Assessment Task 3 Assessment: Clinical Case Studies

Assessment Task 3 Assessment: Clinical Case Studies

Assessment name: Clinical Case Studies
Task description: Developmental and chronological age, gender, life experiences, support, and health status are just a few things that can impact how a person responds to illness and disease.
This assessment requires you to choose one (1) priority problem impacting the two (2) cases and apply your knowledge of evidence-based nursing practice to plan person centered care.
What you need to do: Step one
Select ONE (1) priority problem (from the list below) relevant to the case studies, (found at end of this document). Priority health problems: (Choose 1 only)

1. Pain
2. Potential for cross infection
3. Impaired fluid and electrolyte balance
   Research appropriate evidence-based nursing practices to address the selected problem for each case.
   Step 2
   Write an academic essay that addresses the following points:
   a) From each case study, identify all assessment data relevant to the chosen problem and explain the pathophysiology underlying the problem using relevant evidence.
   b) Demonstrate your understanding of age and developmental based differences in assessment data by discussing the similarities and differences in presentation of the chosen problem
   c) Poppy and Mary are to be discharged home after a successful fluid challenge. Using the SMART framework, write a goal for care to address the chosen problem.
   d) Choose TWO (2) interventions (at least one must be nurse initiated) to address the goal of care that can be implemented in the home setting.
   Describe how the interventions would be modified to meet the unique needs of each case, considering age and developmental differences. Justify your choices using current peer reviewed evidence as support.
   e) Describe the instructions you would give the cases and/or their carer about how to evaluate the efficacy of the interventions. Discuss similarities and differences in the advice given and justify these using peer reviewed evidence as support.
   This is an individual assessment
   Length: 2000 words (± 10%; excludes reference list, includes in text referencing) – Academic paper
   Estimated time to complete task: Approximately 25 – 30 hours
   Weighting: 50%
   How will I be assessed: 7 +/- point grading scale using a rubric
   Due date: This assignment is to be submitted MSB, Friday 2nd October 2020 by 11:59pm.
   Assessments are to be submitted via Turnitin in your NSB132 Blackboard site. More information about Turnitin is available on the FAQs about Turnitin page.
   Presentation requirements: Essay structure:
   You need to present your research findings as an academic paper. There needs to be a clear introduction, body, and conclusion. Introduction (approx. 150 words): the purpose of the introduction is to position the reader to understand what the paper is about. Body: in the body of the paper you develop your argument supported by evidence. (approx. 1700 words)
   Conclusion (approx. 150 words): a conclusion should summarise key findings.
   Please visit this site to get help with academic writing
   https://www.student.qut.edu.au/learning-and-assessment/writingand-referencing/structuring-your-assignment
   This assessment task must:
   • Respond to the question in the Task Description
   • Be a written academic essay containing an introduction, body and conclusion, responding to the task. Use of appendices is NOT acceptable
   • Be written in complete paragraphs that are grammatically correct. The use of dot points and headings should not be used
   • Use QUT APA 7th referencing for citing academic literature
   • Use evidence that is relevant, contemporary, peer reviewed, and no older than 7 years.
   Formatting and Referencing
   • Must include a cover sheet – Make your own cover sheet with the assessment title, your name, student number, tutor name and word count included.
   • Include a ‘footer’ on each page with your name, student number, unit code, and page number.
   • 3 cm margins (normal) on all sides, 2.0-spaced text
   • Use font, such as Arial, Calibri or Times New Roman; minimum font size 12
   • CiteWrite APA style referencing. Note: it is a requirement that page numbers for all paraphrased and direct quoted text are essential (see QUT Cite Write)
   • Headings can be used to structure your assignment logically, but these will add to your word count
   • Be submitted in electronic format via Turnitin.
   Learning outcomes 1. Apply and integrate knowledge of the key NMBA Registered measured: Nurse Standards for Nursing
   Practice, National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards, and National Health Priorities to enable effective clinical decision making, planning and action.
