NRNP 6552 WEEK 5 ASSIGNMENT: CASE STUDTY COMMON GYNECOLOGIC CONDITIONS, PART 2

NRNP 6552 WEEK 5 ASSIGNMENT: CASE STUDTY COMMON GYNECOLOGIC CONDITIONS, PART 2

NRNP 6552 WEEK 5 ASSIGNMENT: CASE STUDTY COMMON GYNECOLOGIC CONDITIONS, PART 2

Case studies provide the opportunity to simulate realistic scenarios involving patients presenting with various health problems or symptoms. Such case studies enable nurse learners to apply concepts, lessons, and critical thinking to interviewing, screening, diagnostic approaches, as well as to the development of treatment plans.

For this Case Study Assignment, you will choose from four case studies to identify a challenging gynecological disease process. You will then explore this case study to determine the diagnosis, diagnostic tests, and treatment options for the patient.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NRNP 6552 WEEK 5 ASSIGNMENT: CASE STUDTY COMMON GYNECOLOGIC CONDITIONS, PART 2 HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Schuiling, K. D., & Likis, F. E. (2022). Gynecologic health care (4th ed.). Jones and Bartlett Learning.

Chapter 23, “Urinary Tract Infections” (pp. 469–478)

Chapter 24, “Urinary Incontinence” (pp. 479–492)

Chapter 23, “Menstrual-Cycle Pain and Premenstrual Syndrome” (pp. 495–510)

Chapter 26, “Normal and Abnormal Uterine Bleeding” (pp. 511–526)

Document: Week 5 Case Studies Download Week 5 Case Studies(PDF)

Document: Week 5 Case Study Template Download Week 5 Case Study Template(Word document)

RESOURCES FOR LGBTQ+

Aisner, A. J., Zappas, M., & Marks, A. (2020). Primary Care for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ) PatientsLinks to an external site.. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 16(4), 281–285. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2019.12.011

Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP). (2020, April 18). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender healthLinks to an external site.. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/lesbian-gay-bisexual-and-transgender-health

Sadlak, C. A., Boyd, C. J., & Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (LGBTQ)

Health Expert Panel (2016). American Academy of Nursing on Policy: Health care services for transgender individuals: Position statementLinks to an external site.. https://www.nursingoutlook.org/action/showPdf?pii=S0029-6554%2816%2930120-8

Wingo, E., Ingraham, N., & Roberts, S. C. M. (2018). Reproductive Health Care Priorities and Barriers to Effective Care for LGBTQ People Assigned Female at Birth: A Qualitative StudyLinks to an external site.. Women’s Health Issues, 28(4), 350–357. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2018.03.002

FNP RESOURCES

American Academy of Nurse Practitioners Certification Board (AANPCB). (2018). Welcome to the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners Certification BoardLinks to an external site.. https://www.aanpcert.org/

American Academy of Nurse Practitioners National Certification Board, Inc. (AANPCB). (2018). FNP & AGNP Certification Candidate HandbookLinks to an external site.. https://www.aanpcert.org/resource/documents/AGNP%20FNP%20Candidate%20Handbook.pdf

CLINICAL GUIDELINE RESOURCES

As you review the following resources, you may want to include a topic in the search area to gather detailed information (e.g., breast cancer screening guidelines; CDC for zika in pregnancy, etc.).

American Cancer Society, Inc. (ACS). (2020). Information and Resources about Cancer: Breast, Colon, Lung, Prostate, SkinLinks to an external site.. https://www.cancer.org/

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)Links to an external site.. (2020). https://www.acog.org/

American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). Lead the profession to share the future of nursing and health careLinks to an external site.. https://www.nursingworld.org/

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (CDC). (n.d.). CDC in actionLinks to an external site.. https://www.cdc.gov

HealthyPeople 2030. (2020). Healthy People 2030 FrameworkLinks to an external site.. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/About-Healthy-People/Development-Healthy-People-2030/Framework

The American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP). (2020). What’s Happening at your associationLinks to an external site.. https://www.aanp.org/

Optional Resources

Kelsey, B. M. & Nagtalon-Ramos, J. (2021). Midwifery & Women’s Health Nurse Practitioner Certification Review Guide (5th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Note: In Weeks 1-10, these resources are optional for your review. In Week 11, you will be required to review each of the PowerPoint slides from the text Gynecologic Health Care (4th ed.).

Chapter 23, “Urinary Tract Infections Download Urinary Tract Infections”

Chapter 24, “Urinary Incontinence Download Urinary Incontinence”

Chapter 25, “Menstrual-Cycle Pain and Premenstrual Syndrome Download Menstrual-Cycle Pain and Premenstrual Syndrome”

Chapter 26, “Normal and Abnormal Uterine Bleeding Download Normal and Abnormal Uterine Bleeding”

To prepare:

Review the 4 case studies under this week’s learning resources. Select one of the cases to prepare your written assignment.

Your assignment should address the following:

Summary of your chosen case study

What is your differential diagnosis?

Why did you make this diagnosis decision?

What is your treatment plan?

What evidence-based research can you provide to support your decision (choice for differential diagnosis and plan/intervention)?

What resources did you use to meet your best practice guidelines?

Address the ethical dilemmas and/or other issues for your case study:

Ethical issues

Psychological issues

Physical issues

Financial issues

Use the Case Study template found in the Learning Resources to develop your assignment

BY DAY 5 OF WEEK 5

Submit your case study assignment by Day 5 of Week 5.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as Wk5Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NRNP_6552_Week5_Case_Study_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6552_Week5_Case_Study_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyzes subjective and objective data and outlines applicable diagnostic tests related to case studies.
30 to >26.7 pts

Excellent

The response provides clear, complete, and comprehensive descriptions of subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining all diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

26.7 to >23.7 pts

Good

The response provides clear, complete partial descriptions of the components of the subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining most of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

The response provides some components of the subjective and objective case data, but they are incomplete, vague or inaccurate, outlining some of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides unclear or incomplete components of subjective and objective case data. The diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions are missing, incorrect, or inappropriately applied.
30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentifies differential diagnoses related to case studies.
30 to >26.76 pts

Excellent

The response contains at least 3 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case.

26.76 to >23.7 pts

Good

The response contains at least 2 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

The response contains at least 1 differential diagnosis relevant and applicable to the case.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

The response contains few or no differential diagnoses and/or diagnoses are not relevant and applicable to the case.
30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormulates a treatment plan related to case studies based on scientific rationale, evidence- based standards of care, and practice guidelines. Integrates ethical, psychological, physical, financial issues and Social Determinants of Health in plan.

30 to >26.76 pts

Excellent

Formulates a thorough treatment plan including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Fully incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

26.76 to >23.7 pts

Good

Formulates a partially complete treatment plan including partial explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

Formulates a minimally complete treatment plan including incomplete or vague explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least 2 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

Formulates a treatment plan that contains incomplete explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options and/ or explanations are missing. Lacks synthesis gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by 1 or no current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.45 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.45 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 to >4.45 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3.45 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts

Total Points: 100

PreviousNext