Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain

The body is constantly sending signals about its health. One of the most easily recognized signals is pain. Musculoskeletal conditions comprise one of the leading causes of severe long-term pain in patients. The musculoskeletal system is an elaborate system of interconnected levers that provides the body with support and mobility. Because of the interconnectedness of the musculoskeletal system, identifying the causes of pain can be challenging. Accurately interpreting the cause of musculoskeletal pain requires an assessment process informed by patient history and physical exams.. Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain

ORDER NOW FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

In this Discussion, you will consider case studies that describe abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting.

To prepare:

· By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to one of the following specific case studies for this Discussion. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your assignment from your Instructor.

· Your Discussion post should be in the Episodic/Focused SOAP Note format rather than the traditional narrative style Discussion posting format. Refer to Chapter 2 of the Sullivan text and the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template in the Week 5 Learning Resources for guidance. Remember that all Episodic/Focused SOAP notes have specific data included in every patient case. Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain

Case : Ankle Pain

A 46-year-old female reports pain in both of her ankles, but she is more concerned about her right ankle. She was playing soccer over the weekend and heard a “pop.” She is able to bear weight, but it is uncomfortable. In determining the cause of the ankle pain, based on your knowledge of anatomy,

· what foot structures are likely involved?

· What other symptoms need to be explored? What are your differential diagnoses for ankle pain?

· What physical examination will you perform? What special maneuvers will you perform? Should you apply the Ottawa ankle rules to determine if you need additional testing?

With regard to the case study you were assigned:

· Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study.

· Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient in the case study you were assigned.

· Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?

· Identify at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.

Post an episodic/focused note about the patient in the case study to which you were assigned using the episodic/focused note template provided in the Week 5 resources.

Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for each case.

List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis, and justify why you selected each.

Episodic-FocusedSOAPNote-ExamplarTemplate.doc

Episodic/Focused SOAP Note Exemplar

Focused SOAP Note for a patient with chest pain

S. CC: “Chest pain” HPI: The patient is a 65 year old AA male who developed sudden onset of chest pain, which began early this morning. The pain is described as “crushing” and is rated nine out of 10 in terms of intensity. The pain is located in the middle of the chest and is accompanied by shortness of breath. The patient reports feeling nauseous. The patient tried an antacid with minimal relief of his symptoms. PMH: Positive history of GERD and hypertension is controlled FH: Mother died at 78 of breast cancer; Father at 75 of CVA. No history of premature cardiovascular disease in first degree relatives. SH : Negative for tobacco abuse, currently or previously; consumes moderate alcohol; married for 39 years ROS General–Negative for fevers, chills, fatigue Cardiovascular–Negative for orthopnea, PND, positive for intermittent lower extremity edema Gastrointestinal–Positive for nausea without vomiting; negative for diarrhea, abdominal pain Pulmonary–Positive for intermittent dyspnea on exertion, negative for cough or hemoptysis

O.

VS: BP 186/102; P 94; R 22; T 97.8; 02 96% Wt 235lbs; Ht 70”

General–Pt appears diaphoretic and anxious

Cardiovascular–PMI is in the 5th inter-costal space at the mid clavicular line. A grade 2/6 systolic decrescendo murmur is heard best at the

second right inter-costal space which radiates to the neck.

A third heard sound is heard at the apex. No fourth heart sound or rub are heard. No cyanosis, clubbing, noted, positive for bilateral 2+ LE edema is noted.

Gastrointestinal–The abdomen is symmetrical without distention; bowel

sounds are normal in quality and intensity in all areas; a

bruit is heard in the right para-umbilical area. No masses or

splenomegaly are noted. Positive for mid-epigastric tenderness with deep palpation.

Pulmonary— Lungs are clear to auscultation and percussion bilaterally

Diagnostic results: EKG, CXR, CK-MB (support with evidenced and guidelines)

A.

Differential Diagnosis:

1) Myocardial Infarction (provide supportive documentation with evidence based guidelines).

2) Angina (provide supportive documentation with evidence based guidelines).

3) Costochondritis (provide supportive documentation with evidence based guidelines).

Primary Diagnosis/Presumptive Diagnosis: Myocardial Infarction

P. This section is not required for the assignments in this course (NURS 6512) but will be required for future courses. Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain

© 2019 Walden University Page 2 of 2

© 2019 Walden University Page 1 of 2
RequiredReadings.docx

Required Readings

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

· Chapter 4, “Vital Signs and Pain Assessment” (Previously read in Week 6)

· Chapter 22, “Musculoskeletal System” This chapter describes the process of assessing the musculoskeletal system. In addition, the authors explore the anatomy and physiology of the musculoskeletal system.

Dains, J. E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. (2019). Advanced health assessment and clinical diagnosis in primary care (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Advanced Health Assessment and Clinical Diagnosis in Primary Care, 6th Edition by Dains, J.E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. Copyright 2019 by Mosby. Reprinted by permission of Mosby via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Chapter 22, “Lower Extremity Limb Pain” This chapter outlines how to take a focused history and perform a physical exam to determine the cause of limb pain. It includes a discussion of the most common tests used to assess musculoskeletal disorders.

Chapter 24, “Low Back Pain (Acute)” The focus of this chapter is the identification of the causes of lower back pain. It includes suggested physical exams and potential diagnoses.

Sullivan, D. D. (2019). Guide to clinical documentation (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.

· Chapter 2, “The Comprehensive History and Physical Exam” (“Muscle Strength Grading”) (Previously read in Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5)

· Chapter 3, “SOAP Notes” This section explains the procedural knowledge needed to perform musculoskeletal procedures.

Note: Download this Student Checklist and Abdomen Key Points to use during your practice abdominal examination.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Musculoskeletal system: Student checklist. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Musculoskeletal system: Key points. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Katz, J. N., Lyons, N., Wolff, L. S., Silverman, J., Emrani, P., Holt, H. L., … Losina, E. (2011). Medical decision-making among Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites with chronic back and knee pain: A qualitative study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 12(1), 78–85.

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

This study examines the medical decision making among Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites. The authors also analyze the preferred information sources used for making decisions in these populations.

Smuck, M., Kao, M., Brar, N., Martinez-Ith, A., Choi, J., & Tomkins-Lane, C. C. (2014). Does physical activity influence the relationship between low back pain and obesity? The Spine Journal, 14(2), 209–216. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.11.010

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Shiri, R., Solovieva, S., Husgafvel-Pursiainen, K., Telama, R., Yang, X., Viikari, J., Raitakari, O. T., & Viikari-Juntura, E. (2013). The role of obesity and physical activity in non-specific and radiating low back pain: The Young Finns study. Seminars in Arthritis & Rheumatism, 42(6), 640–650. doi:10.1016/j.semarthrit.2012.09.002

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Document: Episodic/Focused SOAP Note Exemplar (Word document)

Document: Episodic/Focused SOAP Note Template (Word document)

Optional Resource
Episodic-FocusedSOAPNoteTemplate.doc

Episodic/Focused SOAP Note Template

Patient Information:

Initials, Age, Sex, Race

S.

CC (chief complaint) a BRIEF statement identifying why the patient is here – in the patient’s own words – for instance “headache”, NOT “bad headache for 3 days”.

HPI: This is the symptom analysis section of your note. Thorough documentation in this section is essential for patient care, coding, and billing analysis. Paint a picture of what is wrong with the patient. Use LOCATES Mnemonic to complete your HPI. You need to start EVERY HPI with age, race, and gender (e.g., 34-year-old AA male). You must include the seven attributes of each principal symptom in paragraph form not a list. If the CC was “headache”, the LOCATES for the HPI might look like the following example:

Location: head

Onset: 3 days ago

Character: pounding, pressure around the eyes and temples

Associated signs and symptoms: nausea, vomiting, photophobia, phonophobia

Timing: after being on the computer all day at work

Exacerbating/ relieving factors: light bothers eyes, Aleve makes it tolerable but not completely better

Severity: 7/10 pain scale

Current Medications: include dosage, frequency, length of time used and reason for use; also include OTC or homeopathic products.

Allergies: include medication, food, and environmental allergies separately (a description of what the allergy is ie angioedema, anaphylaxis, etc. This will help determine a true reaction vs intolerance).

PMHx: include immunization status (note date of last tetanus for all adults), past major illnesses and surgeries. Depending on the CC, more info is sometimes needed Soc Hx: include occupation and major hobbies, family status, tobacco & alcohol use (previous and current use), any other pertinent data. Always add some health promo question here – such as whether they use seat belts all the time or whether they have working smoke detectors in the house, living environment, text/cell phone use while driving, and support system.

Fam Hx: illnesses with possible genetic predisposition, contagious or chronic illnesses. Reason for death of any deceased first degree relatives should be included. Include parents, grandparents, siblings, and children. Include grandchildren if pertinent.

