Legislation Comparison Grid And Testimony/Advocacy Statement

Legislation Comparison Grid And Testimony

Legislation Comparison Grid And Testimony

Legislation Comparison Grid And Testimony

Legislation Comparison Grid And Testimony

Legislation Comparison Grid And Testimony

As a nurse, how often have you thought to yourself, If I had anything to do about it, things would work a little differently? Increasingly, nurses are beginning to realize that they do, in fact, have a role and a voice.
Many nurses encounter daily experiences that motivate them to take on an advocacy role in hopes of impacting policies, laws, or regulations that impact healthcare issues of interest. Of course, doing so means entering the less familiar world of policy and politics. While many nurses do not initially feel prepared to operate in this space effectively, the reward is the opportunity to shape and influence future health policy.
To Prepare:

• Select a bill that has been proposed (not one that has been enacted) using the congressional websites provided in the Learning Resources.

The Assignment: (1- to 2-page Comparison Grid; 1-page Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement)
Part 1: Legislation Comparison Grid
Based on the health-related bill (proposed, not enacted) you selected, complete the Legislation Comparison Grid Template. Be sure to address the following:

• Determine the legislative intent of the bill you have reviewed.
• Identify the proponents/opponents of the bill.
• Identify the target populations addressed by the bill.
• Where in the process is the bill currently? Is it in hearings or committees?

Part 2: Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement
Based on the health-related bill you selected, develop a 1-page Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement that addresses the following:

• Advocate a position for the bill you selected and write testimony in support of your position.
• Describe how you would address the opponent to your position. Be specific and provide examples.

PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AS INDICATED BELOW:
1). ZERO (0) PLAGIARISM
2). 5 REFERENCES, NO MORE THAN 5 YEARS
3). PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING ATTACHED: RUBRIC DETAILS, AGENDA GRID TEMPLATE.
Thank you so much.

Rubric Detail

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

Content

Name: NURS_6050_Module02_Week03_Discussion_Rubric

• Grid View
• List View

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Main Posting–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations 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. Good 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. Fair 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. Poor 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–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3. Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)   Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)   Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3. Feedback:

First Response–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
 
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
 
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
 
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
 
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
 
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. Good 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. Fair 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. Poor 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–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
 
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
 
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
 
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
 
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
 
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. Good 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) 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. Fair 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) 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. Poor 0 (0%) – 11 (11%) 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:

Participation–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)   Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)   Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. Feedback:

Name: NURS_6050_Module02_Week03_Discussion_Rubric

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: 

 Environment Assessment

Clearly, diagnosis is a critical aspect of healthcare. However, the ultimate purpose of a diagnosis is the development and application of a series of treatments or protocols. Isolated recognition of a health issue does little to resolve it.
In this module’s Discussion, you applied the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory to diagnose potential problems with the civility of your organization. In this Portfolio Assignment, you will continue to analyze the results and apply published research to the development of a proposed treatment for any issues uncovered by the assessment.
To Prepare:
· Review the Resources and examine the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory, found on page 20 of Clark (2015).
· Review the Work Environment Assessment Template.
· Reflect on the output of your Discussion post regarding your evaluation of workplace civility and the feedback received from colleagues.
· Select and review one or more of the following articles found in the Resources:
· Clark, Olender, Cardoni, and Kenski (2011)
· Clark (2018)
· Clark (2015)
· Griffin and Clark (2014)
The Assignment (3-6 pages total):
Part 1: Work Environment Assessment (1-2 pages)
· Review the Work Environment Assessment Template you completed for this Module’s Discussion.
· Describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment you completed on your workplace.
· Identify two things that surprised you about the results and one idea you believed prior to conducting the Assessment that was confirmed.
· Explain what the results of the Assessment suggest about the health and civility of your workplace.
Part 2: Reviewing the Literature (1-2 pages)
· Briefly describe the theory or concept presented in the article(s) you selected.
· Explain how the theory or concept presented in the article(s) relates to the results of your Work Environment Assessment.
· Explain how your organization could apply the theory highlighted in your selected article(s) to improve organizational health and/or create stronger work teams. Be specific and provide examples.
Part 3: Evidence-Based Strategies to Create High-Performance Interprofessional Teams (1–2 pages)
· Recommend at least two strategies, supported in the literature, that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in your Work Environment Assessment.
· Recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in your Work Environment Assessment.

