pain after hemicolectomy Online case study presentation Unit weighting: 30% Length: 10 minutes maximum. Any material exceeding 10 minutes will not be marked.

Do you want a similar paper? Click here to get it from our professional writers!

Online case study presentation
Unit weighting: 30%
Length: 10 minutes maximum. Any material exceeding 10 minutes will not be marked.
Task requirements: This assessment builds on the feedback you received for the case study abstract. It is designed to provide you with an opportunity to justify the clinical priorities you decided on for your patient.
You should use a maximum of 9 narrated PowerPoint slides. Instructions for creating and submitting your presentation online are available on Blackboard. The structure of your case study presentation should clearly address the following points:
1. Provide a brief overview of your patient that includes the reason for hospitalisation, and relevant assessment data. (2 slides)
2. Analyse the assessment data, demonstrating knowledge of the relevant pathophysiology. You should apply the ‘Process the
Information’ component of the Clinical Reasoning Cycle (CRC). (1 – 2 slide)
3. Identify the clinical priorities (minimum of 2 and maximum of 4). Justify your decision with relevant literature, and by linking
back to the pathophysiology of the patient’s condition. Orally state which clinical priority will be the focus of assessment item
3. (4 slides maximum)
4. Identify 3 sources of evidenced-based literature (EBL) no more than 7 years old that you think will be relevant to Assessment
3. Assessment 3 focuses on the interventions for the identified clinical priority. State the reason you chose the EBL and why
it supports or does not support the interventions(s) used. (1 slide)
5. Add a title slide, and a references slide presented in APA style (not counted in maximum number).
Very important point: You must maintain patient confidentiality when completing this assessment. Any patient data used must be de- identified so that the patient remains anonymous.