ROS: cover all body systems that may help you include or rule out a differential diagnosis You should list each system as follows: General: Head: EENT: etc. You should list these in bullet format and document the systems in order from head to toe.

Example of Complete ROS:

GENERAL: No weight loss, fever, chills, weakness or fatigue.

HEENT: Eyes: No visual loss, blurred vision, double vision or yellow sclerae. Ears, Nose, Throat: No hearing loss, sneezing, congestion, runny nose or sore throat.

SKIN: No rash or itching.

CARDIOVASCULAR: No chest pain, chest pressure or chest discomfort. No palpitations or edema.

RESPIRATORY: No shortness of breath, cough or sputum.

GASTROINTESTINAL: No anorexia, nausea, vomiting or diarrhea. No abdominal pain or blood.

GENITOURINARY: Burning on urination. Pregnancy. Last menstrual period, MM/DD/YYYY.

NEUROLOGICAL: No headache, dizziness, syncope, paralysis, ataxia, numbness or tingling in the extremities. No change in bowel or bladder control.

MUSCULOSKELETAL: No muscle, back pain, joint pain or stiffness.

HEMATOLOGIC: No anemia, bleeding or bruising.

LYMPHATICS: No enlarged nodes. No history of splenectomy.

PSYCHIATRIC: No history of depression or anxiety.

ENDOCRINOLOGIC: No reports of sweating, cold or heat intolerance. No polyuria or polydipsia.

ALLERGIES: No history of asthma, hives, eczema or rhinitis.

O.

Physical exam: From head-to-toe, include what you see, hear, and feel when doing your physical exam. You only need to examine the systems that are pertinent to the CC, HPI, and History. Do not use “WNL” or “normal.” You must describe what you see. Always document in head to toe format i.e. General: Head: EENT: etc.

Diagnostic results: Include any labs, x-rays, or other diagnostics that are needed to develop the differential diagnoses (support with evidenced and guidelines)

A.

Differential Diagnoses (list a minimum of 3 differential diagnoses).Your primary or presumptive diagnosis should be at the top of the list. For each diagnosis, provide supportive documentation with evidence based guidelines.

P.

This section is not required for the assignments in this course (NURS 6512) but will be required for future courses.

References

You are required to include at least three evidence based peer-reviewed journal articles or evidenced based guidelines which relates to this case to support your diagnostics and differentials diagnoses. Be sure to use correct APA 6th edition formatting. Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain

© 2019 Walden University Page 1 of 3

RubricDetails.docx

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name: NURS_6512_Week_8_Discussion_Rubric

· Grid View

· List View

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Main Posting

Points:

Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

“Answers all parts of the Discussion question(s) with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

“Responds to the Discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

“Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

“Does not respond to the Discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Feedback:

Main Post: Timeliness

Points:

Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by Day 3.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post main post by Day 3.

Feedback:

First Response

Points:

Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

“Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

“Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

“Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

“Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.

Feedback:

Second Response

Points:

Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Feedback:

Participation

Points:

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Main Posting–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Good 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Fair 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Feedback:

Main Post: Timeliness–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by Day 3.

Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post main post by Day 3.

Feedback:

First Response–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Good 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Fair 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Feedback:

Second Response–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Good 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Fair 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Feedback:

Participation–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

N/A

Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Feedback:

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6512_Week_8_Discussion_Rubric

%7B%220.15000

%7B%220.13000

%7B%220.00000

%7B%220.16000

%7B%220.14000

%7B%220.12000

%7B%220.00000

%7B%220.05000

%7B%220.40000

%7B%220.00000

%7B%220.35000

%7B%220.00000

%7B%220.10000

%7B%220.00000

%7B%220.17000

%7B%220.15000

%7B%220.13000

%7B%220.00000

%7B%220.16000

%7B%220.14000

Exit

%7B%220.12000

%7B%220.05000

%7B%220.00000

%7B%220.35000

%7B%220.10000

%7B%220.45000

https://nursingassignmentowl.com/2022/03/04/discussion-assessing-musculoskeletal-pain/

NEED HELP WITH YOUR NURSING ASSIGNMENTS ?

We are dedicated to delivering high quality nursing papers that adhere to the provided instructions, are adequately referenced with the latest scholarly knowledge,

Timely Delivery

Respecting your time and needs, we complete and deliver your orders within the specified timeframe.

Highly skilled writers

We employ experienced and qualified PhD and MD writers able to deal with any types of academic papers

100% unique content

Thorough research and the best academic writing practices ensure complete originality and high quality of every paper we deliver.

Order Now Login

Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain