![[Solution] NRS420 Health Assessment [Full Course, All Assignments and Discussions]](https://gradedsolution.com/wp-content/uploads/edd/2024/03/cropped-Graded-Solution-Logo.jpeg){kind=logo}
[ANSWER]CAP203 Assessment Brief 3 – Care of the Person with an Acute Illness
TASK DESCRIPTION
Care of the Person with an Acute Illness
| ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF | |
| Subject Code and Title | CAP203 – Care of the person with an acute illness |
| Assessment | Case Study – Peri-operative patient |
| Individual/Group | Individual |
| Length | 1500 words +/- 10% |
| Learning Outcomes | The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include: a), c), d), f) |
| Submission | To be completed at the end of Module 4.1 (Week 7) |
| Weighting | 35% |
| Total Marks | 100 marks |
Context
Acute surgical admissions are a common practice for most hospitals and therefore, nurses. The ability of a Registered Nurse to understand the pathophysiology and manifestations of more common illnesses allows for greater advocacy for Care of the Person ; and enables the nurse to better evaluate the interventions in place.
Completion of this assessment will test your knowledge relating to the pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, investigations and treatments of a common acute surgical admission. The assessment will further determine your ability to interpret and apply this knowledge to the holistic nursing care of a patient with this illness.
Instructions
To complete this assessment, you will need to read and understand the case study presented below
and provide detailed responses to each of the points listed. Your detailed responses should be presented in the format of a report, summarising the scenario and its implications. For each point, you should have a separate heading.
The points to address in your report, are as follows:
- Summarise the situation and patient identified in the case study.
- Identify and describe the illness and relevant pathophysiology of the illness indicated.
- Identify the common clinical manifestations (signs and symptoms) for the illness you described.
- Consider and discuss the legal and ethical implications of consent giving whilst under the influence of intravenous narcotics.
- You must decide whether the patient is fit to consent, and if not, who may be able to consent for her. You should discuss potential confidentiality and privacy issues in relation to her location for admission.
- Identify the potential issues that could be faced when undergoing surgery in this case study, related to pain, digestion and oxygenation and formulate an intervention plan that explains how to manage each one.
Note: This plan should be a paragraph on each aforementioned issue, which includes the considerations for each intervention and the clinical reasoning behind them.
Case Study – Janet
Read the below case study then complete your response.
Janet is a 48-year old; she has a BMI of 42 and is a single mother of two. She has been admitted to the ward from the emergency department (ED) with a preliminary diagnosis of Cholecystitis after increasing abdominal pain and nausea. Janet’s observations on arrival are T=36.7, P=88, BP=104/74, RR=10, SaO2=98% on 2L/min Oxygen via nasal cannula.
She has a resting pain score of 2/10 which increases to 5/10 on movement after analgesia. She has been given IV Paracetamol, IV Morphine and IV Normal Saline. She has been admitted to the ward awaiting further investigation and review by the general surgery consultant. Janet has been admitted to a shared room on the surgical ward with another patient. Her morphine was administered 45 minutes ago with some effect on her pain, the surgical registrar is going to consent her for surgery when she arrives on the ward in 10 minutes.
Writing your response
You should start with a short introduction (approximately 200 words) detailing the case study and the identified acute illness. This section should be written in complete sentences and paragraphs, using appropriate language and punctuation. This section should not be dot points, lists, graphs or diagrams.
The main body of your case study should be approximately 1000 words long, with separate sections dedicated to each aspect of the instructions (points 2-6 inclusive). This section must be written in full sentences and paragraphs; using appropriate language and punctuation. The report should be written in the third person. The use of tables, graphs and dot points is not required. All arguments and information presented should be appropriately referenced as per the APA referencing guide.
The report should end with a conclusion, which should be approximately 300 words in length, and summarise the case study and information presented. This section should not include new information. You may identify potential areas for further study and or/research in this section; this should be rationalised to include impact on future admission and patient outcomes. The inclusion of potential areas for further research is not a mandatory component of this assessment.
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
Submission Instructions
Submit your Case Study into Assessment 3 submission link in the Assessment section found in the main navigation menu of the subject Blackboard site. A rubric will be attached to the assessment. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Due date: 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 4.1 (Week 7).
Assessment Rubric
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% | Pass (Functional) 50-64% | Credit (Proficient) 65-74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
| Knowledge and understanding of the relevant pathophysiology of the acute illness Percentage for this criterion = 15% | Limited understanding and/or analysis of pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Failing to identify or describe all of the key pathophysiological processes of the illness within the case study. | A basic understanding and analysis of the pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Identifying the key pathophysiological processes of the illness within the case study but providing only a limited description and cursory analysis of them. | Above average understanding and analysis of the pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Identifying the key pathophysiological processes of the illness within the case study, and providing a description of them to a cellular level; that includes • Some analysis of the pathophysiology from one or two sources with little correlation | Advanced understanding and analysis of the pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Identifying and providing a detailed description of all pathophysiological processes of the illness within the case study to a cellular level; that includes • An analysis of all pathophysiological processes which is linked to at least two appropriate resources that provide relevant correlation.. | Exceptional understanding and analysis of the pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Identifying and providing an extensive description of all pathophysiological processes of the illness within the case study to a cellular level; that includes • Exhibiting the ability to correctly correlate and interpret evidence from three or more relevant sources to validate understanding. |
| Knowledge and understanding of clinical manifestations and their relationship to the acute illness Percentage for this criterion = 15% | Limited understanding of clinical manifestations and relation to pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Failure to identify any of the key clinical manifestations of the illness; and/or • Failure to relate any of the clinical manifestations to the pathophysiology. | A basic understanding of clinical manifestations and relation to pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Identifying most clinical manifestations of the illness; and • Providing a limited description of those identified; which includes • Making relationships between the pathophysiology and clinical manifestations without referencing any relevant sources. | Above average understanding of clinical manifestations and relation to pathophysiology demonstrated by: • Identifying all clinical manifestations of the illness; and • Providing a detailed description of most; which includes Some analysis of the relationship of the clinical manifestations to the pathophysiology from at least one relevant source. | Advanced understanding of clinical manifestations and relation to pathophysiology demonstrated by: Identifying and providing a detailed description of all clinical manifestations of the illness; which includes An in-depth analysis of the relationship of the clinical manifestations to the pathophysiological processes, from more than one source. | Exceptional understanding of clinical manifestations and relation to pathophysiology demonstrated by: Identifying and providing an extensive description of all clinical manifestations related to the illness; which includes The correlation and interpretation of evidence from three or more sources to validate understanding. |
| Ability to analyse the potential legal and ethical issues faced by a patient under the influence of IV narcotics and justify what can be done to correct them. Percentage for this criterion = 20% | Limited analysis and justification demonstrated by: • Failing to identify most of the potential ethical and/or legal issues; or • Identifying most issues but not providing an accurate rationale for how to correct any or all of the issues identified. | Basic analysis and justification demonstrated by: Identifying most or all the potential issues relating to the case study; and Providing a basic rationale for how to correct the issues without sufficient evidence to support the approach. | Sufficient analysis and justification demonstrated by: Identifying all potential issues relating to the case study; and Providing an accurate rationale for how to correct the issues with evidence from fewer than two relevant sources. | Above analysis and justification by: Identifying all potential issues relating to the case study; and Providing a clear, logical explanation of how to accurately correct the issues with evidence from fewer than four relevant sources. | Advanced analysis and justification demonstrated by: • Identifying all potential issues relating to the case study; and • Providing a detailed, logical explanation of how to accurately correct the issues that includes evidence from four or more relevant sources. |
| Apply sound clinical reasoning for appropriate nursing interventions that could be undertaken to manage problems associated with pain management, digestion and oxygenation. Percentage for this criterion = 40% | Limited clinical reasoning of appropriate nursing interventions applied by: • Failing to identify any problems associated with the pain management, digestion and oxygenation of the client; or • Identifying some problems but failing to formulate a plan for any appropriate nursing interventions. | Basic clinical reasoning of appropriate nursing interventions applied by: • Identifying at least two problems associated with the pain management, digestion and oxygenation of the client; and • Formulating a basic plan for nursing interventions that could be applied to each problem, without evidence from any relevant sources. | Above average clinical reasoning of appropriate nursing interventions applied by: • Identifying all problems associated with the pain management, digestion and oxygenation of the client; and • Formulating a plan for nursing interventions that could be applied to each problem which includes fewer than two relevant sources. | Advanced clinical reasoning of appropriate nursing interventions applied by: • Identifying all problems associated the pain management, digestion and oxygenation of the client; and • Formulating a good plan for nursing interventions that could be applied to each problem which includes fewer than four relevant sources. | Exceptional clinical reasoning of appropriate nursing interventions applied by: • Identifying problems associated the pain management, digestion and oxygenation of the client; and • Formulating a sound plan for nursing interventions that could be applied to each problem which includes evidence from more than four relevant sources. |
| Demonstration of correct citation and referencing Percentage for this criterion = 5% | Required APA referencing style not followed for most references provided. Inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop understanding | Required APA referencing style not followed for some references provided. Fewer than seven appropriate resources used to support and develop understanding that are of good quality, credible and relevant. | Required APA referencing style followed for most references provided. Seven to ten appropriate resources used to support and develop understanding that are of good quality, credible and relevant. | Required APA referencing style followed for all references provided. Ten to fifteen appropriate resources used to support and develop understanding that are of good quality, credible and relevant. | Required APA referencing style followed for all references provided. Fifteen or more appropriate resources used to support and develop understanding that are of good quality, credible and relevant. |
| Demonstration of appropriate grammar, language and structure Percentage for this criterion = 5% | Inconsistent use of correct grammar, spelling, language and structure; writing difficult to follow with frequent mistakes. | Basic use of correct grammar, spelling, language and structure; writing difficult to follow with some mistakes | Consistent use of correct grammar, spelling, language and structure; writing easy to follow with some mistakes. | Advanced use of correct grammar, spelling, language and structure; writing easy to follow with minimal mistakes. | Exceptional use of correct grammar, spelling, language and structure; writing easy to follow with very few mistakes. |
| The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment | |
| SLO a) | Identify and describe the pathophysiology and clinical manifestations of common acute presentations in the clinical setting (Criteria 1.1, 1.2, 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, 7.1). |
| SLO c) | Demonstrate an understanding of nursing care requirements to an acute presentation, using an holistic approach (Criteria 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 5.1, 6.5). |
| SLO d) | Consider and apply ethical and legal principles such as consent, privacy, open disclosure and confidentiality (Criteria 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 2.5, 6.2). |
| SLO f) | Apply clinical reasoning processes for problems associated with oxygenation, digestion, pain, movement and metabolic imbalances in caring for persons in simulated and actual clinical settings (Criteria 1.1, 1.2, 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, 6.6, 7.1). |
[ANSWER PREVIEW]
On Demand: Order Customised Solution Starting from just USD 11 per page. Contact Our Support on Whatsapp Now!