abstract by . Navjot Kaur Submission date: 31-Aug-2017 05:12PM (UTC+1000) Submission ID: 841222952 File name: Nsb026_abstract.doc (54K) Word count: 845 Character count: 4963 Clin lang Grammar/English see final comment what framework did you use/ Normal? Sp. 1 assessment and case presentation clearly stated 2 3 4 5 6 7 GOALS Evaluation Criteria need to match up with your problem once you have revisited that section. see foianl comment general comment 8 FINAL GRADE 14/30 abstract GRADEMARK REPORT GENERAL COMMENTS Instructor Navjot Your writing style at times does not f ollow the conventions of English and grammar required in an academic paper. This occurs in the opening section, so make sure you have this checked bef ore your f inal assessment which will require the narrative f ormat. In the opening , your relevance statement is very general .What was it that was special about this complex patient that the RN should know or think about? As the narrated power point available on blackboard states “ Make your argument here as to why your f ellow students should be interested in your case study, why yours is important f or them to know about and what they can learn from it. One or two sentences are suf f icient without the dot points. You have presented the assessment data clearly setting the scene f or this patient however it has been underutilized in subsequent sections. The clinical priorities must be identif ied as nursing and not restating medical diagnoses. You need to demonstrate your understanding by identif ying which data supports which problem and why. The best way to articulate a problem is State problem (what is the ACTUAL problem?)….related to (xxxxxxxxx”) as evidenced by xxxxxx (which piece(s) of assessment data supports this?) . Angina is a symptom..what is the actual problem, what is going on in the heart?. Another problem you identif y is pain, is it surgical pain..what is causing it? How do you know the patient has pain?(i.e evidence). You will need to rework this section considerably as you can then match up each problem with a planning goal and the relevant interventions. As the narrated power point states “Be more specif ic here – e.g. ‘‘Inef f ective breathing pattern related to worsening of asthma symptoms’ …plus you need to add what evidence you are identif ying which supports EACH problem. In using the SMART goal f ormat your planning goals would be more specif ic. You evaluation criteria need to be specif ic. The textbook will help you here. As the narrated power point states” Aim f or your goals to be SMART – Specif ic, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, & Timely”. The interventions sections requires you to describe what you actually DID, not what you would do (case study rather than care QM QM QM QM plan) theref ore this section needs to be expressed in the past tense. Which intervention is addressing which problem will need to be clearly identif ied, be specif ic and be nursing orientated. Revisit CRA f or ref lective question requirements as these are vague. The above f eedback is intended to be f ormative to support you to succeed in your case study submission. Kate PAGE 1 Clin lang Use prof essional / clinical term Grammar/English Grammar/ English expression Text Comment. see f inal comment Text Comment. what framework did you use/ Normal? By identif ying if this data is abnormal or normal, you are demonstrating your underpinning knowledge. Sp. Spelling error Comment 1 need to comment what is this and what it does Text Comment. assessment and case presentation clearly stated PAGE 2 Comment 2 two problems Comment 3 this is not a nursing problem and is unclear Comment 4 QM QM QM symptom Comment 5 too general Comment 6 needs to be separated out as two problems. Comment 7 intervention GOALS This could have been improved with succinctly clarif ying the goals using the SMART goal f ormat Evaluation Criteria what would your evaluation criteria be Text Comment. need to match up with your problem once you have revisited that section. see f oianl comment general comment general comment which does not introduce new inf ormation Comment 8 question needs to be more specif ic RUBRIC: NSB026 CASE STUDY ABSTRACT CRITERION 1 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 2 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 3 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 4 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL 0 / 0 0 / 0 Identif ies a complex patient care situation Has thoughtf ully identif ied a complex patient care situation that triggered uncertainty and required high level critical thinking and clinical judgement. Identif ied an appropriately complex patient care situation that triggered uncertainty and required critical thinking and clinical judgement. Identif ied a patient care situation that provides limited opportunity f or critical ref lection. 0 / 0 Identif ies a complex patient care situation The signif icance and rationale f or reporting the case is persuasively argued. Broadly identif ies the signif icance and rationale f or reporting the case. Superf icial or partially developed explanation of the signif icance and rationale f or reporting the case. 0 / 0 Provides a clear and logical case description Presented a comprehensive case description using data from a range of sources. Includes all the most salient patient history, physical assessment data and any relevant investigations. Presented a satisf actory case description. Includes most of the salient patient history, physical assessment data and any relevant investigations. Poorly developed case description. Some essential patient history, physical assessment data or relevant investigations are missing. 0 / 0 Provides a clear and logical case description Assessment data logically structured using an appropriate framework. The patient’s clinical condition is clearly described. Assessment data structured using an appropriate framework with minor errors. Assessment data is not organised or applied a framework with major errors. (0) CRITERION 5 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 6 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 7 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 8 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) 0 / 0 Provides a clear and logical case description Identif ies all the patient’s most important clinical priorities. Identif ies some of the patient’s most important clinical priorities. Incorrectly identif ies the patient’s clinical priorities. 0 / 0 Provides a clear and logical case description Clearly describes the care that was provided to the patient including the planning, interventions and evaluation data. Has removed all inf ormation that is not essential to understand the clinical management of the patient. Generally clearly describes the care that was provided to the patient including the planning, interventions and evaluation data. Has removed most of the inf ormation that is not essential to understand the clinical management of the patient. Some essential aspects of the care that was provided to the patient including the planning, interventions and evaluation data are missing. Extraneous inf ormation included making it dif f icult to understand the clinical management of the patient. 0 / 0 Writes in a scholarly, prof essional manner Used appropriate prof essional non-discriminatory language, with mastery of clinical terminology. Used appropriate prof essional non-discriminatory language, with correct clinical terminology. Lacking appropriate prof essional language and/or use of clinical terminology to convey ideas. 0 / 0 Writes in a scholarly, prof essional manner Always expressed your ideas clearly and concisely. Mostly expressed your ideas clearly and concisely. FAIL (0) CRITERION 9 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 10 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) CRITERION 11 HD/ DISTINCTION (0) CREDIT/PASS (0) FAIL (0) Poor logical f low. Exceeds word limit. 0 / 0 Writes in a scholarly, prof essional manner Correctly f ollows f ormatting guidelines. Follows f ormatting guidelines with minor errors. Incorrectly f ormatted. 0 / 0 Writes in a scholarly, prof essional manner Maintains patient anonymity and conf identiality. Maintains patient anonymity and conf identiality. Patient anonymity or conf identiality breached. 0 / 0 Ref lects on gaps in knowledge and plans f or f urther learning Clearly identif ies a range of key questions and areas f or f urther learning arising from the case study. Clearly identif ies some key questions and areas f or f urther learning arising from the case study. Superf icial attempt to identif y questions and areas f or f urther learning arising from the case study. 4% SIMILARITY INDEX 0% INTERNET SOURCES 0% PUBLICATIONS 4% STUDENT PAPERS 1 2% 2 2% Exclude quotes Of f Exclude bibliography On Exclude matches Of f abstract ORIGINALITY REPORT PRIMARY SOURCES Submitted to Queensland University of Technology Student Paper Submitted to Harding University Student Paper

PART A: Online case study presentation Unit weighting: 30% Length: 10 minutes maximum. Any material exceeding 10 minutes will not be marked. Task requirements: This assessment builds on the feedback you received for the case study abstract. It is designed to provide you with an opportunity to justify the clinical priorities you decided on for your patient. You should use a maximum of 9 narrated PowerPoint slides. Instructions for creating and submitting your presentation online are available on Blackboard. The structure of your case study presentation should clearly address the following points: 1. Provide a brief overview of your patient that includes the reason for hospitalisation, and relevant assessment data. (2 slides) 2. Analyse the assessment data, demonstrating knowledge of the relevant pathophysiology. You should apply the ‘Process the Information’ component of the Clinical Reasoning Cycle (CRC). (1 – 2 slide) 3. Identify the clinical priorities (minimum of 2 and maximum of 4). Justify your decision with relevant literature, and by linking back to the pathophysiology of the patient’s condition. Orally state which clinical priority will be the focus of assessment item 3. (4 slides maximum) 4. Identify 3 sources of evidenced-based literature (EBL) no more than 7 years old that you think will be relevant to Assessment 3. Assessment 3 focuses on the interventions for the identified clinical priority. State the reason you chose the EBL and why it supports or does not support the interventions(s) used. (1 slide) 5. Add a title slide, and a references slide presented in APA style (not counted in maximum number). Very important point: You must maintain patient confidentiality when completing this assessment. Any patient data used must be de- identified so that the patient remains anonymous.

Do you want a similar paper? Click here to get it from our professional writers!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *