Case Study: WORKING THROUGH COMMON PREGNANCY ISSUES

Post ID: 3371391

Case studies and templates are attached. Follow the rubric and be as detailed as possible.

The Assignment for this week is to provide you an opportunity to analyze one of five case studies provided. These case studies involve common pregnancy and psychosocial issues encountered in advanced nursing primary care practice. You will use the case study template under weekly resources to develop your assignment.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity. Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

To prepare:

Review the 5 case studies in this week’s Learning Resources. Select one of the cases to prepare your written assignment.
Review the Learning Resources for this week.

Assignment Instructions:

Use the Case Study Template from the Learning Resources to complete the assignment. Your submission must include a brief case write-up, followed by the fully completed template, which must be integrated into the document rather than submitted separately.
Include a title page, a case summary in your own words, the completed template, and a reference page formatted in APA style.
Ensure your submission meets all criteria outlined in the template and rubric for completeness and accuracy.

NRNP_6552_Week9_Case_Study_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyzes subjective and objective data and outlines applicable diagnostic tests related to case studies.

30 to >26.7 pts

Excellent

The response provides clear, complete, and comprehensive descriptions of subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining all diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

26.7 to >23.7 pts

Good

The response provides clear, complete partial descriptions of the components of the subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining most of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

The response provides some components of the subjective and objective case data, but they are incomplete, vague or inaccurate, outlining some of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides unclear or incomplete components of subjective and objective case data. The diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions are missing, incorrect, or inappropriately applied.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentifies differential diagnoses related to case studies.

30 to >26.76 pts

Excellent

The response contains at least 3 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case.

26.76 to >23.7 pts

Good

The response contains at least 2 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

The response contains at least 1 differential diagnosis relevant and applicable to the case.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

The response contains few or no differential diagnoses and/or diagnoses are not relevant and applicable to the case.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormulates a treatment plan related to case studies based on scientific rationale, evidence- based standards of care, and practice guidelines. Integrates ethical, psychological, physical, financial issues and Social Determinants of Health in plan.

30 to >26.76 pts

Excellent

Formulates a thorough treatment plan including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Fully incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

26.76 to >23.7 pts

Good

Formulates a partially complete treatment plan including partial explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

Formulates a minimally complete treatment plan including incomplete or vague explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least 2 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

Formulates a treatment plan that contains incomplete explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options and/ or explanations are missing. Lacks synthesis gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by 1 or no current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - English writing standards:Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.45 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.45 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 - 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 >4.45 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3.45 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts

Total Points: 100