Tag: Care Plans

  • [Solved] NUR501

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    I need your expertise with an assignment – 2 years ago **files (1)** – ## questionweek3research.docx **## questionweek3research.docx** **_Middle Range Theory Utilization & Application Paper_** **Goal:** Analyze and evaluate a middle range theory. You will select a middle range theory and identify ap…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    I need your expertise with an assignment

    – 2 years ago

    **files (1)**

    – ## questionweek3research.docx

    **## questionweek3research.docx**

    **_Middle Range Theory Utilization & Application Paper_**

    **Goal:**

    Analyze and evaluate a middle range theory.  You will select a middle range theory and identify application of nursing theories into clinical practice
    **.**

    **Content Requirements:**

    1. Components of the theory

    ·

    · Discuss the major concepts of the theory

    · Philosophical basis or worldview change, advancing health

    2. Structural aspects of the theory

    ·

    · Discuss the framework of the theory.

    3. Identify an area of your practice where this theory could be applicable

    ·

    · What question does the theory help to answer?

    · Describe the area of interest in relationship to the theory/theoretical model.

    · Is it appropriate for the practice setting and is it applicable?

    · Discuss the strength and weakness of the theory. If there is weakness, discuss what makes it difficult to be used in practice.

    4. Use of theory in clinical practice.

    ·

    · Performing a literature review is essential to completing this section. If there is no literature available about the application of this theory in practice, address reason(s) why based on your findings.

    5. Evaluation of theory

    ·

    · Is this theory used to understand and apply into practice?

    · What difficulties did you encounter or would anticipate encountering in using this theory?

    ·

    · What would make this theory more usable or applicable to practice?

    **Submission Instructions:**

    · The paper is to be clear and concise and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation and misspelling.

    · The paper should be formatted per current APA and references should be current (published within last five years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions.)

    · The paper is to be 3 – 5 pages in length, excluding the title, abstract and references page.

    · Incorporate a minimum of 3 current (published within last five years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions) within your work. Journal articles and books should be referenced according to current APA style.

    **## questionweek3research.docx**

    **_Middle Range Theory Utilization & Application Paper_**

    **Goal:**

    Analyze and evaluate a middle range theory.  You will select a middle range theory and identify application of nursing theories into clinical practice
    **.**

    **Content Requirements:**

    1. Components of the theory

    ·

    · Discuss the major concepts of the theory

    · Philosophical basis or worldview change, advancing health

    2. Structural aspects of the theory

    ·

    · Discuss the framework of the theory.

    3. Identify an area of your practice where this theory could be applicable

    ·

    · What question does the theory help to answer?

    · Describe the area of interest in relationship to the theory/theoretical model.

    · Is it appropriate for the practice setting and is it applicable?

    · Discuss the strength and weakness of the theory. If there is weakness, discuss what makes it difficult to be used in practice.

    4. Use of theory in clinical practice.

    ·

    · Performing a literature review is essential to completing this section. If there is no literature available about the application of this theory in practice, address reason(s) why based on your findings.

    5. Evaluation of theory

    ·

    · Is this theory used to understand and apply into practice?

    · What difficulties did you encounter or would anticipate encountering in using this theory?

    ·

    · What would make this theory more usable or applicable to practice?

    **Submission Instructions:**

    · The paper is to be clear and concise and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation and misspelling.

    · The paper should be formatted per current APA and references should be current (published within last five years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions.)

    · The paper is to be 3 – 5 pages in length, excluding the title, abstract and references page.

    · Incorporate a minimum of 3 current (published within last five years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions) within your work. Journal articles and books should be referenced according to current APA style.

  • [Solved] mod 3 replys

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    In-depth study guidance and analytical solution covering mod 3 replys.

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Full assignment prompt and step-by-step guidance are included in the downloadable solution file.

  • [Solved] MEDICAL TERMINOLOGY- HP114

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    DISCUSSION: Medical terms ASSIGNMENT: LANGUAGE MASTERY JOURNEY – 2 years ago

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    DISCUSSION:

    Medical terms

    ASSIGNMENT:

    LANGUAGE MASTERY JOURNEY

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] W DISC 6

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    #### **Community Work & Health Promotion** **Objective:** This discussion post aims to explore the role and impact of community partnerships or coalitions in promoting health and well-being within your home community. You will describe a specific partnership, the health area they are addressing, the…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    #### **Community Work & Health Promotion**

    **Objective:** This discussion post aims to explore the role and impact of community partnerships or coalitions in promoting health and well-being within your home community. You will describe a specific partnership, the health area they are addressing, the organizations involved, and how the partnership has gained visibility and impact.

    **Assignment Instructions:**

    **Introduction:**

    – **Contextualize the Importance of Community Partnerships:**
    – Begin by discussing the significance of community partnerships or coalitions in addressing public health issues. Highlight how these collaborative efforts can lead to more comprehensive and effective health promotion initiatives.

    **1. Identifying the Community Partnership/Coalition:**

    – **Name and Description:**
    – Provide the name of the community partnership or coalition.
    – Offer a brief description of the partnership, including its mission, goals, and overall purpose.

    **2. Health Area Addressed:**

    – **Focus Area:**
    – Describe the specific health area or issue that the partnership is addressing.

    **3. Organizations Involved:**

    – **List and Describe Partner Organizations:**
    – Identify the key organizations involved in the partnership. This may include:
    – Local health departments and public health agencies.
    – Hospitals and healthcare providers.
    – Non-profit organizations and community-based groups.
    – Schools and educational institutions.
    – Faith-based organizations and advocacy groups.
    – Businesses and local government agencies.
    – **Roles and Contributions:**
    – Describe the roles and contributions of each organization within the partnership. Explain how their collaboration enhances the overall effectiveness of the initiative.

    **4. Critical Analysis:**

    – **Evaluate the Effectiveness of the Partnership:**
    – Critically analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the partnership. Consider factors such as:
    – The level of collaboration and communication between partner organizations.
    – The impact of the partnership on the targeted health area.
    – Any challenges faced and how they were addressed.
    – **Recommendations for Improvement:**
    – Suggest ways to enhance the effectiveness and visibility of the partnership. Consider strategies for increasing community engagement, securing funding, and sustaining long-term impact.

    **5.Conclusion:**

    – **Summarize Key Points:**
    – Recap the main insights gained from describing and analyzing the community partnership.

    Please note the grading rubric for the discussion board.

    As a reminder, all discussion posts must be a minimum of 350 words initial, references must be cited in APA format 7th Edition, and must include a minimum of 2 scholarly resources published within the past 5 years with in text-citations.

    No PLAGIARISM MORE THAN 10 % IS ALLOWED

    CHECK YOUR GRAMMAR

    DUE DATE APRIL 4, 2025

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] Tumor case study

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    The episode was unwitnessed by providers but observed by his mother. – 2 years ago **files (3)** – ## case2todo.docx – ## ME_Sample_CaseStudy_.docx – N638CaseStudyGradingRubric_2025.docx **## case2todo.docx** **Syncope, Weakness, Anorexia, Brain Tumor15554303'. Case/ake Nine** **S:** 16-year-old…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    The episode was unwitnessed by providers but observed by his mother.

    – 2 years ago

    **files (3)**

    – ## case2todo.docx

    – ## ME_Sample_CaseStudy_.docx

    – N638CaseStudyGradingRubric_2025.docx

    **## case2todo.docx**

    **Syncope, Weakness, Anorexia, Brain Tumor15554303'. Case/ake Nine**

    **S:** 16-year-old Hispanic male with weakness and reported loss of consciousness on Sunday for approximately 2–3 minutes. The episode was unwitnessed by providers but observed by his mother. He regained awareness quickly and was oriented. No EMS called or ER evaluation performed. Patient has a history of brain tumor with surgeries in 2016 and 2020; receives monthly chemotherapy. Complaints of fatigue, shortness of breath on exertion, poor appetite, difficulty walking, and generalized weakness. Often sleeps during the day and struggles to expectorate sputum. Uses a walker or cane for ambulation.
    Mother confirms poor appetite and notes he has not been eating well. Last labs (2/6/25) were WNL. No vomiting or GI symptoms. Neurology consult is scheduled in 2 weeks.

    **Past Medical History:** Brain tumor with surgeries (2016, 2020), on chemotherapy

    **Social History:** Lives with mother, no current school attendance due to medical condition

    **O:** **VS:** Temp: 98.6°F | HR: not taken | RR: not taken | BP: not taken | Wt: 147.6 lbs (66.95 kg) | Ht: 60 in (152.4 cm) | BMI: 28.82 (95.98%)
    **General:** Alert, well-nourished, no acute distress

    **Head:** Normocephalic, atraumatic.
    **Eyes:** PERRLA, sclera anicteric.
    **ENT:** Moist mucosa, clear throat.
    **Neck:** Supple, full ROM, no LAD.
    **Skin:** Warm, dry, no rashes

    **Heart:** RRR, no murmurs, normal S1/S2.
    **Lungs:** Clear to auscultation, good air movement

    **Abdomen:** Soft, nontender, no organomegaly.
    **Extremities:** No edema, no cyanosis or clubbing

    **Neuro:** Alert, oriented x3, generalized weakness with ambulation, uses walker; no focal deficits

    **A:** **R53.1** – Weakness.
    **R63.0** – Anorexia.
    **Z85.841** – Personal history of brain tumor.
    **Z51.11** – Encounter for antineoplastic chemotherapy

    **P:** **Weakness**: Safety reinforced, use of walker/cane encouraged, continue neurology referral

    **Anorexia**: Counsel on iron-rich and calorie-dense foods: lean meats, fortified cereals, beans, greens. Vitamin B12, folate, and Vitamin C-rich foods recommended. Encourage small, frequent meals and high-calorie shakes. Monitor for weight loss and hydration status. Energy conservation techniques recommended. Moderate exercise with clearance from oncologist

    **Education:** Emphasized nutrition, hydration, and rest. Encouraged mother to monitor for any new neurologic symptoms, prolonged fatigue, vomiting, or worsening weakness. Instructed to go to ER for any acute changes in consciousness, severe fatigue, vomiting, seizures, or breathing issues. Regular follow-up with oncology, neurology, and PCP encouraged.
    **Follow-Up:** Neurology in 2 weeks. RTC in 3 months or sooner if symptoms worsen

    **## ME_Sample_CaseStudy_.docx**

    1

    2

    **CC:**(10 yo female with constipation x 4 days)

    **HPI**: D.E. is a 10-year-old black female with no significant PMH who presents to the office for a sick visit, accompanied by his mother for a constipation evaluation. She has had hard stools, straining with bowel movements, and minimal discomfort for the last 4 days. There is no abdominal pain, vomiting, fever, or blood in stool. The patient has no recent dietary change or illness. Normal baseline pattern: The patient’s mother reports that she usually has one bowel movement every 1-2 days, which is typically formed and easy to pass. No prior history of chronic constipation requiring medical intervention. Occasional mild constipation in the past, but symptoms usually resolved within 1–2 days with increased fluid intake—no history of fecal incontinence, soiling, or painful defecation. No history of withholding behaviors (e.g., avoiding bowel movements due to fear of pain). She has no history of chronic constipation. The patient is in 5th grade and participates in the gym twice daily.

    **Diet:** She likes rice and pasta and occasionally eats vegetables but does not consistently consume fiber-rich foods. Dairy intake: She consumes moderate amounts of milk and cheese, which may contribute to constipation. Fluid intake: The patient drinks adequate water daily and has no excessive intake of sugary drinks or soda.

    **Sleep:** Pt sleeps from 8. P.M. to 6 A.M.

    **Behavior:** Social interaction is age-appropriate. Has friends and good peer interactions. Engages in structured physical activities —no concerns from school or parents.

    **Past Medical History (PMH):** No significant medical history.

    Surgical history: None

    Medications: None currently prescribed.

    Allergies: NKDA.

    Immunization: review and Up to date.

    Unremarkable prenatal history

    **Family History**: Both parents are healthy with no medical history, have two younger siblings, a five-year-old brother who has asthma and a three-year-old sister with Autistic

    **Social History:** She lives with her parents and two siblings in a private apartment. He likes to play with his siblings and friends. She attends swimming classes twice a week. She has no sedentary lifestyle concerns (e.g., excessive screen time). The home is smoke-free and pet-free. His grandmother visits twice a month from Ghana and usually stays for five months at a time.

    **Review of Systems (ROS)**

    **General:** Healthy-appearing, well-nourished, and alert child.

    **Skin**: Denies skin, hair, and nail symptoms.

    **HEENT: Head:** No history of head injury.
    **Eyes:** denies photophobia, glaucoma, or diplopia in his past medical/social history.
    **Ears:** canal clear bilaterally. TM clear bilaterally.
    **Nose** Pink nasal mucosa, indicating healthy tissue.
    **Throat**: No tooth pain or gum bleeding, and oral mucosa pink.

    **Neck:** Supple, No lumps, goiter, pain. No swollen glands.

    **Lymph Nodes: No** cervical

    **Thorax and Lungs:** symmetric.

    **Cardiovascular:** no chest pains and no edema.

    **Gastrointestinal: Constipation x 4 days**, straining with bowel movements, and passing hard, pellet-like stools. No diarrhea. Reports abdominal discomfort, intermittent, worse after meals. No nausea, vomiting, blood in stool, or excessive gas. Appetite normal/decreased. No history of food intolerance.

    Genitourinary: No dysuria, hematuria, or recent urinary tract infections. No urinary incontinence or enuresis.

    **Musculoskeletal:** Full motion range and normal flexion and extension

    **Respiratory**: No cough, wheezing, or shortness of breath.

    **Physical Exam:**

    **VS**: BP: 104/68 mmHg- Temperature: 98.4°F; HR: 82 bpm, RR: 18/min, Spo2: 98% on RA. Growth Percentiles: Weight: 28 kg (50th percentile), Height: 130 cm (50th percentile).

    **General:** Healthy-appearing child. Well-nourished and alert. Weighs within the normal range. Mucous membranes are moist and pink. The respiratory pattern is unremarkable, with no grunting or nasal flaring.

    **Skin:** Warm, dry, no rashes or pallor. No signs of dehydration (no tenting, no dry mucous membranes).

    **Head and face**: The size of the skull is developmentally appropriate and is in proportion to the rest of the body. Facial move symmetrically and midline. There is no evidence of dropping, asymmetry, or disproportionate features.

    **Eye:** No conjunctival pallor anicteric sclera.

    **Neck**: Palpation reveals no lymphadenopathy, swelling, or tenderness. No nuchal rigidity

    **Cardiovascular:** Rhythm is regular. No heart murmur, rubs, or gallops. No peripheral edema.

    **Respiration:** exhibits normal structure without evidence of curvature or protrusions. Respiration is regular at a rate of 18 bpm. Lungs are clear bilaterally.

    **Abdomen:** Inspection: Mild distension noted. No visible peristalsis.
    Auscultation: Positive bowel sounds in all four quadrants.
    Palpation:
    Soft, mild tenderness in LLQ.
    No guarding, rebound tenderness, or rigidity.
    No hepatosplenomegaly.
    No palpable masses.
    Percussion: No tympany or dullness no obstruction.

    **Neurology:** Reflexes are present and symmetric. Cranial Nerves: No sign of apparent neurological deficit.

    **Age-Appropriate Developmental Exam**

    At 10 years old, she demonstrates appropriate developmental milestones:

    Language: Speaks fluently and understands complex instructions.

    Motor Skills: Coordinates fine motor tasks well (e.g., handwriting, drawing).

    Social Skills: She engages appropriately with peers and adults.

    **Differential Diagnosis (DD)**

    **DD#: 1: Functional Constipation**

    This is the most likely diagnosis in this case. Functional constipation “is the presence of two or more of the following for a minimum of one month: straining during defecation, hard stools, the sensation of incomplete evacuation, manual maneuvers to facilitate defecation, less than three bowel movements per week, and absence of loose stools without laxatives” (Bashir, & Khan, 2024).  This patient has several of the classic characteristics of functional constipation in the form of hard stools, straining, and mild discomfort without the accompaniment of any ominous signs such as hematochezia, fever, or substantial weight loss. The lack of recent diet changes or illness also validates this diagnosis. Relevant positives are low fiber and straining in bowel movements. Relevant negatives are no abdominal pain, vomiting, fever, or systemic symptoms.

    **DD#2. Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS)**

    Though less probable due to the limited symptom duration and lack of alternate constipation/diarrhea, IBS should be considered in the differential diagnosis (Di Rosa et al., 2023). IBS is the recurrent or chronic abdominal pain accompanied by a change in bowel habits, either diarrhea, constipation, or both. As seen in IBS, this patient does not complain of alternating bowel habits, bloating, or mucus with stool. Also, a lack of a chronic course of symptoms excludes IBS as an actual diagnosis at this point. IBS is a clinical diagnosis requiring recurrent symptoms for ≥2 months. Follow-up overtime for different symptoms will discriminate between functional constipation and IBS to assess if constipation becomes recurrent or alternating with diarrhea. The correct positives are a few abdominal pains and alterations in bowel habits. The correct negatives are the absence of diarrhea, bloating, and mucus per stool.

    **DD#3. Intestinal Obstruction**

    Intestinal obstruction is a more ominous but less likely differential diagnosis. It usually presents with severe pain, vomiting, distension, and reduced bowel sounds. Even though the patient has slight distension and straining, no evidence of severe pain, vomiting, or reduced bowel sounds, characteristic of obstruction, exists (Griffiths & Glancy, 2023). In addition, the slow development and absence of systemic signs are contraindicative of intestinal obstruction here. This diagnosis would be more likely only if the patient worsens or new warning signs appear. Positives of relevance are mild distension and straining. Negatives of relevance are no vomiting, severe pain, or bowel sounds.

    **PLAN OF CARE (P)**

    Testing and Diagnostic Studies

    – No immediate testing is required based on clinical presentation.

    – Consider abdominal X-ray if symptoms persist or worsen despite treatment.

    **Pharmacologic Treatment**

    – Polyethylene Glycol 3350 (MiraLAX)

    -Dosing: 0.7–1.5 g/kg/day (maximum 17 g/day) mixed in water daily.

    -Patient-Specific Dose: 17 g once daily at night.

    **Non-Pharmacologic Treatment**

    – Increase fluid intake to at least 6–8 cups of water daily.

    – Encourage a high-fiber diet rich in fruits.

    – Promote regular toilet habits by encouraging the child to sit on the toilet for 5–10 minutes after daily meals.

    **Patient Education**

    – Educated the patient and parent about the importance of maintaining adequate hydration and incorporating more fiber into the diet.

    – Emphasized the need for consistent toilet habits to establish a routine.

    – Advised monitoring for worsening symptoms such as persistent pain, blood in stool, or weight loss, which would require immediate medical attention.

    **Anticipatory Guidance**

    – Discussed strategies to prevent future episodes of constipation, including maintaining a balanced diet and staying physically active.

    – Reinforced the importance of routine wellness visits for ongoing health maintenance.

    **Follow-Up**

    – RTC if symptoms persist beyond 10 days

    – Schedule routine wellness visits in 6 months.

    -If symptoms persist, TSH, celiac panel, or abdominal imaging, and refer to GI for further evaluation

    References

    Bashir, S. K., & Khan, M. B. (2024). Pediatric Functional Constipation: A New Challenge.
    _Advanced Gut & Microbiome Research_,
    _2024_(1), 5569563.

    Di Rosa, C., Altomare, A., Terrigno, V., Carbone, F., Tack, J., Cicala, M., & Guarino, M. P. L. (2023). Constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C): Effects of different nutritional patterns on intestinal dysbiosis and symptoms.
    _Nutrients_,
    _15_(7), 1647.

    Griffiths, S., & Glancy, D. G. (2023). Intestinal obstruction.
    _Surgery (Oxford)_,
    _41_(1), 47-54.

    **N638CaseStudyGradingRubric_2025.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/n638casestudygradingrubric-2025-docx-10246877)

    **N638CaseStudyGradingRubric_2025.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/n638casestudygradingrubric-2025-docx-10246877)

    **## case2todo.docx**

    **Syncope, Weakness, Anorexia, Brain Tumor15554303'. Case/ake Nine**

    **S:** 16-year-old Hispanic male with weakness and reported loss of consciousness on Sunday for approximately 2–3 minutes. The episode was unwitnessed by providers but observed by his mother. He regained awareness quickly and was oriented. No EMS called or ER evaluation performed. Patient has a history of brain tumor with surgeries in 2016 and 2020; receives monthly chemotherapy. Complaints of fatigue, shortness of breath on exertion, poor appetite, difficulty walking, and generalized weakness. Often sleeps during the day and struggles to expectorate sputum. Uses a walker or cane for ambulation.
    Mother confirms poor appetite and notes he has not been eating well. Last labs (2/6/25) were WNL. No vomiting or GI symptoms. Neurology consult is scheduled in 2 weeks.

    **Past Medical History:** Brain tumor with surgeries (2016, 2020), on chemotherapy

    **Social History:** Lives with mother, no current school attendance due to medical condition

    **O:** **VS:** Temp: 98.6°F | HR: not taken | RR: not taken | BP: not taken | Wt: 147.6 lbs (66.95 kg) | Ht: 60 in (152.4 cm) | BMI: 28.82 (95.98%)
    **General:** Alert, well-nourished, no acute distress

    **Head:** Normocephalic, atraumatic.
    **Eyes:** PERRLA, sclera anicteric.
    **ENT:** Moist mucosa, clear throat.
    **Neck:** Supple, full ROM, no LAD.
    **Skin:** Warm, dry, no rashes

    **Heart:** RRR, no murmurs, normal S1/S2.
    **Lungs:** Clear to auscultation, good air movement

    **Abdomen:** Soft, nontender, no organomegaly.
    **Extremities:** No edema, no cyanosis or clubbing

    **Neuro:** Alert, oriented x3, generalized weakness with ambulation, uses walker; no focal deficits

    **A:** **R53.1** – Weakness.
    **R63.0** – Anorexia.
    **Z85.841** – Personal history of brain tumor.
    **Z51.11** – Encounter for antineoplastic chemotherapy

    **P:** **Weakness**: Safety reinforced, use of walker/cane encouraged, continue neurology referral

    **Anorexia**: Counsel on iron-rich and calorie-dense foods: lean meats, fortified cereals, beans, greens. Vitamin B12, folate, and Vitamin C-rich foods recommended. Encourage small, frequent meals and high-calorie shakes. Monitor for weight loss and hydration status. Energy conservation techniques recommended. Moderate exercise with clearance from oncologist

    **Education:** Emphasized nutrition, hydration, and rest. Encouraged mother to monitor for any new neurologic symptoms, prolonged fatigue, vomiting, or worsening weakness. Instructed to go to ER for any acute changes in consciousness, severe fatigue, vomiting, seizures, or breathing issues. Regular follow-up with oncology, neurology, and PCP encouraged.
    **Follow-Up:** Neurology in 2 weeks. RTC in 3 months or sooner if symptoms worsen

    **## ME_Sample_CaseStudy_.docx**

    1

    2

    **CC:**(10 yo female with constipation x 4 days)

    **HPI**: D.E. is a 10-year-old black female with no significant PMH who presents to the office for a sick visit, accompanied by his mother for a constipation evaluation. She has had hard stools, straining with bowel movements, and minimal discomfort for the last 4 days. There is no abdominal pain, vomiting, fever, or blood in stool. The patient has no recent dietary change or illness. Normal baseline pattern: The patient’s mother reports that she usually has one bowel movement every 1-2 days, which is typically formed and easy to pass. No prior history of chronic constipation requiring medical intervention. Occasional mild constipation in the past, but symptoms usually resolved within 1–2 days with increased fluid intake—no history of fecal incontinence, soiling, or painful defecation. No history of withholding behaviors (e.g., avoiding bowel movements due to fear of pain). She has no history of chronic constipation. The patient is in 5th grade and participates in the gym twice daily.

    **Diet:** She likes rice and pasta and occasionally eats vegetables but does not consistently consume fiber-rich foods. Dairy intake: She consumes moderate amounts of milk and cheese, which may contribute to constipation. Fluid intake: The patient drinks adequate water daily and has no excessive intake of sugary drinks or soda.

    **Sleep:** Pt sleeps from 8. P.M. to 6 A.M.

    **Behavior:** Social interaction is age-appropriate. Has friends and good peer interactions. Engages in structured physical activities —no concerns from school or parents.

    **Past Medical History (PMH):** No significant medical history.

    Surgical history: None

    Medications: None currently prescribed.

    Allergies: NKDA.

    Immunization: review and Up to date.

    Unremarkable prenatal history

    **Family History**: Both parents are healthy with no medical history, have two younger siblings, a five-year-old brother who has asthma and a three-year-old sister with Autistic

    **Social History:** She lives with her parents and two siblings in a private apartment. He likes to play with his siblings and friends. She attends swimming classes twice a week. She has no sedentary lifestyle concerns (e.g., excessive screen time). The home is smoke-free and pet-free. His grandmother visits twice a month from Ghana and usually stays for five months at a time.

    **Review of Systems (ROS)**

    **General:** Healthy-appearing, well-nourished, and alert child.

    **Skin**: Denies skin, hair, and nail symptoms.

    **HEENT: Head:** No history of head injury.
    **Eyes:** denies photophobia, glaucoma, or diplopia in his past medical/social history.
    **Ears:** canal clear bilaterally. TM clear bilaterally.
    **Nose** Pink nasal mucosa, indicating healthy tissue.
    **Throat**: No tooth pain or gum bleeding, and oral mucosa pink.

    **Neck:** Supple, No lumps, goiter, pain. No swollen glands.

    **Lymph Nodes: No** cervical

    **Thorax and Lungs:** symmetric.

    **Cardiovascular:** no chest pains and no edema.

    **Gastrointestinal: Constipation x 4 days**, straining with bowel movements, and passing hard, pellet-like stools. No diarrhea. Reports abdominal discomfort, intermittent, worse after meals. No nausea, vomiting, blood in stool, or excessive gas. Appetite normal/decreased. No history of food intolerance.

    Genitourinary: No dysuria, hematuria, or recent urinary tract infections. No urinary incontinence or enuresis.

    **Musculoskeletal:** Full motion range and normal flexion and extension

    **Respiratory**: No cough, wheezing, or shortness of breath.

    **Physical Exam:**

    **VS**: BP: 104/68 mmHg- Temperature: 98.4°F; HR: 82 bpm, RR: 18/min, Spo2: 98% on RA. Growth Percentiles: Weight: 28 kg (50th percentile), Height: 130 cm (50th percentile).

    **General:** Healthy-appearing child. Well-nourished and alert. Weighs within the normal range. Mucous membranes are moist and pink. The respiratory pattern is unremarkable, with no grunting or nasal flaring.

    **Skin:** Warm, dry, no rashes or pallor. No signs of dehydration (no tenting, no dry mucous membranes).

    **Head and face**: The size of the skull is developmentally appropriate and is in proportion to the rest of the body. Facial move symmetrically and midline. There is no evidence of dropping, asymmetry, or disproportionate features.

    **Eye:** No conjunctival pallor anicteric sclera.

    **Neck**: Palpation reveals no lymphadenopathy, swelling, or tenderness. No nuchal rigidity

    **Cardiovascular:** Rhythm is regular. No heart murmur, rubs, or gallops. No peripheral edema.

    **Respiration:** exhibits normal structure without evidence of curvature or protrusions. Respiration is regular at a rate of 18 bpm. Lungs are clear bilaterally.

    **Abdomen:** Inspection: Mild distension noted. No visible peristalsis.
    Auscultation: Positive bowel sounds in all four quadrants.
    Palpation:
    Soft, mild tenderness in LLQ.
    No guarding, rebound tenderness, or rigidity.
    No hepatosplenomegaly.
    No palpable masses.
    Percussion: No tympany or dullness no obstruction.

    **Neurology:** Reflexes are present and symmetric. Cranial Nerves: No sign of apparent neurological deficit.

    **Age-Appropriate Developmental Exam**

    At 10 years old, she demonstrates appropriate developmental milestones:

    Language: Speaks fluently and understands complex instructions.

    Motor Skills: Coordinates fine motor tasks well (e.g., handwriting, drawing).

    Social Skills: She engages appropriately with peers and adults.

