ASSIGNMENT: NURS 6512 Week 9 ASSESSING NEUROLOGICAL SYMPTOMS CASE STUDY 

ASSIGNMENT: NURS 6512 Week 9 ASSESSING NEUROLOGICAL SYMPTOMS CASE STUDY

Case Study 1: Headaches

A 40 year old female presents with complaint of a headache for one week. Reports a “head cold” 3 weeks ago. Thought it was getting better, but sinus symptoms are back and even worse.

Describes the headache is located across her forehead; feels like pressure behind my eyes and unable to breathe out of nose. Also feels mucus running down the back of throat. Pain sometimes severe (8/10) but with acetaminophen reduces to moderate (4/10) and occasionally mild (2/10). Occasional nonproductive cough. Feels feverish at times; noted frequent sneezing and no appetite. Bending over seems to make the headache worse. “Acetaminophen improves my headache, but doesn’t take it away.” Taking Sudafed HCL 120 mg every 12 hours, with some relief. Symptoms are worse in the morning – awakes with a headache. Ranges from 2/10 at its best to 8/10. Difficulty with concentrating at job and feels very tired.

BUY A CUSTOM FREE PAPER HERE ON ;ASSIGNMENT: NURS 6512 Week 9 ASSESSING NEUROLOGICAL SYMPTOMS CASE STUDY 

Students who last name start with letter A – K, are assigned to this Case Study

FOCUS IS THE NEUROLOGICAL SYSTEM

REMEMBER THIS IS THE NEUROLOGICAL SYSTEM AND NOT HEENT, FOCUS IS THE NEUROLOGICAL SYSTEM

PLEASE DO NOT REVIEW OR EXAMINE HEENT, THIS IS A NEUROLOGICAL PROBLEM!!

CASE STUDY ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING NEUROLOGICAL SYMPTOMS

Imagine not being able to form new memories. This is the reality patients with anterograde amnesia face. Although this form of amnesia is rare, it can result from severe brain trauma. Anterograde amnesia demonstrates just how impactful brain disorders can be to a patient’s quality of living. Accurately assessing neurological symptoms is a complex process that involves the analysis of many factors.

In this Case Study Assignment, you will consider case studies that describe abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting.

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

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Chapter 7, “Mental Status”

This chapter revolves around the mental status evaluation of an individual’s overall cognitive state. The chapter includes a list of mental abnormalities and their symptoms.

Chapter 23, “Neurologic System”

The authors of this chapter explore the anatomy and physiology of the neurologic system. The authors also describe neurological examinations and potential findings.

Dains, J. E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. (2019). Advanced health assessment and clinical diagnosis in primary care (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Advanced Health Assessment and Clinical Diagnosis in Primary Care, 6th Edition by Dains, J.E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. Copyright 2019 by Mosby. Reprinted by permission of Mosby via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Chapter 4, “Affective Changes”Download Chapter 4, “Affective Changes”

This chapter outlines how to identify the potential cause of affective changes in a patient. The authors provide a suggested approach to the evaluation of this type of change, and they include specific tools that can be used as part of the diagnosis.

Chapter 9, “Confusion in Older Adults”Download Chapter 9, “Confusion in Older Adults”

This chapter focuses on causes of confusion in older adults, with an emphasis on dementia. The authors include suggested questions for taking a focused history as well as what to look for in a physical examination.

Chapter 13, “Dizziness”Download Chapter 13, “Dizziness”

Dizziness can be a symptom of many underlying conditions. This chapter outlines the questions to ask a patient in taking a focused history and different tests to use in a physical examination.

Chapter 19, “Headache”Download Chapter 19, “Headache”

The focus of this chapter is the identification of the causes of headaches. The first step is to ensure that the headache is not a life-threatening condition. The authors give suggestions for taking a thorough history and performing a physical exam.

Chapter 31, “Sleep Problems”Download Chapter 31, “Sleep Problems”

In this chapter, the authors highlight the main causes of sleep problems. They also provide possible questions to use in taking the patient’s history, things to look for when performing a physical exam, and possible laboratory and diagnostic studies that might be useful in making the diagnosis.

Sullivan, D. D. (2019). Guide to clinical documentation (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.

