I have uploaded below.
The purpose of this essay is for students to present a comprehensive discussion and justification identifying two (2) care priorities within a clinical scenario using the Levett-Jones’ Clinical Reasoning Cycle. Students are required to provide critical analysis and justification of the care priorities using appropriate academic references. Essay should revise issue of stigma, coping, family impact and services available Discuss the trajectories, adjustments, redefining “care”, communication and inter-displinary care. Word length is 1600 hundred APA references minimum of 15 resources latest publication with in 4/5 years Should be plagiarism free Plz target for the high distinction by following provided rubric with this document. Due date March 24 2018 NRSG366 Assessment Task One: Case Study One NRSG366 Semester One 2018 Assessment Task One: Case Study One Multiple factors influence the care of patients with chronic conditions. As a Primary Heath Care nurse, it is important that care given is prioritised based on both clinical and patient needs. Prioritisation of the patient needs for care is integral to daily nursing practice. This requires integrating and collaborating different aspects of patient needs in order to maximise care activities and the effectiveness of nursing interventions. This case study is designed to demonstrate the integration of various principles of managing care of patients with chronic conditions. Students will be expected to identify and discuss two PRIORITIES OF CARE and apply the clinical reasoning cycle to these as a means of justification. Please refer to the subject outline and marking rubric when answering this question. NRSG366 Assessment Task One: Case Study One Case scenario Peter Mitchell is a 52 year old male with morbid obesity and type 2 diabetes who was admitted to the medical ward with poorly controlled diabetes, obesity ventilation syndrome and sleep apnoea. Peter was referred by his GP after he presented with symptoms of shakiness, diaphoresis, increased hunger, high BGL levels and difficulty breathing whilst sleeping. Peter has been a smoker for approximately 30 years and smokes approximately 20 cigarettes per day. On his previous admission, Peter was seen by a dietician and commenced on low energy, high protein diet (LEHP) to assist with weight reduction. His GP had previously discussed weight loss with Peter however he had never wanted to do anything about it as it seemed ‘too hard’. Peter was also reviewed by the physiotherapist and was commenced on light exercises which he was to continue at home on discharge. Peter has been discharged home, with referral to community care unit for ongoing support and follow up, after four weeks in the medical ward to manage his weight and clinical comorbidities. Past medical history Obesity (weight 145kgs with a BMI of 50.2m2). Type 2 diabetes (Diagnosed 9 years ago) Hypertension Depression (Diagnosed three months ago by GP). Sleep apnoea Gastro oesophageal disease reflux disease Social History Peter is an unemployed male who receives government benefits. Peter lost his job three years ago as a fork lift driver at the Moranbah coal mine in far North Queensland. Peter states that he has always been a ’biggish guy’ with his ‘normal weight’ sitting at around 105kg but since starting insulin and losing his job he has gained a significant amount of weight. NRSG366 Assessment Task One: Case Study One Consequently, because of his weight issues Peter has difficulty finding work due to fatigue and feeling generally ‘uncomfortable’ about his size. Peter is a divorcee who lives alone, his two sons live in the same state but live in different cities and rarely visit him. He is socially isolated because he is embarrassed by his size and he rarely goes out. Peter is also finding it increasingly difficult to perform activities of daily living (ADLs). Peter realises that he is in the prime of his middle age life and is motivated to lose weight and quit smoking but isn’t sure where to start. Current Medication Insulin Novamix 30 B D (34units mane & 28units nocte) Metformin 500mg BD Lisinopril 10mg daily Nexium 20mg daily Metoprolol 50mg BD Pregabalin (Lyrica) 50mg nocte Last observations on discharge Weight 145kgs Height 170cms BP 180/92mmHg RR 23 Bpm HR 102 Bpm Sp02 95% on RA ASSESSMENT TASK 1: Individual Case Study Marking Criteria - Weighting: 40% Assessment Criteria HIGH DISTINCTION High HD 1 0 0 - 9 5 HIGH DISTINCTION Low HD 94-85 DISTINCTION 75-84 CREDIT 65-74 PASS 50-64 FAIL 49-30 FAIL 29-1 NO ATTEMPT 0 MARK Language Awareness and Sequencing The language is sophisticated, with integrated professional language and terminology, and suits the purpose for which the essay is intended Content is organised, and there is a logical progression of ideas that promotes flow of thought. The language is appropriate, with integrated professional language and terminology, and suits the purpose for which the essay is intended Content is organised, and there is a logical progression of ideas that promotes flow of thought. The essay ends with rational conclusion The language is appropriate with integrated terminology that suits the purpose for which the essay is intended. The content is organised in a logical manner and promotes the flow of thought. The essay ends with rationale conclusion The language is appropriate and suits the purpose for which the essay is intended The content is organised in a logical manner and promotes the flow of thought. The essay ends with a rational conclusion. The language is clear Most content is organised in a logical manner, and the essay ends with a rational conclusion. The language is not clear and appropriate, it does not promote flow of thought Content within the essay is not sequenced. There is an introduction followed by the body of the essay with concluding sentence The language is not clear and appropriate, it does not promote flow of thought Content within the essay is not sequenced. There is either no introduction or no conclusion present. The language in the essay is not and there is no flow of thought There is no sequencing. 10% Content: Critical Thinking, Reasoning and Evaluation of the Evidence A critical and considered case is presented, that is well-constructed and balanced. The planned care has been justified and rationale provided. There is clear evidence of the use of the clinical reasoning cycle in interpretation, A critical case is presented, that is well-constructed and balanced. The planned care has been justified and rationale provided There is sufficient evidence of the use of the clinical reasoning cycle in interpretation, analysis and application A clear, well- constructed and balanced case has been presented. There is justification of care provided with evidence of critical thinking There is evidence of the use of the clinical reasoning cycle in interpretation, A clear, well- structured case has been presented with some justification or rationale of care. There is some evidence of critical thinking There is some evidence of the use of the clinical reasoning cycle in one or more of the areas of A clear case has been presented with minimal justification or rationale of care and limited evidence of critical thinking There is minimal evidence of the use of the clinical reasoning cycle in one or more areas A clear case has not been presented, with minimal links or evidence of critical thinking evident There is evidence of the use of the clinical reasoning cycle A clear case has not been presented, with minimal links or evidence of critical thinking evident There minimal evidence of the use of the clinical reasoning cycle There is no evidence of critical thinking, the content does not match the case study topic There is no evidence of the use of the clinical 50% analysis and application analysis and application interpretation, analysis and application reasoning cycle Evidence & Examples There is evidence of both depth and breadth of high quality reading. The content is pertinent to the topic. High quality evidence and examples are presented. There is evidence of both depth and breadth of reading The content is pertinent to the topic. Quality evidence and examples are presented. There is evidence of both depth and breadth of reading The content is relevant to the topic. Quality evidence and examples are presented There is evidence of reading. The content is relevant to the topic. Appropriate evidence and examples are presented. There is limited evidence of reading The content is relevant to the topic. Evidence and examples are presented of varying quality. Evidence and examples are presented of varying quality. Evidence and examples are presented of poor quality and not related to case study. The content, evidence and examples are not appropriate There are