    **Differential Diagnosis (DD)**

    **DD#: 1: Functional Constipation**

    This is the most likely diagnosis in this case. Functional constipation “is the presence of two or more of the following for a minimum of one month: straining during defecation, hard stools, the sensation of incomplete evacuation, manual maneuvers to facilitate defecation, less than three bowel movements per week, and absence of loose stools without laxatives” (Bashir, & Khan, 2024).  This patient has several of the classic characteristics of functional constipation in the form of hard stools, straining, and mild discomfort without the accompaniment of any ominous signs such as hematochezia, fever, or substantial weight loss. The lack of recent diet changes or illness also validates this diagnosis. Relevant positives are low fiber and straining in bowel movements. Relevant negatives are no abdominal pain, vomiting, fever, or systemic symptoms.

    **DD#2. Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS)**

    Though less probable due to the limited symptom duration and lack of alternate constipation/diarrhea, IBS should be considered in the differential diagnosis (Di Rosa et al., 2023). IBS is the recurrent or chronic abdominal pain accompanied by a change in bowel habits, either diarrhea, constipation, or both. As seen in IBS, this patient does not complain of alternating bowel habits, bloating, or mucus with stool. Also, a lack of a chronic course of symptoms excludes IBS as an actual diagnosis at this point. IBS is a clinical diagnosis requiring recurrent symptoms for ≥2 months. Follow-up overtime for different symptoms will discriminate between functional constipation and IBS to assess if constipation becomes recurrent or alternating with diarrhea. The correct positives are a few abdominal pains and alterations in bowel habits. The correct negatives are the absence of diarrhea, bloating, and mucus per stool.

    **DD#3. Intestinal Obstruction**

    Intestinal obstruction is a more ominous but less likely differential diagnosis. It usually presents with severe pain, vomiting, distension, and reduced bowel sounds. Even though the patient has slight distension and straining, no evidence of severe pain, vomiting, or reduced bowel sounds, characteristic of obstruction, exists (Griffiths & Glancy, 2023). In addition, the slow development and absence of systemic signs are contraindicative of intestinal obstruction here. This diagnosis would be more likely only if the patient worsens or new warning signs appear. Positives of relevance are mild distension and straining. Negatives of relevance are no vomiting, severe pain, or bowel sounds.

    **PLAN OF CARE (P)**

    Testing and Diagnostic Studies

    – No immediate testing is required based on clinical presentation.

    – Consider abdominal X-ray if symptoms persist or worsen despite treatment.

    **Pharmacologic Treatment**

    – Polyethylene Glycol 3350 (MiraLAX)

    -Dosing: 0.7–1.5 g/kg/day (maximum 17 g/day) mixed in water daily.

    -Patient-Specific Dose: 17 g once daily at night.

    **Non-Pharmacologic Treatment**

    – Increase fluid intake to at least 6–8 cups of water daily.

    – Encourage a high-fiber diet rich in fruits.

    – Promote regular toilet habits by encouraging the child to sit on the toilet for 5–10 minutes after daily meals.

    **Patient Education**

    – Educated the patient and parent about the importance of maintaining adequate hydration and incorporating more fiber into the diet.

    – Emphasized the need for consistent toilet habits to establish a routine.

    – Advised monitoring for worsening symptoms such as persistent pain, blood in stool, or weight loss, which would require immediate medical attention.

    **Anticipatory Guidance**

    – Discussed strategies to prevent future episodes of constipation, including maintaining a balanced diet and staying physically active.

    – Reinforced the importance of routine wellness visits for ongoing health maintenance.

    **Follow-Up**

    – RTC if symptoms persist beyond 10 days

    – Schedule routine wellness visits in 6 months.

    -If symptoms persist, TSH, celiac panel, or abdominal imaging, and refer to GI for further evaluation

    References

    Bashir, S. K., & Khan, M. B. (2024). Pediatric Functional Constipation: A New Challenge.
    _Advanced Gut & Microbiome Research_,
    _2024_(1), 5569563.

    Di Rosa, C., Altomare, A., Terrigno, V., Carbone, F., Tack, J., Cicala, M., & Guarino, M. P. L. (2023). Constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C): Effects of different nutritional patterns on intestinal dysbiosis and symptoms.
    _Nutrients_,
    _15_(7), 1647.

    Griffiths, S., & Glancy, D. G. (2023). Intestinal obstruction.
    _Surgery (Oxford)_,
    _41_(1), 47-54.

    **N638CaseStudyGradingRubric_2025.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/n638casestudygradingrubric-2025-docx-10246877)

    **## case2todo.docx**

    **Syncope, Weakness, Anorexia, Brain Tumor15554303'. Case/ake Nine**

    **S:** 16-year-old Hispanic male with weakness and reported loss of consciousness on Sunday for approximately 2–3 minutes. The episode was unwitnessed by providers but observed by his mother. He regained awareness quickly and was oriented. No EMS called or ER evaluation performed. Patient has a history of brain tumor with surgeries in 2016 and 2020; receives monthly chemotherapy. Complaints of fatigue, shortness of breath on exertion, poor appetite, difficulty walking, and generalized weakness. Often sleeps during the day and struggles to expectorate sputum. Uses a walker or cane for ambulation.
    Mother confirms poor appetite and notes he has not been eating well. Last labs (2/6/25) were WNL. No vomiting or GI symptoms. Neurology consult is scheduled in 2 weeks.

    **Past Medical History:** Brain tumor with surgeries (2016, 2020), on chemotherapy

    **Social History:** Lives with mother, no current school attendance due to medical condition

    **O:** **VS:** Temp: 98.6°F | HR: not taken | RR: not taken | BP: not taken | Wt: 147.6 lbs (66.95 kg) | Ht: 60 in (152.4 cm) | BMI: 28.82 (95.98%)
    **General:** Alert, well-nourished, no acute distress

    **Head:** Normocephalic, atraumatic.
    **Eyes:** PERRLA, sclera anicteric.
    **ENT:** Moist mucosa, clear throat.
    **Neck:** Supple, full ROM, no LAD.
    **Skin:** Warm, dry, no rashes

    **Heart:** RRR, no murmurs, normal S1/S2.
    **Lungs:** Clear to auscultation, good air movement

    **Abdomen:** Soft, nontender, no organomegaly.
    **Extremities:** No edema, no cyanosis or clubbing

    **Neuro:** Alert, oriented x3, generalized weakness with ambulation, uses walker; no focal deficits

    **A:** **R53.1** – Weakness.
    **R63.0** – Anorexia.
    **Z85.841** – Personal history of brain tumor.
    **Z51.11** – Encounter for antineoplastic chemotherapy

    **P:** **Weakness**: Safety reinforced, use of walker/cane encouraged, continue neurology referral

    **Anorexia**: Counsel on iron-rich and calorie-dense foods: lean meats, fortified cereals, beans, greens. Vitamin B12, folate, and Vitamin C-rich foods recommended. Encourage small, frequent meals and high-calorie shakes. Monitor for weight loss and hydration status. Energy conservation techniques recommended. Moderate exercise with clearance from oncologist

    **Education:** Emphasized nutrition, hydration, and rest. Encouraged mother to monitor for any new neurologic symptoms, prolonged fatigue, vomiting, or worsening weakness. Instructed to go to ER for any acute changes in consciousness, severe fatigue, vomiting, seizures, or breathing issues. Regular follow-up with oncology, neurology, and PCP encouraged.
    **Follow-Up:** Neurology in 2 weeks. RTC in 3 months or sooner if symptoms worsen

    **## ME_Sample_CaseStudy_.docx**

    1

    2

    **CC:**(10 yo female with constipation x 4 days)

    **HPI**: D.E. is a 10-year-old black female with no significant PMH who presents to the office for a sick visit, accompanied by his mother for a constipation evaluation. She has had hard stools, straining with bowel movements, and minimal discomfort for the last 4 days. There is no abdominal pain, vomiting, fever, or blood in stool. The patient has no recent dietary change or illness. Normal baseline pattern: The patient’s mother reports that she usually has one bowel movement every 1-2 days, which is typically formed and easy to pass. No prior history of chronic constipation requiring medical intervention. Occasional mild constipation in the past, but symptoms usually resolved within 1–2 days with increased fluid intake—no history of fecal incontinence, soiling, or painful defecation. No history of withholding behaviors (e.g., avoiding bowel movements due to fear of pain). She has no history of chronic constipation. The patient is in 5th grade and participates in the gym twice daily.

    **Diet:** She likes rice and pasta and occasionally eats vegetables but does not consistently consume fiber-rich foods. Dairy intake: She consumes moderate amounts of milk and cheese, which may contribute to constipation. Fluid intake: The patient drinks adequate water daily and has no excessive intake of sugary drinks or soda.

    **Sleep:** Pt sleeps from 8. P.M. to 6 A.M.

    **Behavior:** Social interaction is age-appropriate. Has friends and good peer interactions. Engages in structured physical activities —no concerns from school or parents.

    **Past Medical History (PMH):** No significant medical history.

    Surgical history: None

    Medications: None currently prescribed.

    Allergies: NKDA.

    Immunization: review and Up to date.

    Unremarkable prenatal history

    **Family History**: Both parents are healthy with no medical history, have two younger siblings, a five-year-old brother who has asthma and a three-year-old sister with Autistic

    **Social History:** She lives with her parents and two siblings in a private apartment. He likes to play with his siblings and friends. She attends swimming classes twice a week. She has no sedentary lifestyle concerns (e.g., excessive screen time). The home is smoke-free and pet-free. His grandmother visits twice a month from Ghana and usually stays for five months at a time.

    **Review of Systems (ROS)**

    **General:** Healthy-appearing, well-nourished, and alert child.

    **Skin**: Denies skin, hair, and nail symptoms.

    **HEENT: Head:** No history of head injury.
    **Eyes:** denies photophobia, glaucoma, or diplopia in his past medical/social history.
    **Ears:** canal clear bilaterally. TM clear bilaterally.
    **Nose** Pink nasal mucosa, indicating healthy tissue.
    **Throat**: No tooth pain or gum bleeding, and oral mucosa pink.

    **Neck:** Supple, No lumps, goiter, pain. No swollen glands.

    **Lymph Nodes: No** cervical

    **Thorax and Lungs:** symmetric.

    **Cardiovascular:** no chest pains and no edema.

    **Gastrointestinal: Constipation x 4 days**, straining with bowel movements, and passing hard, pellet-like stools. No diarrhea. Reports abdominal discomfort, intermittent, worse after meals. No nausea, vomiting, blood in stool, or excessive gas. Appetite normal/decreased. No history of food intolerance.

    Genitourinary: No dysuria, hematuria, or recent urinary tract infections. No urinary incontinence or enuresis.

    **Musculoskeletal:** Full motion range and normal flexion and extension

    **Respiratory**: No cough, wheezing, or shortness of breath.

    **Physical Exam:**

    **VS**: BP: 104/68 mmHg- Temperature: 98.4°F; HR: 82 bpm, RR: 18/min, Spo2: 98% on RA. Growth Percentiles: Weight: 28 kg (50th percentile), Height: 130 cm (50th percentile).

    **General:** Healthy-appearing child. Well-nourished and alert. Weighs within the normal range. Mucous membranes are moist and pink. The respiratory pattern is unremarkable, with no grunting or nasal flaring.

    **Skin:** Warm, dry, no rashes or pallor. No signs of dehydration (no tenting, no dry mucous membranes).

    **Head and face**: The size of the skull is developmentally appropriate and is in proportion to the rest of the body. Facial move symmetrically and midline. There is no evidence of dropping, asymmetry, or disproportionate features.

    **Eye:** No conjunctival pallor anicteric sclera.

    **Neck**: Palpation reveals no lymphadenopathy, swelling, or tenderness. No nuchal rigidity

    **Cardiovascular:** Rhythm is regular. No heart murmur, rubs, or gallops. No peripheral edema.

    **Respiration:** exhibits normal structure without evidence of curvature or protrusions. Respiration is regular at a rate of 18 bpm. Lungs are clear bilaterally.

    **Abdomen:** Inspection: Mild distension noted. No visible peristalsis.
    Auscultation: Positive bowel sounds in all four quadrants.
    Palpation:
    Soft, mild tenderness in LLQ.
    No guarding, rebound tenderness, or rigidity.
    No hepatosplenomegaly.
    No palpable masses.
    Percussion: No tympany or dullness no obstruction.

    **Neurology:** Reflexes are present and symmetric. Cranial Nerves: No sign of apparent neurological deficit.

    **Age-Appropriate Developmental Exam**

    At 10 years old, she demonstrates appropriate developmental milestones:

    Language: Speaks fluently and understands complex instructions.

    Motor Skills: Coordinates fine motor tasks well (e.g., handwriting, drawing).

    Social Skills: She engages appropriately with peers and adults.

    **Differential Diagnosis (DD)**

    **DD#: 1: Functional Constipation**

    This is the most likely diagnosis in this case. Functional constipation “is the presence of two or more of the following for a minimum of one month: straining during defecation, hard stools, the sensation of incomplete evacuation, manual maneuvers to facilitate defecation, less than three bowel movements per week, and absence of loose stools without laxatives” (Bashir, & Khan, 2024).  This patient has several of the classic characteristics of functional constipation in the form of hard stools, straining, and mild discomfort without the accompaniment of any ominous signs such as hematochezia, fever, or substantial weight loss. The lack of recent diet changes or illness also validates this diagnosis. Relevant positives are low fiber and straining in bowel movements. Relevant negatives are no abdominal pain, vomiting, fever, or systemic symptoms.

    **DD#2. Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS)**

    Though less probable due to the limited symptom duration and lack of alternate constipation/diarrhea, IBS should be considered in the differential diagnosis (Di Rosa et al., 2023). IBS is the recurrent or chronic abdominal pain accompanied by a change in bowel habits, either diarrhea, constipation, or both. As seen in IBS, this patient does not complain of alternating bowel habits, bloating, or mucus with stool. Also, a lack of a chronic course of symptoms excludes IBS as an actual diagnosis at this point. IBS is a clinical diagnosis requiring recurrent symptoms for ≥2 months. Follow-up overtime for different symptoms will discriminate between functional constipation and IBS to assess if constipation becomes recurrent or alternating with diarrhea. The correct positives are a few abdominal pains and alterations in bowel habits. The correct negatives are the absence of diarrhea, bloating, and mucus per stool.

    **DD#3. Intestinal Obstruction**

    Intestinal obstruction is a more ominous but less likely differential diagnosis. It usually presents with severe pain, vomiting, distension, and reduced bowel sounds. Even though the patient has slight distension and straining, no evidence of severe pain, vomiting, or reduced bowel sounds, characteristic of obstruction, exists (Griffiths & Glancy, 2023). In addition, the slow development and absence of systemic signs are contraindicative of intestinal obstruction here. This diagnosis would be more likely only if the patient worsens or new warning signs appear. Positives of relevance are mild distension and straining. Negatives of relevance are no vomiting, severe pain, or bowel sounds.

    **PLAN OF CARE (P)**

    Testing and Diagnostic Studies

    – No immediate testing is required based on clinical presentation.

    – Consider abdominal X-ray if symptoms persist or worsen despite treatment.

    **Pharmacologic Treatment**

    – Polyethylene Glycol 3350 (MiraLAX)

    -Dosing: 0.7–1.5 g/kg/day (maximum 17 g/day) mixed in water daily.

    -Patient-Specific Dose: 17 g once daily at night.

    **Non-Pharmacologic Treatment**

    – Increase fluid intake to at least 6–8 cups of water daily.

    – Encourage a high-fiber diet rich in fruits.

    – Promote regular toilet habits by encouraging the child to sit on the toilet for 5–10 minutes after daily meals.

    **Patient Education**

    – Educated the patient and parent about the importance of maintaining adequate hydration and incorporating more fiber into the diet.

    – Emphasized the need for consistent toilet habits to establish a routine.

    – Advised monitoring for worsening symptoms such as persistent pain, blood in stool, or weight loss, which would require immediate medical attention.

    **Anticipatory Guidance**

    – Discussed strategies to prevent future episodes of constipation, including maintaining a balanced diet and staying physically active.

    – Reinforced the importance of routine wellness visits for ongoing health maintenance.

    **Follow-Up**

    – RTC if symptoms persist beyond 10 days

    – Schedule routine wellness visits in 6 months.

    -If symptoms persist, TSH, celiac panel, or abdominal imaging, and refer to GI for further evaluation

    References

    Bashir, S. K., & Khan, M. B. (2024). Pediatric Functional Constipation: A New Challenge.
    _Advanced Gut & Microbiome Research_,
    _2024_(1), 5569563.

    Di Rosa, C., Altomare, A., Terrigno, V., Carbone, F., Tack, J., Cicala, M., & Guarino, M. P. L. (2023). Constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C): Effects of different nutritional patterns on intestinal dysbiosis and symptoms.
    _Nutrients_,
    _15_(7), 1647.

    Griffiths, S., & Glancy, D. G. (2023). Intestinal obstruction.
    _Surgery (Oxford)_,
    _41_(1), 47-54.

    **N638CaseStudyGradingRubric_2025.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/n638casestudygradingrubric-2025-docx-10246877)

  • [Solved] SOAP Note 2 Week 5

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    1. Review the SOAP note resources provided in the course content. 2. Read the Case Study: Begin by carefully reading the case study provided below. Pay close attention to the patient's background, medical history, and presenting complaint. 3. Download the SOAP Form: Access the attached SOAP form….

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    1. Review the SOAP note resources provided in the course content.

    2. Read the Case Study: Begin by carefully reading the case study provided below. Pay close attention to the patient's background, medical history, and presenting complaint.

    3. Download the SOAP Form: Access the attached SOAP form. This form will serve as your template for documenting the patient encounter.

    4. Complete the SOAP Form: Using the information from the case study, fill out the SOAP form to the best of your ability. Ensure that you provide details for each section: Subjective, Objective, Assessment, and Plan. **Any part of the assessment not mentioned in the case study is considered normal.**

    5. Thoroughness is Key: Aim to complete each section of the SOAP form as comprehensively as possible. Include relevant information obtained from both the patient's subjective account and objective observations.

    6. Submit Your Completed SOAP Note: Once you have filled out the SOAP form, submit your completed document according to the instructions provided by your instructor. **Include at least 1 reference.**

    **CASE STUDY: Pain in Right Upper Quadrant and Back**

    Reason for Seeking Care

    Y.C. is a 35-year-old woman who is 6 months pregnant and presents to her obstetrics appointment with complaints of periodic pain in the right upper quadrant and mid-back. This pain tends to accompany nausea and sometimes episodes of vomiting. The woman indicates she feels somewhat feverish at times but has not taken her temperature.

    **History of Present Illness and Health History**

    A 35-year-old pregnant woman, G1P0 presents for her routine obstetric examination at 28 weeks. The woman appears her stated age and appears to be somewhat uncomfortable due to reported back pain and right upper quadrant pain. This pain started approximately 1 week prior and comes and goes throughout the day and night. The patient reports a hot bath is the only relieving measure. The pain does not respond to repositioning, OTC pain medication, or other measures. The woman reports nausea with the pain and occasional vomiting also associated with the pain. The woman’s history includes polycystic ovary syndrome and chronic sinusitis with a deviated septum repair. Current medications include only prenatal vitamins.

    **Physical Examination**

    – General: Well-nourished, woman who appears age stated. The woman’s weight gain has been as expected with pregnancy.
    – Head: Denies vision problems, and does not wear glasses or contact lenses. History of sinus problems but no current concerns. Occasional nasal stuffiness was reported with pregnancy.
    – Neck: No masses, thyroid smooth and symmetrical.
    – CV: Heart rate and rhythm regular, no murmur. Peripheral pulses are equally palpable in all four extremities. Heart rate 78, blood pressure 128/62.
    – Lungs: Breath sounds equal bilaterally, clear to auscultation.
    – Abdomen: No hepatomegaly, abdomen slightly rounded related to pregnancy, denies constipation. Currently has sharp pain in RUQ and radiating to back. The gallbladder is palpable and the patient reports tenderness.
    – Neuro: Denies changes in mood or memory, gait is steady. Is oriented to person, place, time, and situation.
    – Skin: No rashes or wounds. Skin smooth and dry.
    – GU: Patient denies any problems with urination.

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] WK 6 RESP EPID

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    – 2 years ago **files (1)** – ## WK6Blog.docx **## WK6Blog.docx** Blog: Critiquing Sources of Error in Population Research to Address Gaps in Nursing Practice ![A person in blue scrubs holding a tablet AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-6-resp-epid) As a …

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    – 2 years ago

    **files (1)**

    – ## WK6Blog.docx

    **## WK6Blog.docx**

    Blog: Critiquing Sources of Error in Population Research to Address Gaps in Nursing Practice

    ![A person in blue scrubs holding a tablet AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-6-resp-epid)

    As a DNP-educated nurse, part of your role will be to identify the differences, or gaps, between current knowledge and practice and opportunities for improvement leading to an ideal state of practice. Being able to recognize and evaluate sources of error in population research is an important skill that can lead to better implementation of evidence-based practice.

    In order to effectively critique and apply population research to practice, you should be familiar with the following types of error:

    **Selection Bias**

    Selection bias in epidemiological studies occurs when study participants do not accurately represent the population for whom results will be generalized, and this results in a measure of association that is distorted (i.e., not close to the truth). For example, if persons responding to a survey tend to be different (e.g., younger) than those who do not respond, then the study sample is not representative of the general population, and study results may be misleading if generalized.

    **Information Bias**

    Information bias results from errors made in the collection of information obtained in a study. For example, participants’ self-report of their diet may be inaccurate for many reasons. They may not remember what they ate, or they may want to portray themselves as making healthier choices than they typically make. Regardless of the reason, the information collected is not accurate and therefore introduces bias into the analysis.

    **Confounding**

    Confounding occurs when a third variable is really responsible for the association you think you see between two other variables. For example, suppose researchers detect a relationship between consumption of alcohol and occurrence of lung cancer. The results of the study seem to indicate that consuming alcohol leads to a higher risk of developing lung cancer. However, when researchers take into account that people who drink alcohol are much more likely to smoke than those who do not, it becomes clear that the real association is between smoking and lung cancer and the reason that those who consume alcohol had a higher risk of lung cancer was because they were also more likely to be smokers. In this example, smoking was a confounder of the alcohol-lung cancer relationship.

    **Random Error**

    The previous three types of errors all fall under the category of
    _systematic errors_, which are reproducible errors having to do with flaws in study design, sampling, data collection, analysis, or interpretation.
    _Random errors_, on the other hand, are fluctuations in results that arise from naturally occurring differences in variables or samples. While unavoidable to a small degree even under the most careful research parameters, these types of errors can still affect the validity of studies.

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259874)

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259874)

    · Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2024).
    _Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice_ (4th ed.). Springer.

    · Chapter 5, “Epidemiological Methods and Measurements in Population-Based Nursing Practice: Part II” (pp. 106-128)

    Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021).
    _Epidemiology for public health practice_ (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.

    · Chapter 10, “Data Interpretation Issues”

    · Enzenbach, C., Wicklein, B., Wirkner, K., & Loeffler, M. (2019).
    [Evaluating selection bias in a population-based cohort study with low baseline participation: The LIFE-Adult-StudyLinks to an external site.](https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=137275246&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s6527200).
    _BMC Medical Research Methodology_,
    _19_(1), Article 135. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0779-8

    · Khalili, P., Nadimi, A. E., Baradaran, H. R., Janani, L., Rahimi-Movaghar, A., Rajabi, Z., Rahmani, A., Hojati, Z., Khalagi, K., & Motevalian, S. A. (2021).
    [Validity of self-reported substance use: Research setting versus primary health care settingLinks to an external site.](https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=152444700&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s6527200).
    _Substance abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy_,
    _16_(1), Article 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3

    · Karr, J. E., Iverson, G. L., Isokuortti, H., Kataja, A., Brander, A., Öhman, J., & Luoto, T. M. (2021).
    [Preexisting conditions in older adults with mild traumatic brain injuries. \
    _Brain Injury_, 1–9](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/files/12410807?wrap=1) [Download Preexisting conditions in older adults with mild traumatic brain injuries. Brain Injury, 1–9](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/files/12410807/download?download_frd=1). Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2021.1976419

    To Prepare:

    · Review this week’s Learning Resources, focusing on how to recognize and distinguish selection bias, information bias, confounding, and random error in research studies.

    · Select a health issue and population relevant to your professional practice and a practice gap that may exist related to this issue.

    · Consider how each type of measurement error may influence data interpretation in epidemiologic literature and how you might apply the literature to address the identified practice gap.

    · Consider strategies you might use to recognize these errors and the implications they may have for addressing gaps in practice relevant to your selected issue.

    By Day 3 of Week 6

    **Post** a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

    · Describe your selected practice gap.

    · Explain how your treatment of this population/issue could be affected by having awareness of bias and confounding in epidemiologic literature.

    · Explain two strategies researchers can use to minimize these types of bias in studies, either through study design or analysis considerations.

    · Finally, explain the effects these biases could have on the interpretation of study results if not minimized.

    By Day 6 of Week 6

    **Respond** to
    **at least two** colleagues
    **on two different days** in one or more of the following ways:

    · Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

    · Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

    · Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.

    · Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

    · Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

    · Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

    Vivian

    ·
    **Practice Gap Selected**

    · The gap exists due to inadequate and infrequent treatment of hypertension in patients 65 years and older in primary care settings. Many times, healthcare professionals fail to follow the proper therapeutic processes for this age group, and it can lead to poor results for the patient.

    ·
    **Influence of Bias and Confounding on Treatment**

    · With respect to this practice guideline gap, it matters how bias and confounding affect treatment and its results. For instance, there is selection bias when strategies are based on patients who show up foor appointments and are health conscious, as this does not depict the whole population of older adults suffering from hypertension. Some older patients may unintentionally exaggerate medication compliance for various reasons, making compliance assessment more difficult (Khalili et al., 2021). Other chronic illnesses prevalent in older populations, like diabetes or obesity, may result in blurring of the use and effectiveness of the treatment. Thus, this may lead to under-treatment or over-treatment (Friis & Sellers, 2021).

    ·
    **Strategies to Minimize Bias**

    · Minimizing selection bias is best achieved by employing random control trials (RCTs). RCTs are beneficial because they issue randomization, which theoretically gives every participant an equal chance of being given the intervention. This significantly lowers the impact of confounding factors and strengthens the validity of causative conclusions regarding the treatment of hypertension in the elderly (Friis & Sellers, 2021).

    · Similarly, researchers may use multivariate techniques, for example, logistic regression or propensity score matching, to account for confounding factors statistically(Curley, 2024). The greater the number of confounding factors, such as age, sex, lifestyle, and other medical issues, that are removed, the greater the real impact of the hypertension interventions.

    · Implications of Bias if Not Minimized

    · The literature’s biases and other external factors affecting treatment need to be addressed before coming up with a management plan for hypertension for older adults. For example, there could be selection bias in which patients who visit the clinic are overrepresented and this is a real problematic scenario because these patients have been given a better chance of recovery than they actually have. Older patients might ignore reporting their medication adherence due to recall and social desirability, undermining the effectiveness of the intervention (Khalili et al., 2021). If present, Other conditions, such as diabetes and obesity, affect the validity of the expected outcomes and can result from the hypertension management strategies and cause adverse effects on the treatment (Friis & Sellers, 2021).

    · References

    · Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2024). Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice (4th ed.). Springer.

    · Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021). Epidemiology for public health practice (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.

    · Khalili, P., Nadimi, A. E., Baradaran, H. R., Janani, L., Rahimi-Movaghar, A., Rajabi, Z., Rahmani, A., Hojati, Z., Khalagi, K., & Motevalian, S. A. (2021). Validity of self-reported substance use: Research setting versus primary health care setting. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 16(1), Article 66.
    [https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3\
    Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3)

    ·

    ·

    ## image1.jpeg

    **## WK6Blog.docx**

    Blog: Critiquing Sources of Error in Population Research to Address Gaps in Nursing Practice

    ![A person in blue scrubs holding a tablet AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-6-resp-epid)

    As a DNP-educated nurse, part of your role will be to identify the differences, or gaps, between current knowledge and practice and opportunities for improvement leading to an ideal state of practice. Being able to recognize and evaluate sources of error in population research is an important skill that can lead to better implementation of evidence-based practice.

    In order to effectively critique and apply population research to practice, you should be familiar with the following types of error:

    **Selection Bias**

    Selection bias in epidemiological studies occurs when study participants do not accurately represent the population for whom results will be generalized, and this results in a measure of association that is distorted (i.e., not close to the truth). For example, if persons responding to a survey tend to be different (e.g., younger) than those who do not respond, then the study sample is not representative of the general population, and study results may be misleading if generalized.

    **Information Bias**

    Information bias results from errors made in the collection of information obtained in a study. For example, participants’ self-report of their diet may be inaccurate for many reasons. They may not remember what they ate, or they may want to portray themselves as making healthier choices than they typically make. Regardless of the reason, the information collected is not accurate and therefore introduces bias into the analysis.

    **Confounding**

    Confounding occurs when a third variable is really responsible for the association you think you see between two other variables. For example, suppose researchers detect a relationship between consumption of alcohol and occurrence of lung cancer. The results of the study seem to indicate that consuming alcohol leads to a higher risk of developing lung cancer. However, when researchers take into account that people who drink alcohol are much more likely to smoke than those who do not, it becomes clear that the real association is between smoking and lung cancer and the reason that those who consume alcohol had a higher risk of lung cancer was because they were also more likely to be smokers. In this example, smoking was a confounder of the alcohol-lung cancer relationship.

    **Random Error**

    The previous three types of errors all fall under the category of
    _systematic errors_, which are reproducible errors having to do with flaws in study design, sampling, data collection, analysis, or interpretation.
    _Random errors_, on the other hand, are fluctuations in results that arise from naturally occurring differences in variables or samples. While unavoidable to a small degree even under the most careful research parameters, these types of errors can still affect the validity of studies.

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259874)

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259874)

    · Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2024).
    _Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice_ (4th ed.). Springer.

    · Chapter 5, “Epidemiological Methods and Measurements in Population-Based Nursing Practice: Part II” (pp. 106-128)

    Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021).
    _Epidemiology for public health practice_ (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.

    · Chapter 10, “Data Interpretation Issues”

    · Enzenbach, C., Wicklein, B., Wirkner, K., & Loeffler, M. (2019).
    [Evaluating selection bias in a population-based cohort study with low baseline participation: The LIFE-Adult-StudyLinks to an external site.](https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=137275246&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s6527200).
    _BMC Medical Research Methodology_,
    _19_(1), Article 135. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0779-8

    · Khalili, P., Nadimi, A. E., Baradaran, H. R., Janani, L., Rahimi-Movaghar, A., Rajabi, Z., Rahmani, A., Hojati, Z., Khalagi, K., & Motevalian, S. A. (2021).
    [Validity of self-reported substance use: Research setting versus primary health care settingLinks to an external site.](https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=152444700&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s6527200).
    _Substance abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy_,
    _16_(1), Article 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3

    · Karr, J. E., Iverson, G. L., Isokuortti, H., Kataja, A., Brander, A., Öhman, J., & Luoto, T. M. (2021).
    [Preexisting conditions in older adults with mild traumatic brain injuries. \
    _Brain Injury_, 1–9](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/files/12410807?wrap=1) [Download Preexisting conditions in older adults with mild traumatic brain injuries. Brain Injury, 1–9](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/files/12410807/download?download_frd=1). Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2021.1976419

    To Prepare:

    · Review this week’s Learning Resources, focusing on how to recognize and distinguish selection bias, information bias, confounding, and random error in research studies.

    · Select a health issue and population relevant to your professional practice and a practice gap that may exist related to this issue.

    · Consider how each type of measurement error may influence data interpretation in epidemiologic literature and how you might apply the literature to address the identified practice gap.

    · Consider strategies you might use to recognize these errors and the implications they may have for addressing gaps in practice relevant to your selected issue.

    By Day 3 of Week 6

    **Post** a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

    · Describe your selected practice gap.

    · Explain how your treatment of this population/issue could be affected by having awareness of bias and confounding in epidemiologic literature.

    · Explain two strategies researchers can use to minimize these types of bias in studies, either through study design or analysis considerations.

    · Finally, explain the effects these biases could have on the interpretation of study results if not minimized.

    By Day 6 of Week 6

    **Respond** to
    **at least two** colleagues
    **on two different days** in one or more of the following ways:

    · Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

    · Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

    · Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.

    · Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

    · Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

    · Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

    Vivian

    ·
    **Practice Gap Selected**

    · The gap exists due to inadequate and infrequent treatment of hypertension in patients 65 years and older in primary care settings. Many times, healthcare professionals fail to follow the proper therapeutic processes for this age group, and it can lead to poor results for the patient.

    ·
    **Influence of Bias and Confounding on Treatment**

    · With respect to this practice guideline gap, it matters how bias and confounding affect treatment and its results. For instance, there is selection bias when strategies are based on patients who show up foor appointments and are health conscious, as this does not depict the whole population of older adults suffering from hypertension. Some older patients may unintentionally exaggerate medication compliance for various reasons, making compliance assessment more difficult (Khalili et al., 2021). Other chronic illnesses prevalent in older populations, like diabetes or obesity, may result in blurring of the use and effectiveness of the treatment. Thus, this may lead to under-treatment or over-treatment (Friis & Sellers, 2021).

    ·
    **Strategies to Minimize Bias**

    · Minimizing selection bias is best achieved by employing random control trials (RCTs). RCTs are beneficial because they issue randomization, which theoretically gives every participant an equal chance of being given the intervention. This significantly lowers the impact of confounding factors and strengthens the validity of causative conclusions regarding the treatment of hypertension in the elderly (Friis & Sellers, 2021).

    · Similarly, researchers may use multivariate techniques, for example, logistic regression or propensity score matching, to account for confounding factors statistically(Curley, 2024). The greater the number of confounding factors, such as age, sex, lifestyle, and other medical issues, that are removed, the greater the real impact of the hypertension interventions.

    · Implications of Bias if Not Minimized

    · The literature’s biases and other external factors affecting treatment need to be addressed before coming up with a management plan for hypertension for older adults. For example, there could be selection bias in which patients who visit the clinic are overrepresented and this is a real problematic scenario because these patients have been given a better chance of recovery than they actually have. Older patients might ignore reporting their medication adherence due to recall and social desirability, undermining the effectiveness of the intervention (Khalili et al., 2021). If present, Other conditions, such as diabetes and obesity, affect the validity of the expected outcomes and can result from the hypertension management strategies and cause adverse effects on the treatment (Friis & Sellers, 2021).

    · References

    · Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2024). Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice (4th ed.). Springer.

    · Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021). Epidemiology for public health practice (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.

    · Khalili, P., Nadimi, A. E., Baradaran, H. R., Janani, L., Rahimi-Movaghar, A., Rajabi, Z., Rahmani, A., Hojati, Z., Khalagi, K., & Motevalian, S. A. (2021). Validity of self-reported substance use: Research setting versus primary health care setting. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 16(1), Article 66.
    [https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3\
    Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3)

    ·

    ·

    ## image1.jpeg

  • [Solved] WK 6 RESP DATA

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    – 2 years ago **files (1)** – ## WK6DIS.DATA.docx **## WK6DIS.DATA.docx** Self-Study: Comparing Counts (Chi Square) Throughout the course, there will be a self-study Discussion pertaining to an important concept or topic covered within the assigned week. These Discussions are designed to give you th…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    – 2 years ago

    **files (1)**

    – ## WK6DIS.DATA.docx

    **## WK6DIS.DATA.docx**

    Self-Study: Comparing Counts (Chi Square)

    Throughout the course, there will be a self-study Discussion pertaining to an important concept or topic covered within the assigned week. These Discussions are designed to give you the opportunity to collaborate with your peers and faculty, test your knowledge, ask questions, practice research analysis, and assist your peers.

    You are not required to post to this forum; however, you are encouraged to post, review the posts of others, as well as answer questions and/or provide clarity and collaboration with your peers. Discussions will be graded as either Complete or Incomplete.

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/modules/items/6373771)

    [Required Resources](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6373771)

    · Dang, D., Dearholt, S. L., Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2021). Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model & guidelines (4th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.

    · Chapter 6, “Evidence of Appraisal: Research” (pp. 254–267)

    · Salkind, N., & Frey, B. (2019). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (7th ed.). SAGE Publications.

    · Chapter 5, “Creating Graphs: A Picture Really Is Worth a Thousand Words” (pp. 110–115)

    · Chapter 18, “Chi-Square and Some Other Nonparametric Tests: What to Do When You’re Not Normal” (pp. 337–342, 345–346)

    ·
    **Document:** [Creating Charts in Excel (Excel)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465866?wrap=1) [Download Creating Charts in Excel (Excel)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465866/download?download_frd=1)

    ·
    **Document:** [Critical Assessment, Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465989?wrap=1) [Download Critical Assessment, Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465989/download?download_frd=1)

    ·
    **Document:** [Critical Assessment, Appendix G: Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465864?wrap=1) [Download Critical Assessment, Appendix G: Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465864/download?download_frd=1)

    [Required Media](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6373771)

    · Niedz, B. (2024). Inferential comparison of counts (chi square) [Video]. Walden University Canvas. https://waldenu.instructure.com

    [Optional Resources](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6373771)

    · Conner, C. (2018).
    [_Evaluating the impact of an early warning scoring system in a community hospital setting_ Links to an external site.](https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/) (Publication No. 10747387) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/

    · Moradkhani, B., Mollazadeh, S., Niloofar, P., Bashiri, A., & Oghazian, M. B. (2021).
    [Association between medication adherence and health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-021-00222-x).
    _Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences, 7_(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-021-00222-x

    · Owusu, M. (2023).
    [_Language barrier: An unmet challenge for low screening of colorectal cancer among Hispanic Americans in TexasLinks to an external site._](https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/14412/) (Publication No. 30567908) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/14412/

    **To prepare:**

    · Read and view the Learning Resources.

