NRNP 6541 Week 4 iHuman
iHuman Case Study:Evaluation And Management of EENT Conditions
Welcome to another i-Human Case Study. Take a moment to imagine a child and family you might meet. Based on the Learning Resources for this week, consider eye, ear, nose, and throat (EENT) conditions you may identify frequently as a Family Nurse Practitioner and those that may be more unusual. Also consider what aspects of the exam process might be more challenging for you—assessing, evaluating, providing multiple diagnoses, treatments, or offering the patient and family management advice. Work to be mindful of how to take best advantage of the simulated i-Human exam to prepare for pediatric patients with EENT conditions.
To prepare:
· Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider how to apply knowledge of EENT conditions and understanding of socio-cultural family needs in assessing, diagnosing, and treating pediatric patients.
· Access i-Human Patients from this week’s Learning Resources and review the i-Human Case Study. Based on the provided patient information, think about the health history you would need to collect from the patient.
· Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. Reflect on how the results would be used to make a diagnosis.
· Identify 3–5 possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.
· Consider the patient’s diagnosis. Think about clinical guidelines that might support this diagnosis.
· Develop a treatment plan for the patient that includes health promotion and patient education strategies for patients with EENT conditions and their families.
Assignment:
As you interact with this week’s i-Human patient, complete the assigned case study. For guidance on using i-Human, refer to the i-Human Graduate Programs Help link within the i-Human platform.
BY DAY 7 OF WEEK 4
Complete your Assignment in i-Human.
You will access i-Human from the Access i-Human link located in the Start Here module.
SUBMISSION INFORMATION
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK4Assgn+last name+first initial.
2. Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
3. Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
NRNP_6541_Week4_Assignment_Rubric
NRNP_6541_Week4_Assignment_Rubric
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
|---|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHistory: Complete an appropriate health history (Scores are automatically calculated in iHuman platform). Evidence of Academic Integrity Issues will result in a grade of 0. | 10 pts Proficient Achieve a score of 85-100% | 5 pts Competent Achieve a score of 65-84% | 1 pts Novice Achieve a score of less than 65% |
| 10 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePhysical Exam: Complete an appropriate physical exam (Scores are automatically calculated in iHuman platform). Evidence of Academic Integrity Issues will result in a grade of 0. | 10 pts Proficient Achieve a score of 85-100% | 5 pts Competent Achieve a score of 65-84% | 1 pts Novice Achieve a score of less than 65% |
| 10 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProblem Statement: Clearly written problem statement including all aspects including subjective/objective data. | 5 to >3.0 pts Proficient Clearly written problem statement including all pertinent information related to chief complaint. | 3 to >1.0 pts Competent Well written problem statement but missing 1-2 key components. | 1 to >0 pts Novice Poorly written problem statement. Incomplete ideas and sentences. Lacks basic information. |
| 5 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHPI: Complete HPI including all 8 aspects and pertinent information related to chief complaint. | 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Clearly written HPI statement including all 8 aspects and pertinent information related to chief complaint. Includes pertinent positives and negatives. | 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Well written HPI statement but missing 1-2 key components from the history. Missing pertinent positives and negatives. | 2 to >0 pts Novice Poorly written HPI statement. Incomplete ideas and sentences. Lacks basic history taking skills. Missing pertinent positives and negatives. |
| 10 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiagnosis, Differentials, and Coding: What were the key clinical presentations in this patient that led you to choose these differentials; then how did you rule them out to reach your primary diagnosis? | 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Primary diagnosis identified. Appropriate and clearly written differential diagnoses. Minimum of three differentials with appropriate rationale included. Appropriate codes included. | 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Correct primary diagnosis identified. Well written differential diagnoses. May be missing 1-2 critical components. Priority list may be out of order. At least 2 differentials are included and rationale is generally appropriate. Most codes correct but some errors. | 2 to >0 pts Novice Primary diagnosis is wrong. Differential diagnosis list too brief and inconclusive. May be missing 3 or more critical components. 0 to 2 differentials are included and rationale is lacking or not appropriate. Codes are incorrect. |
| 10 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMedications: Ordered (including over the counter) are appropriate, evidenced based, written as a complete prescription, and includes appropriate patient education. | 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Medications prescribed are appropriate, evidenced based, and full prescription is included and dosing correct. Full patient education information is included. | 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Medications prescribed are appropriate, may not be evidenced based, and missing 1 or 2 elements of the prescription. Dosing is correct. Some patient education information is missing. | 2 to >0 pts Novice Medications prescribed are inappropriate, are not evidenced based, and missing more than 3 elements of the prescription. Dosing is incorrect. Patient education information is inaccurate or missing important elements. |
| 10 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeManagement Plan: Nonpharmacological treatment, Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) is addressed and evidenced based screening tool is used. | 20 to >14.0 pts Proficient Clearly written plan covering all critical components for patient’s final diagnosis. SDOH and Health promotion/anticipatory guidance is addressed. | 14 to >8.0 pts Competent Well written plan but may be missing 1-2 key issues critical to patient’s diagnosis. Some aspects of SDOH are addressed. Some aspects of Health Promotion/anticipatory guidance are addressed. | 8 to >0 pts Novice Poorly written plan. May be missing 3 or more key issues that are critical to patient’s diagnosis. There are missing aspects of SDOH and Health Promotion anticipatory guidance |
| 20 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePatient Education | 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Comprehensive patient education is included related to current health visit and recommended health screenings. | 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Patient education is present but missing 1 or 2 key pieces of information. Missing some recommendation for health screenings. | 2 to >0 pts Novice Patient education is missing many aspects related to current visit. Recommended health screenings are missing. |
| 10 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFollow Up Instructions | 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Follow up instructions are complete and include time to next visit and specific symptoms to prompt a return visit sooner. | 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Follow up instructions are generally complete but missing 1 or 2 aspects. Symptoms that would prompt a return visit sooner are included but some are missing. | 2 to >0 pts Novice Follow up instructions are missing important timing aspects. Symptoms prompting return visit sooner are incomplete or missing. |
| 10 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholarly References and Clinical Practice Guidelines: The assignment includes a minimum of 3 scholarly references that are not older than 5 years. Clinical practice guidelines are included if applicable. | 5 pts Excellent Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 3 evidenced based references less than 5 years old are listed. Clinical practice guidelines are cited if applicable. | 3 pts Good Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 2 evidenced based references less than 5 years old are listed. Clinical practice guidelines are cited if applicable. | 1 pts Poor Contains no parenthetical/in-text citations and 0 evidenced based references listed. Clinical practice guidelines are not cited if applicable. |
| 5 pts |
Total Points: 100 |
Our team of expert nursing writers at Nursing Assignment Service can help you with your NRNP 6541 Week 4 iHuman, place your order here.
