Download Nr603 w5 apea predictor assignment docx.pdf and more Exams Nursing in PDF only on Docsity!
APEA PREDICTOR EXAM ASSIGNMENT GUIDELINES
PURPOSE
The purpose of this assignment is for learners to: Identify opportunities for improvement in their knowledge base. Improve their knowledge base and understanding of a disease process identified as an opportunity area on the APEA predictor exam. Have the opportunity to integrate knowledge and skills learned throughout all core courses in the FNP track and previous clinical courses. Demonstrate the ability to analyze the literature be able to perform an evidenced-based review of their case, diagnosis, and plan, while guiding and taking feedback from peers regarding the case. Demonstrate professional communication and leadership, while advancing the education of peers. Course Outcomes This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes: CO 1- Interpret subjective and objective data to develop appropriate diagnoses and evidence based management plans for patients and families with complex or multiple diagnoses across the lifespan. CO 4 -Develop management plans based on current scientific evidence and national guidelines. Requirements For Week 5 of the course the faculty will not be providing a case study. Instead you will choose from an area that you have an opportunity for improvement that was identified on your APEA predictor exam. You will research that area of content in relation to complaints and disorders that commonly occur in family practice. Please work up a case study that begins with a chief complaint commonly seen in primary care based on that disorder. The case should be clear and include all elements of a normal case that might be presented in class (subjective, objective, assessment, and full five (5) point plan). The clinical logs will be helpful for this process, or notes you have taken in clinical regarding cases. The case should be clear, organized, and meet the following guidelines: Week 5 Part 1: Due by Wednesday 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 5. Step 1. Review your Week 4 APEA Predictor Exam Results and focus on the “Percent Correct by Knowledge Area” Choose a knowledge area on which you scored the lowest to work on this week.
Step 2. Once you've chosen the subject, research and work up a common chief complaint from that system and present your findings in the discussion threads. Work up includes: Chief complaint; Associated risk factors/demographics that contribute to the chief complaint; Three common differential diagnoses represented by the CC including pathophysiology and rationale; Discuss how the three differential diagnoses differ from each other in: occurrence, pathophysiology and presentation (NOTE: Simply listing the diagnoses and their occurrence, pathophysiology and presentations separately does not confer an understanding of how they differ. Your discussion should compare and contrast these items against each other among the three differentials chosen); Relevant testing required to diagnose/evaluate severity of the three differential diagnoses; and Review of relevant National Guidelines related to the Diagnosis, Diagnostic testing and/or treatment of the final diagnosis. Part 2- Due By Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 5 First line treatment plan based on one dx from your differential list in SOAP format Grading Rubric Part 1 Criterion Exceptional Exceeds Meets Needs Improvement Developing
CC including pathophysiology and rationale How the three differential diagnoses differ from each other in: occurrence, etiology and presentation Support from Evidence- Based Practice (EBP) 40 Points 35 Points 33 Points 16 Points 0 Points Discussion post supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. In-text citations and full references are provided. Discussion post is partially supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. In-text citations and full references are provided. Evidence-based reference(s) used but may not fully support the treatment plan. Sources may not be scholarly in nature or may be older than five years. In-text citations and/or full references may be incomplete or missing. Citations to non- scholarly websites given as rationale to support differential diagnoses, treatment plan and as rationale for board certification style questions answers. Discussion post contains no evidence-based practice reference or citation. _Students should note that factitious sources, sources that are clearly not read by the student and used, or sources that have incorrect dates will result in an automatic ZERO for this section for the_*
week. Organization 10 Points 9 Points 8 Points 4 Points 0 Points Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Discussion post is relevant to the topic but may be unclear or difficult to follow in places. OR Unclear or difficult to follow in places. Discussion post not fully relevant to the topic. May be unclear or difficult to follow in places. Discussion post sometimes unclear to follow and may not always be relevant to identified topic. OR Lacks relevance to identified topic. Discussion post is not relevant to case study. Grammar, Syntax, APA 10 Points 9 Points 8 Points 4 Points 0 Points APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate, or with zero to one errors. Two to four errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted. Five to seven errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted. Eight to nine errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted. Post contains ten or greater errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation or repeatedly makes the same errors after faculty feedback.
Case presentation summary demonstrates course knowledge by thorough, thoughtful, evidence-based support in Specific diagnostic testing Treatment plan based on one of the three differentials presented incorporating feedback from instructor Case presentation summary includes at least three (3) appropriate differential diagnoses with rationale and answers four out of five (4/5) of the items outlined in the assignment guidelines. Case presentation summary does not does not include at least three (3) differential diagnoses for each patient and three out of five (3-5) of the items outlined in the assignment. Some evidence- based rationale may be missing. Three or more elements from case presentation or the summary is missing. Case presentation summary offer no insight or application to the identified area of content/chief complaint presentation. Support from Evidence- Based Practice (EBP) 30 Points 26 Points 24 Points 12 Points 0 Points Case presentation summary is supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. In-text citations and full references are provided. Case presentation summary is partially supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. In-text citations and full references are provided. Sources may not be scholarly in nature or may be older than five years. In-text citations and/or full references may be incomplete or missing. Citations to non- scholarly websites given as rationale to support differential diagnoses, treatment plan. Case presentation summary contain no evidence-based practice reference or citation. _Students should note that factitious sources, sources that are clearly not read by the student and used,_*
Evidence-based reference(s) used but may not fully support the treatment plan. or sources that have incorrect dates will result in an automatic ZERO for this section for the week. Organization 5 Points 4 Points 3 Points 1 Points 0 Points Case presentation summary presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Case presentation summary is relevant to the topic but may be unclear or difficult to follow in places.
Case
presentation
summary is not
fully relevant to the topic. May be unclear or difficult to follow in places. Case presentation summary is sometimes unclear to follow and may not always be relevant to identified topic. OR One of the two parts lacks relevance to identified topic. Case presentation summary is not relevant to case study. Interactive Dialogue 30 Points 26 Points 24 Points 12 Points 0 Points
feedback. Participation Enters first post to part one by Wednesday 11:59 p.m. MT; first post to part two by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT; and enters peer/faculty response by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT. 0 points deducted Points deducted for late or missing posts Enters first post to part one by Wednesday 11:59 p.m. MT; first post to part two by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT; and enters peer/faculty response by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT. 10% (10 points deducted from the assignment total of 100) deducted per part for late submission.