    **Use** this Discussion to collaborate with your peers and faculty as an open office hours/ Q&A forum.

    **Post** answers to the following:

    · Find the Chi Sq in Moradkhani et al. (2021), Conner (2018), or Owusu (2023) from the Optional Resources, and critique its use in the study.

    · Tania

    · In the dissertation by
    **Conner (2018)** titled
    _Evaluating the Impact of an Early Warning Scoring System in a Community Hospital Setting_, the Chi-square (χ²) test was used to examine whether implementing an Early Warning Scoring (EWS) system influenced the frequency of rapid response team (RRT) activations, intensive care unit (ICU) transfers, and code blue events. Specifically, the test compared pre- and post-intervention frequencies to assess the EWS system’s effectiveness.

    · Conner reported a statistically significant decrease in code blue events post-intervention, with a Chi-square value of χ² = 4.60, p = 0.032. The use of the Chi-square test was appropriate, given that the variables in question (e.g., occurrence of code blue events) were categorical. This statistical approach is useful in determining whether distributions of categorical variables differ from one another across groups (Sedgwick, 2019). The results suggest that the EWS system may have had a beneficial impact on identifying patient deterioration earlier and reducing critical incidents.

    · However, while the statistical test was suitable, several limitations should be addressed. Most notably, effect size measures, such as Phi coefficient or Cramér’s V, were not reported. Without these, it's difficult to determine the practical or clinical relevance of the findings. A statistically significant result (p < .05) does not automatically imply a strong or meaningful association (Lakens, 2021).

    · Additionally, Conner did not clearly discuss whether the assumptions of the Chi-square test—particularly the requirement for expected frequencies of at least 5 per cell—were met. Failure to meet these assumptions can reduce the validity of the results. Also, the Chi-square test does not account for confounding factors such as staffing levels, patient acuity, or seasonal trends. A multivariate analysis, such as logistic regression, could have helped control for these potential confounders and provided more robust conclusions (Sharma et al., 2020).

    · Despite these caveats, Conner’s use of the Chi-square test effectively illustrated key patterns and associations between EWS implementation and critical event reduction. To fully inform evidence-based practice, future studies should incorporate effect size reporting, assumption verification, and complementary statistical analyses to better interpret both statistical and clinical significance.

    ·

    ·
    **References**

    · Conner, C. (2018).
    _Evaluating the impact of an early warning scoring system in a community hospital setting. (_ Publication No. 10747387) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
    [https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/Links to an external site.](https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/)

    · Lakens, D. (2021). Sample size justification. Collabra:
    _Psychology, 7_(1), 1–16.
    [https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267)

    · Sedgwick, P. (2019). Understanding the chi-squared test.
    _BMJ, 364_, l1296.
    [https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1296Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1296)

    · Sharma, A., Minh Duc, N. T., Luu Lam Thang, T., Nam, N. H., Ng, S. J., Abbas, K. S., … & Huy, N. T. (2020). A consensus-based checklist for reporting of survey studies (CROSS).
    _Journal of General Internal Medicine, 36_(10), 3179–3187.
    [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-06737-1Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-06737-1)

    ·

    **## WK6DIS.DATA.docx**

    Self-Study: Comparing Counts (Chi Square)

    Throughout the course, there will be a self-study Discussion pertaining to an important concept or topic covered within the assigned week. These Discussions are designed to give you the opportunity to collaborate with your peers and faculty, test your knowledge, ask questions, practice research analysis, and assist your peers.

    You are not required to post to this forum; however, you are encouraged to post, review the posts of others, as well as answer questions and/or provide clarity and collaboration with your peers. Discussions will be graded as either Complete or Incomplete.

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/modules/items/6373771)

    [Required Resources](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6373771)

    · Dang, D., Dearholt, S. L., Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2021). Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model & guidelines (4th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.

    · Chapter 6, “Evidence of Appraisal: Research” (pp. 254–267)

    · Salkind, N., & Frey, B. (2019). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (7th ed.). SAGE Publications.

    · Chapter 5, “Creating Graphs: A Picture Really Is Worth a Thousand Words” (pp. 110–115)

    · Chapter 18, “Chi-Square and Some Other Nonparametric Tests: What to Do When You’re Not Normal” (pp. 337–342, 345–346)

    ·
    **Document:** [Creating Charts in Excel (Excel)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465866?wrap=1) [Download Creating Charts in Excel (Excel)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465866/download?download_frd=1)

    ·
    **Document:** [Critical Assessment, Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465989?wrap=1) [Download Critical Assessment, Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465989/download?download_frd=1)

    ·
    **Document:** [Critical Assessment, Appendix G: Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465864?wrap=1) [Download Critical Assessment, Appendix G: Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Word document)](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/files/12465864/download?download_frd=1)

    [Required Media](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6373771)

    · Niedz, B. (2024). Inferential comparison of counts (chi square) [Video]. Walden University Canvas. https://waldenu.instructure.com

    [Optional Resources](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157739/pages/week-6-learning-resources?module_item_id=6373771)

    · Conner, C. (2018).
    [_Evaluating the impact of an early warning scoring system in a community hospital setting_ Links to an external site.](https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/) (Publication No. 10747387) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/

    · Moradkhani, B., Mollazadeh, S., Niloofar, P., Bashiri, A., & Oghazian, M. B. (2021).
    [Association between medication adherence and health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-021-00222-x).
    _Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences, 7_(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-021-00222-x

    · Owusu, M. (2023).
    [_Language barrier: An unmet challenge for low screening of colorectal cancer among Hispanic Americans in TexasLinks to an external site._](https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/14412/) (Publication No. 30567908) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/14412/

    **To prepare:**

    · Read and view the Learning Resources.

    **Use** this Discussion to collaborate with your peers and faculty as an open office hours/ Q&A forum.

    **Post** answers to the following:

    · Find the Chi Sq in Moradkhani et al. (2021), Conner (2018), or Owusu (2023) from the Optional Resources, and critique its use in the study.

    · Tania

    · In the dissertation by
    **Conner (2018)** titled
    _Evaluating the Impact of an Early Warning Scoring System in a Community Hospital Setting_, the Chi-square (χ²) test was used to examine whether implementing an Early Warning Scoring (EWS) system influenced the frequency of rapid response team (RRT) activations, intensive care unit (ICU) transfers, and code blue events. Specifically, the test compared pre- and post-intervention frequencies to assess the EWS system’s effectiveness.

    · Conner reported a statistically significant decrease in code blue events post-intervention, with a Chi-square value of χ² = 4.60, p = 0.032. The use of the Chi-square test was appropriate, given that the variables in question (e.g., occurrence of code blue events) were categorical. This statistical approach is useful in determining whether distributions of categorical variables differ from one another across groups (Sedgwick, 2019). The results suggest that the EWS system may have had a beneficial impact on identifying patient deterioration earlier and reducing critical incidents.

    · However, while the statistical test was suitable, several limitations should be addressed. Most notably, effect size measures, such as Phi coefficient or Cramér’s V, were not reported. Without these, it's difficult to determine the practical or clinical relevance of the findings. A statistically significant result (p < .05) does not automatically imply a strong or meaningful association (Lakens, 2021).

    · Additionally, Conner did not clearly discuss whether the assumptions of the Chi-square test—particularly the requirement for expected frequencies of at least 5 per cell—were met. Failure to meet these assumptions can reduce the validity of the results. Also, the Chi-square test does not account for confounding factors such as staffing levels, patient acuity, or seasonal trends. A multivariate analysis, such as logistic regression, could have helped control for these potential confounders and provided more robust conclusions (Sharma et al., 2020).

    · Despite these caveats, Conner’s use of the Chi-square test effectively illustrated key patterns and associations between EWS implementation and critical event reduction. To fully inform evidence-based practice, future studies should incorporate effect size reporting, assumption verification, and complementary statistical analyses to better interpret both statistical and clinical significance.

    ·

    ·
    **References**

    · Conner, C. (2018).
    _Evaluating the impact of an early warning scoring system in a community hospital setting. (_ Publication No. 10747387) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
    [https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/Links to an external site.](https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4846/)

    · Lakens, D. (2021). Sample size justification. Collabra:
    _Psychology, 7_(1), 1–16.
    [https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267)

    · Sedgwick, P. (2019). Understanding the chi-squared test.
    _BMJ, 364_, l1296.
    [https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1296Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1296)

    · Sharma, A., Minh Duc, N. T., Luu Lam Thang, T., Nam, N. H., Ng, S. J., Abbas, K. S., … & Huy, N. T. (2020). A consensus-based checklist for reporting of survey studies (CROSS).
    _Journal of General Internal Medicine, 36_(10), 3179–3187.
    [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-06737-1Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-06737-1)

    ·

  • [Solved] week 5.5

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    discussion response – 2 years ago

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    discussion response

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] week 4-transtition to NP

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    Choose a state and review the scope of practice for the advanced practice nurse. How does it compare to Florida? **Submission Instructions:** – Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources. Your initial post is…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Choose a state and review the scope of practice for the advanced practice nurse. How does it compare to Florida?

    **Submission Instructions:**

    – Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources. Your initial post is worth 8 points.
    – You should respond to at least two of your peers by extending, refuting/correcting, or adding additional nuance to their posts. Your reply posts are worth 2 points (1 point per response.)
    – All replies must be constructive and use literature where possible.

    – 2 years ago
    – 7.5