See attached document Case study: Diagnostic Reasoning  92 y/o African American male is brought to the Emergency Department by his daughter. The

See attached document

Case study: Diagnostic Reasoning 

92 y/o African American male is brought to the Emergency Department by his daughter. The patient has slurred speech. His blood pressure is 210/100.

For this Case Study Assignment, you will determine the physical exams and diagnostic tests that would be most appropriate for gaining information and better understanding of your patient’s condition. Then, based on your analysis, you will formulate a differential diagnosis for the patient. 

Include the following: 

· Identify the patient’s chief complaint. 

· Identify what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be most appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. Be specific and explain your reasoning. 

· Explain how the results would be used to make a diagnosis. 

· Identify 
three to five (3–5) possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient. Explain your thinking. 

References page

Assignment 1_Rubric

NURS_6512_Week 3_Assignment 1_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify the patient’s chief complaint.

15 to >12.0 pts

Excellent

The response clearly, accurately, and in detail explains the assigned patient’s chief complaint.

12 to >9.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains the assigned patient’s chief complaint.

9 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response vaguely and with some inaccuracy explains the assigned patient’s chief complaint.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response is inaccurate and/or missing an explanation of the assigned patient’s chief complaint.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be most appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. Be specific and explain your reasoning.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response clearly, accurately, and in detail Identifies physical exams and diagnostic tests that are most appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition; reasoning for the exams/tests is clear, accurate, and detailed.

17 to >14.0 pts

Good

The response accurately Identifies physical exams and diagnostic tests that are most appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition; reasoning for the exams/tests is specific and accurate.

14 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response vaguely and with some inaccuracy Identifies physical exams and diagnostic tests that are appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition; reasoning for the exams/tests is vague and somewhat accurate.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response is inaccurate and/or missing identification of physical exams and diagnostic tests that are appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition; reasoning for the exams/tests is inaccurate or missing.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how the results would be used to make a diagnosis.

15 to >12.0 pts

Excellent

The response clearly, accurately, and in detail explains how the results would be used to make a diagnosis.

12 to >9.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains how the results would be used to make a diagnosis.

9 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response vaguely and with some inaccuracy explains how the results would be used to make a diagnosis.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response explains inaccurately and/or is missing how the results would be used to make a diagnosis.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify three to five (3–5) possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient. Explain your thinking.

35 to >29.0 pts

Excellent

The response clearly, accurately, and in detail identifies four or five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient; with clear, accurate, and detailed reasoning for each possible condition.

29 to >23.0 pts

Good

The response accurately identifies three to five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient; with accurate reasoning for each possible condition.

23 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response vaguely and lacking specificity identifies three possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient; with vague reasoning for each possible condition.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inadequately identifies fewer than three possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient; with inadequate or missing reasoning for each possible condition.

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 and 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: APA 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


Previous


Next

Share This Post

Email
WhatsApp
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest
Reddit

Order a Similar Paper and get 15% Discount on your First Order

Related Questions

TO PREPARE FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT: · Select a vulnerable patient from the list provided. · Consider age, birth-assigned sex, FDA approvals, and risk and

TO PREPARE FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT: · Select a vulnerable patient from the list provided. · Consider age, birth-assigned sex, FDA approvals, and risk and side-effect consideration. · Select the most appropriate medication for your selected patient based upon the information provided. · Review the textbook for commonly prescribed antidepressants,  Fast

#1  The SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation) communication tool is effective in healthcare settings primarily because it provides a

#1  The SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation) communication tool is effective in healthcare settings primarily because it provides a clear, concise framework for communications, which is crucial in high-stakes environments. Studies have shown that SBAR improves communication clarity and reduces errors, particularly during handoffs between healthcare providers. For instance, it