Description
YOUR CASE STUDY:
Submit your Case Study Analysis Assignment by Day 7 of Week 8.
Scenario 3: A 74-year-old female presents to the clinic with complaints of increased difficulty in getting up from a seated position and worsening right knee pain over the last few months. The patient reports the pain is a 6/10 and is not relieved with Tylenol. The pain is sharp at times to her knees but aches at night when she is trying to rest. The patient denies any recent injuries to her knee. The patient has a history of diabetes type 2 and hypertension. The patient is taking metformin 500mg PO twice daily and lisinopril 10mg po daily. Patient is 5’8” and weighs 220 pounds. BP is 122/84, pulse is 72, resp 18, regular and non-labored, pulse ox 96%, and temp 98.8F. Physical exam reduced ROM to right knee and complaints of pain with flexion; bilateral knee crepitus worse in the right knee. No erythema to knee joints but mild edema noted bilaterally. The patient reports tenderness to both knees upon palpation. Diagnostic testing ESR 14 mm/hr. CMP otherwise normal except for non-fasting glucose of 220 mg/dL. Right and left knee xray: Moderate degenerative changes with joint space narrowing, no radiographic evidence of osteoporosis or joint effusion. Based on this result and exam findings the patient is given a diagnosis of osteoarthritis.
The Assignment (1- to 2-page case study analysis)
In your Case Study Analysis related to the scenario provided, explain the following:
The musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes that would account for the patient presenting these symptoms.
Any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning.
How these processes interact to affect the patient.NURS_6501_Week 8_Case Study_Assignment_Rubric
NURS_6501_Week 8_Case Study_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDevelop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following: Explain the musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of why the patient presents these symptoms.
30 to >27.0 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations of the musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 27 to >24.0 ptsGoodThe response describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, explanations of the musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 24 to >22.0 ptsFairThe response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. … The response includes explanations of the musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. 22 to >0 ptsPoorThe response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. … The response does not include explanations of the musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient.
30 to >27.0 ptsExcellentThe response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 27 to >24.0 ptsGoodThe response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 24 to >22.0 ptsFairThe response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 22 to >0 ptsPoorThe response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning.
25 to >22.0 ptsExcellentThe response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 22 to >19.0 ptsGoodThe response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 19 to >17.0 ptsFairThe response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 17 to >0 ptsPoorThe response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research.
25 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 ptsExcellentParagraphs 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 >3.5 ptsGoodParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. …The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. … The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. 3 to >0 ptsPoorParagraphs 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 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 to >3.5 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains 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 >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct APA format with no errors. 4 to >3.0 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 3 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts
Total Points: 100
