seve

LAB ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING THE ABDOMEN
A male went to the emergency room for seve

LAB ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING THE ABDOMEN
A male went to the emergency room for severe midepigastric abdominal pain. He was diagnosed with AAA ; however, as a precaution, the doctor ordered a CTA scan.
Because of a high potential for misdiagnosis, determining the precise cause of abdominal pain can be time consuming and challenging. By analyzing case studies of abnormal abdominal findings, nurses can prepare themselves to better diagnose conditions in the abdomen.
In this Lab Assignment, you will analyze an Episodic note case study that describes abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting. You will consider what history should be collected from the patients as well as which physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted. You will also formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
TO PREPARE
Review the Episodic note case study your instructor provides you for this week’s Assignment. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your Episodic note case study.
With regard to the Episodic note case study provided:Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study.
Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient in the case study.
Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
Identify at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.
THE ASSIGNMENT
Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
Analyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
Is the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not?
What diagnostic tests would be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
Would you reject/accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not? Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differential diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
NURS_6512_Week_6_Assignment_1_Rubric
NURS_6512_Week_6_Assignment_1_Rubric
CriteriaRatingsPts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWith regard to the SOAP note case study provided, address the following:Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
12 to >9.0 ptsExcellent
The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation.
9 to >6.0 ptsGood
The response accurately analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
6 to >3.0 ptsFair
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
3 to >0 ptsPoor
The response inaccurately analyzes or is missing analysis of the subjective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
12 to >9.0 ptsExcellent
The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation.
9 to >6.0 ptsGood
The response accurately analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
6 to >3.0 ptsFair
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or inaccurately lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
3 to >0 ptsPoor
The response inaccurately analyzes or is missing analysis of the objective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIs the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not?
16 to >13.0 ptsExcellent
The response clearly and accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a thorough and detailed explanation.
13 to >10.0 ptsGood
The response accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an explanation.
10 to >7.0 ptsFair
The response vaguely and/or inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a vague explanation.
7 to >0 ptsPoor
The response inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an inaccurate or missing explanation.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWhat diagnostic tests would be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
20 to >17.0 ptsExcellent
The response thoroughly and accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly, thoroughly, and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
17 to >14.0 ptsGood
The response accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
14 to >11.0 ptsFair
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
11 to >0 ptsPoor
The response inaccurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case, with an inaccurate or missing explanation of how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Would you reject or accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not?· Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differenial diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
25 to >22.0 ptsExcellent
The response states clearly whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a thorough, accurate, and detailed explanation of sound reasoning. The response clearly, thoroughly, and accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained clearly, accurately, and thoroughly using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
22 to >19.0 ptsGood
The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an accurate explanation of sound reasoning. The response accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained accurately using three different references from current evidence-based literature.
19 to >16.0 ptsFair
The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a vague explanation of the reasoning. The response identifies two or three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained vaguely and/or inaccurately using three references from current evidence-based literature.
16 to >0 ptsPoor
The response inaccurately or is missing a statement of whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an explanation that is inaccurate and/or missing. The response identifies two or fewer conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is missing or explained inaccurately using three or fewer references from current evidence-based literature.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.
4 to >3.0 ptsGood
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive.
3 to >2.0 ptsFair
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic.
2 to >0 ptsPoor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation 5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 to >3.0 ptsGood
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3 to >2.0 ptsFair
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
2 to >0 ptsPoor
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
4 to >3.0 ptsGood
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.
3 to >2.0 ptsFair
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.
2 to >0 ptsPoor
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

Default image
admin
Articles: 38790

Quick Quote

QUICK QUOTE

Approximately 250 words