Discussion: NRNP 6552 NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice

Discussion: NRNP 6552 NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice

Discussion: NRNP 6552 NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice

The Discussion for this week is to provide you an opportunity to discuss with your colleagues the case studies presented in the interactive media program. These case studies involve ethical dilemmas or other issues encountered in advanced nursing practice.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE Discussion: NRNP 6552 NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice HERE

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 3,” Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans) pp. 39–49)

Chapter 13, “Contraception” (pp. 236–266)

Morreim, H., Antiel, R. M., Zacharias, D. G., & Hall, D. E. (2014). Should age be a basis for rationing health care?Links to an external site. The Virtual Mentor: VM, 16(5), 339–347. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2014.16.05.ecas2-1405

World Health Organization. (2020). Ageing and life courseLinks to an external site.. https://www.who.int/ageing/en/

ADULT GERONTOLOGY RESOURCES

Harrison, B. J., Hilton, T. N., Rivière, R. N., Ferraro, Z. M., Deonandan, R., & Walker, M. C. (2017). Advanced maternal age: Ethical and medical considerations for assisted reproductive technologyLinks to an external site.. International Journal of Women’s Health, 9, 561–570.

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

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

Required Media

Unfolding Case Study 1 – Issues in Advanced Nursing PracticeLinks to an external site.

In this interactive media program, you will be presented with various case studies with a variety of decision paths to take as an Advanced Nurse Practitioner.

Unfolding Case Study 2 – Ethical Dilemmas in Advance Nursing PracticeLinks to an external site.

In this interactive media program, you will be presented with various case studies with a variety of decision paths to take as an Advanced Nurse Practitioner.

Optional Resources

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 3, “Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans” Download “Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans”

Chapter 13, “Contraception” Download “Contraception”

BY DAY 3

To prepare:

Review the interactive case studies in this week’s Learning Resources. Select one of the cases to prepare your discussion post. Your post 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

BY DAY 6

Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts (from a different group) on two different days and provide additional insight that might be useful and appropriate for the issue addressed. Use your learning resources and/or evidence from the literature to support your position.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the Reply button to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Post Reply, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Post Reply!

NRNP_6552_Week9_Case_Study_Discussion_Rubric

NRNP_6552_Week9_Case_Study_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:

Response to the case study discussion questions includes appropriate diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options as directed, is based on evidence-based research where appropriate, and is incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
44 to >39.16 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s)… Post includes appropriate diagnoses including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options… Incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of post the post having exceptional depth and breadth… Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.

39.16 to >34.76 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Responds to most of the discussion question(s).. Post includes appropriate diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options… Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the post having exceptional depth and breadth… Supported by at least 3 credible references.

34.76 to >30.36 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Responds to some of the discussion question(s)… Post contains incomplete or vague diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options… Is somewhat lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources… Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.

30.36 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not respond to the discussion question(s)… Post contains incomplete diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options, or diagnoses and/or explanations are missing… Lacks synthesis gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources… Contains only 1 or no credible references.
44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:

Writing
6 to >5.34 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Written clearly and concisely… Contains no grammatical or spelling errors… Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5.34 to >4.74 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Written concisely… May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors… Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4.74 to >4.14 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Written somewhat concisely… May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors… Contains some APA formatting errors.

4.14 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Not written clearly or concisely… Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors… Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:

Timely and full participation
10 to >8.9 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts main discussion by due date.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Posts main discussion by due date… Meets requirements for full participation.

7.9 to >6.9 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts main discussion by due date.

6.9 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post main discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 to >8.01 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings… Responds to questions posed by faculty… The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8.01 to >7.11 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7.11 to >6.21 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6.21 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:

Writing

6 to >5.34 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed… Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources… Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5.34 to >4.74 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed… Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources… Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4.74 to >4.14 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication… Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed… Few or no credible sources are cited.

4.14 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication… Response to faculty questions are missing… No credible sources are cited.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:

Timely and full participation

5 to >4.45 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts by due date.

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Meets requirements for full participation… Posts by due date.

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts by due date.

3.45 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post by due date.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 to >8.01 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings… Responds to questions posed by faculty… The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8.01 to >7.11 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7.11 to >6.21 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6.21 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:

Writing
6 to >5.34 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed… Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources… Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5.34 to >4.74 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed… Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources… Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4.74 to >4.14 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication… Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed… Few or no credible sources are cited.

4.14 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication… Response to faculty questions are missing… No credible sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:

Timely and full participation

5 to >4.45 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts by due date.

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Meets requirements for full participation… Posts by due date.

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts by due date.

3.45 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post by due date.
5 pts

Total Points: 10