4. Apply the underpinning knowledge of anatomy, physiology and pathophysiology to support evidence-based decisions for planning and action.
5. Apply clinical reasoning and decision-making frameworks and beginning level communication skills to the development of foundational person-centred care plans for individuals across the lifespan.
   What you need to One-word document that contains:
   submit: 1. Assignment Cover Sheet
6. Your response to the task.
7. A reference list using APA 7th reference guidelines
   Resources needed to Your textbooks may be used as references BUT you also need to complete task: use relevant, contemporary, peer reviewed journal articles no older than 7 years old as supporting evidence.
   Note – There is no minimum number of references to be used. You will be graded on the quality and application of the sources used not quantity.
   • SMART Goal pdf • QUT Cite Write APA guide.
   • Turnitin Tip Sheets.
   Academic Integrity
   The School of Nursing takes academic integrity very seriously. All work submitted must be your own work. The work of others correctly acknowledged and referenced according to the APA guidelines.
   There are serious consequences that will be imposed should you be found to breach academic integrity. Make sure you are familiar with the MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity and view the Academic Integrity video and explore the Academic Case Studies available on your Blackboard site.
   Maintaining academic integrity is your responsibility. If in doubt, check it carefully.
   Case Studies
   The case studies to contrast and compare are below:
   Scenario 1: Poppy Sutherland
   Situation
   Poppy Sutherland is a 4-year-old girl admitted today to the emergency department with her mother for review of pain and hydration status secondary to a 30-hour history of vomiting and diarrhoea.
   Background
   Poppy has been unwell with a 30-hour history of vomiting and diarrhoea. Her mother brought her to the emergency department today because Poppy is unable to tolerate any oral fluids or diet and has had 3 episodes of watery bowel motions this morning. The small amount of water given to Poppy was vomited up shortly after consumption. She has complained to her mother that her ‘tummy hurts’. Three children at day care have had similar symptoms this week. Poppy has no other relevant medical history and is up to date with her immunisations. No IV therapy is recommended at this stage, but this will be reviewed by the doctor in 2 hours following a fluid challenge.
   Assessment
   Medical History: Nil significant, Nil allergies
   Current medications: PRN Paracetamol suppository x 1 every 4-6 hours, maximum of 4 suppositories per day; PRN Paracetamol oral syrup 240mg every 4-6 hours
   Assessment data: Temperature 38.2 0 C, BP 88/50, HR 118, R 22, SpO 2 98% on room air, Weight 16kg
   Her checks are warm to touch, and she is flushed
   Drowsy but rousable, cries when woken
   Pain: 4/10 (observational pain scale used), complains her “tummy hurts”
   Lips are pale, tongue dry, capillary refill 1 secs, no urine output for 8 hours and shakes her head and cries when offered fluids.
   Recommendations
   Poppy has been admitted to a single room in the short stay ward and will be reviewed after the fluid challenge.
   Scenario 2: Mary Smith
   Situation
   Mrs Mary Smith is a frail, thin looking 85-year-old woman admitted to the emergency department by her GP for review of pain and hydration status secondary to a 30-hour history of vomiting a diarrhoea.
   Background
   Mary has been unwell with a 30-hour history of vomiting and diarrhoea. She was brought to the emergency department by her husband as recommended by Mary’s GP as she is unable to tolerate any oral fluids and has had 3 episodes of watery bowel motions this morning. The small amount of water and diet that Mary has consumed was vomited up shortly after consumption. She is also complaining of cramping abdominal pain and nausea. Mary reports that her grandchildren had similar symptoms this week. Mary is usually in good health although she is prone to postural hypotension, particularly in the morning. No IV therapy has been recommended at this stage, but Mary will be reviewed by the doctor in 2 hours following a fluid challenge.
   Assessment
   Medical History: Osteoarthritis knees, wears glasses, uses a walking stick for stability when outside the home.
   Medications: QID Paracetamol OesteoTM 1g (oral).
   Assessment data: Temperature 37.8 0 C, HR 108 (irregular), BP 105/60, R 22 SpO 2 96% on room air
   Drowsy but rousable to speech, disorientated to place and some responses to questions are not appropriate
   Pain score 6/10 (self-report); states she has abdominal cramping pain
   Lips are pale, tongue dry, feels lightheaded when she stands up, capillary refill 1 secs, no urine output for 8 hours.
   Recommendations
   Mary has been admitted to a single room in the short stay ward and will be reviewed after the fluid challenge.
   NSB132 – Assessment Task 1 Page 7 of 9
   NSB132 Assessment Task 2 Rubric
   Name:
   Learning outcomes assessed: 1, 2, & 3 Weighting: 40%
   Criteria +/- 7 +/- 6 +/- 5 +/- 4 +/- 3 +/- 2 – 1
   Applied Knowledge & Critical Thinking
   Apply clinical reasoning framework to the development of foundational level personcentred care plans for individuals across the lifespan.
   Weighting 80%
   In your response, you have:
   • Clearly and correctly identified and interpreted all relevant health data related to your chosen priority problem.
   • All similarities and differences in the presentation of the problems identified and clearly discussed
   • Clearly set a goal for care relevant to the selected problem using SMART framework
   • Clearly and correctly discussed 2 care strategies related to the chosen problem relevant to both cases identifying all similarities and differences
   • Clearly and correctly identified all agerelated modifications in implementing the interventions
   • Clearly and correctly discussed all In your response, you have:
   • Correctly identified and interpreted all relevant health data related to your chosen priority problem
   • Most similarities and differences in the presentation of the problems identified and discussed with some clarity
   • Set a goal for care with relevance to the selected problem and mostly clear using SMART framework
   • Correctly discussed 2 care strategies related to the chosen problem relevant to both cases identifying most similarities and differences
   • Correctly identified all age-related modifications in implementing the
   interventions
   • Correctly discussed
   all evaluation methods relevant to both cases In your response, you have:
   • Described and
   interpreted relevant health data related to your chosen priority problem; 1 omitted
   • Some similarities and differences in the presentation of the problems identified and discussed
   • Set a goal for care relevant to the selected problem using the
   SMART framework
   • Compared and
   contrasted 2 care
   strategies related to the chosen problem and relevant to both cases identifying some similarities and differences
   • Identified most agerelated modifications in implementing the intervention.
   • Discussed most
   modifications in implementing the
   intervention
   • Discussed most evaluation methods relevant to both cases identifying all similarities and differences In your response, you have:
   • Some relevant health
   data related to your chosen priority problem have been identified and some interpretation attempted
   • Similarities and differences in the presentation of the problems identified and described
   • Set a goal for care relevant to the selected problem using most aspects of the SMART framework
   • Two care strategies identified and described with little analysis of appropriateness to cases and or identified problem. Some comparison of care strategies with some similarities and
   differences discussed
   • Some relevant and correct age-related modifications in implementing the
   intervention described
   • Some evaluation methods with some relevance to both cases identifying some similarities and In your response, you have:
   • Identified health data with limited relation to your chosen priority problem with little
   interpretation
   • Similarities and differences in the presentation of the problems not identified correctly or discussed
   • Goal not set or not related to stated
   problem; SMART framework not obvious
   • 2 care strategies identified with limited comparison or relevance to one or both cases. Mainly descriptive
   • Limited
   appropriate/correct age-related modifications in implementing the intervention described
   • Limited evaluation methods with limited relevance to one or both cases. Mainly descriptive In your response, you have:
   • Not identified relevant health data related to your chosen priority problem with no
   interpretation
   • Similarities and differences in the presentation of the problems not identified or discussed
   • No goals for care set
   • No comparison of
   care strategies
   • Did not identify age related modifications in implementing the intervention
   described
   • No evaluation methods
   • Findings and conclusions have not been evidenced in relevant and/or current, peer
   reviewed literature
   • No attempt to
   provide relevant supporting evidence
   Criteria +/- 7 +/- 6 +/- 5 +/- 4 +/- 3 +/- 2 – 1
   evaluation methods relevant to both cases identifying all similarities and
   differences
   • Evidenced findings and conclusions grounded in a wide range of high quality relevant, current and peer reviewed
   literature
   • Logically and
   correctly applied relevant evidence to
   the task identifying all similarities and differences
   • Evidenced findings and conclusions grounded in a wide range of relevant, current and peer reviewed literature
   • Correctly applied relevant evidence to
   the task • Findings and conclusions evidenced in a range of relevant and current, peer reviewed literature
   • Applied relevant evidence to the task most of the time differences
   • Findings and conclusions evidenced in some relevant and current, peer reviewed literature. Some invalid sources used
   • Attempted to apply
   evidence to the task; some links not clear and/or relevant • Findings and conclusions evidenced in few relevant and/or current, peer
   reviewed literature
   • Supporting
   evidence not relevant or not linked to the task
   Professional
   Writing/communication
   Demonstrates clarity of expression and adheres to information literacy standards in communication of health data and information to others.