Chapter 2, “The Comprehensive History and Physical Exam” (“Cranial Nerves and Their Function” and “Grading Reflexes”) (Previously read in Weeks 1, 2, 3, and 5)

O’Caoimh, R., & Molloy, D. W. (2019). Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of two cognitive screening instruments in different dementia subtypes and clinical depression.Links to an external site. Diagnostics, 9(3), 93. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics9030093

Shadow Health Support and Orientation Resources

Use the following resources to guide you through your Shadow Health orientation as well as other support resources:

Shadow Health. (2021). Welcome to your introduction to Shadow Health.Links to an external site. https://link.shadowhealth.com/Student-Orientation-Video

Shadow Health. (n.d.). Shadow Health help desk.Links to an external site.Retrieved from https://support.shadowhealth.com/hc/en-us

Shadow Health. (2021). Walden University quick start guide: NURS 6512 NP students. Download Walden University quick start guide: NURS 6512 NP students. https://link.shadowhealth.com/Walden-NURS-6512-Student-Guide

Document: DCE (Shadow Health) Documentation Template for Comprehensive (Head-to-Toe) Physical Assessment (Word document)Download DCE (Shadow Health) Documentation Template for Comprehensive (Head-to-Toe) Physical Assessment (Word document)

Use this template to complete your Assignment 3 for this week.

Required Media

Neurologic System – Week 9 (16m)

Online media for Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination

It is highly recommended that you access and view the resources included with the course text, Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination. Focus on the videos and animations in Chapters 7 and 23 that relate to the assessment of cognition and the neurologic system. Refer to the Week 4 Learning Resources area for access instructions on https://evolve.elsevier.com/Links to an external site.

Optional Resources

LeBlond, R. F., Brown, D. D., & DeGowin, R. L. (2020). DeGowin’s diagnostic examination (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical.

Chapter 14, “The Neurologic Examination”

This chapter provides an overview of the nervous system. The authors also explain the basics of neurological exams.

Chapter 15, “Mental Status, Psychiatric, and Social Evaluations”

In this chapter, the authors provide a list of common psychiatric syndromes. The authors also explain the mental, psychiatric, and social evaluation process.

Kim, H., Lee, S., Ku, B. D., Ham, S. G., & Park, W. (2019). Associated factors for cognitive impairment in the rural highly elderly.Links to an external site. Brain and Behavior, 9(5), e01203. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1203

Lee, K., Puga, F., Pickering, C. E., Masoud, S. S., & White, C. L. (2019). Transitioning into the caregiver role following a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease or related dementia: A scoping review.Links to an external site. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 96, 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.02.007

TO PREPARE

By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to a specific case study for this Case Study Assignment. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your assignment from your Instructor.

Also, your Case Study Assignment should be in the Episodic/Focused SOAP Note format rather than the traditional narrative style format. Refer to Chapter 2 of the Sullivan text and the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template in the Week 5 Learning Resources for guidance. Remember that all Episodic/Focused SOAP notes have specific data included in every patient case.

With regard to the case study you were assigned:

Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study.

Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient in the case study you were assigned.

Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?

Identify at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.

THE CASE STUDY ASSIGNMENT

Use the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template and create an episodic/focused note about the patient in the case study to which you were assigned using the episodic/focused note template provided in the Week 5 resources. Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for each case. List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis, and justify why you selected each.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 9

Submit your Assignment.

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 WK9Assgn1+last name+first initial.

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

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

Rubric

NURS_6512_Week_9_Assignment1_Rubric

NURS_6512_Week_9_Assignment1_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUsing the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template: · Create documentation or an episodic/focused note in SOAP format about the patient in the case study to which you were assigned. · Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for your case.
50 to >44.0 pts
Excellent

The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response thoroughly and accurately provides detailed evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.

44 to >38.0 pts
Good

The response accurately follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response accurately provides detailed evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.

38 to >32.0 pts
Fair

The response follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness and inaccuracy. The response provides evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness or inaccuracy in the evidence selected.

32 to >0 pts
Poor

The response incompletely and inaccurately follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response provides incomplete, inaccurate, and/or missing evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.

50 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis, and justify why you selected each.
35 to >29.0 pts
Excellent

The response lists five distinctly different and detailed possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study and provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the five conditions selected.

29 to >23.0 pts
Good

The response lists four to five different possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study and provides an accurate justification for each of the five conditions selected.

23 to >17.0 pts
Fair

The response lists three to four possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness and/or some inaccuracy in the conditions and/or justification for each.

17 to >0 pts
Poor

The response lists three or fewer, or is missing, possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, with inaccurate or missing justification for each condition selected.

35 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.

4 to >3.0 pts
Good

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

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

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

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

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

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

2 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, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

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

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts

Total Points: 100