   Weighting 20% In your response you have:
   • Logically and
   succinctly structured the content with a clear introduction, body and conclusion, to create a coherent
   response to the task
   • Consistently adhered to the English conventions of grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, spelling
   – no errors
   • Accurately and
   consistently adhered to QUT APA
   referencing conventions, in both the text and the reference list – no errors
   • Acknowledged all
   sources
   • Used non-
   discriminatory and In your response you have:
   • Logically structured the content with a clear introduction, body and conclusion, to create a clear response to the
   questions
   • Mostly adhered to the English conventions of grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, spelling
   1-2 errors
   • Accurately adhered to QUT APA
   referencing conventions, in both the text and the reference list – 1-2
   minor errors
   • Acknowledged all
   sources
   • Used non-
   discriminatory and In your response you have:
   • Logically structured the content with an introduction, body and conclusion, to create some clarity in the responses
   • Adhered to the English conventions of grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, spelling –
   3-5 errors
   • Mostly adhered to QUT APA referencing conventions, in both the text and the reference
   list – 3-5 minor errors
   • Acknowledged most
   sources
   • Mainly used non-
   discriminatory and
   culturally safe language
   • Adhered to the word count ± 10% In your response you have:
   • Used some structure to provide some clarity to your response.
   Introduction, body and conclusion evident.
   • Adhered to the English conventions of grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, and spelling some of the time – 5 errors
   • QUT APA referencing
   conventions mostly followed in the text and the reference list 5 errors
   • Some sources acknowledged
   • Used some
   discriminatory and/or culturally unsafe language
   • Adhered to the word count ± 10% In your response you have:
   • Little logic and structure which has created an incoherent response to the questions. Introduction, body and conclusion not evident.
   • Did not always
   adhere to the English conventions
   – grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, and spelling – 10 errors
   • QUT APA
   referencing conventions not always followed in the text and the reference list 10 errors
   • Sources not always acknowledged In your response you have:
   • Not logically and succinctly structured the content to create a coherent response to the questions. Introduction, body and conclusion not evident.
   • Did not adhere to the
   English conventions – many grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, and spelling – many errors
   • QUT APA
   referencing conventions not followed in the text and the reference list
   – many errors
   • Sources not acknowledged
   • Used discriminatory
   and/or culturally unsafe language
   Criteria +/- 7 +/- 6 +/- 5 +/- 4 +/- 3 +/- 2 – 1
   • culturally safe language
   Adhered to the word count ± 10% • culturally safe language
   Adhered to the word count ± 10% •
   • Used mainly discriminatory and/or culturally unsafe language Did not adhere to the word count ±
   10% • Did not adhere to
   the word count ±
   10%
   • Satisfactorily complied with the Academic Integrity standards outlined in the MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity.

Assessment Task 3 Assessment: Clinical Case Studies