Rubric Detail

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

Name: NURS_6053_Module04_Week09_Assignment_Rubric

 
· Grid View
· List View

Name: NURS_6053_Module04_Week09_Assignment_Rubric

 
 
Exit
Exit

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: 

Grand Rounds Discussion: Complex Case Study Presentation

 
In Weeks 4, 7, and 9 of the course, you will participate in clinical discussions called grand rounds. In one of these three weeks, you will be a presenter as well as help facilitate the online discussion; in the others you will be an active discussion participant. When it is your week to present, you will create a Focused SOAP note and a short didactic (teaching) video presenting a real (but de-identified) complex patient case from your practicum experience.
You should have received an assignment from your Instructor letting you know which week of the course you are assigned to present.

To prepare:

• Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide. Also review the Kaltura Media Uploader resource in the left-hand navigation of the classroom for help creating your self-recorded Kaltura video.
• Select a child/adolescent or adult patient from your clinical experience that presents with a significant concern. Create a focused SOAP note for this patient using the template in the Resources. All SOAP notes must be signed, and each page must be initialed by your Preceptor. When you submit your SOAP note, you should include the complete SOAP note as a Word document and PDF/images of each page that is initialed and signed by your Preceptor. You must submit your SOAP Note using SafeAssign.
  Please Note: Electronic signatures are not accepted. If both files are not received by the due date, Faculty will deduct points per the Walden Late Policies.
• Then, based on your SOAP note of this patient, develop a video case study presentation. Take time to practice what you will say beforehand, and ensure that you have the appropriate lighting and equipment to record the presentation.
• Your presentation should include objectives for your audience, at least 3 possible discussion questions/prompts for your classmates to respond to, and at least 5 scholarly resources to support your diagnostic reasoning and treatment plan.
•  
• State 3–4 objectives for the presentation that are targeted, clear, use appropriate verbs from Bloom’s taxonomy, and address what the audience will know or be able to do after viewing.
• Present the full complex case study. Include chief complaint; history of present illness; any pertinent past psychiatric, substance use, medical, social, family history; most recent mental status exam; current psychiatric diagnosis including differentials that were ruled out; and plan for treatment and management.
• Report normal diagnostic results as the name of the test and “normal” (rather than specific value). Abnormal results should be reported as a specific value.
• Pose three questions or discussion prompts, based on your presentation, that your colleagues can respond to after viewing your video.
• Be succinct in your presentation, and do not exceed 8 minutes. Specifically address the following for the patient, using your SOAP note as a guide.
  • Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?
  • Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment?
  • Assessment: Discuss their mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses and why you chose them. List them from highest priority to lowest priority. What was your primary diagnosis, and why? Describe how your primary diagnosis aligns with DSM-5 diagnostic criteria and is supported by the patient’s symptoms.
  • Plan: What was your plan for psychotherapy (include one health promotion activity and patient education)? What was your plan for treatment and management, including alternative therapies? Include pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters, as well as a rationale for this treatment and management plan.
  • Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this patient if you could conduct the session again? If you are able to follow up with your patient, explain whether these interventions were successful and why or why not. If you were not able to conduct a follow-up, discuss what your next intervention would be.
    NRNP/PRAC 6665 & 6675 Comprehensive Focused SOAP Psychiatric Evaluation Template

    Week (enter week #): (Enter assignment title)
    Student Name
    College of Nursing-PMHNP, Walden University
    PRAC 6675: PMHNP Care Across the Lifespan II
    Faculty Name
    Assignment Due Date
    Subjective:
    CC (chief complaint):
    HPI:
    Substance Current Use:
    Medical History:
    · Current Medications:
    · Allergies:
    · Reproductive Hx:
    ROS:
    · GENERAL:
    · HEENT:
    · SKIN:
    · CARDIOVASCULAR:
    · RESPIRATORY:
    · GASTROINTESTINAL:
    · GENITOURINARY:
    · NEUROLOGICAL:
    · MUSCULOSKELETAL:
    · HEMATOLOGIC:
    · LYMPHATICS:
    · ENDOCRINOLOGIC:
    Objective:
    Diagnostic results:
    Assessment:
    Mental Status Examination:
    Diagnostic Impression:
    Reflections:
    Case Formulation and Treatment Plan:
    References

    © 2021 Walden University Page 1 of 3

    Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: 

Assignment 1: Lab Assignment: Differential Diagnosis For Skin Conditions/NURS 6512: Advanced Health Assessment And Diagnostic Reasoning

Properly identifying the cause and type of a patient’s skin condition involves a process of elimination known as differential diagnosis. Using this process, a health professional can take a given set of physical abnormalities, vital signs, health assessment findings, and patient descriptions of symptoms, and incrementally narrow them down until one diagnosis is determined as the most likely cause.
In this Lab Assignment, you will examine several visual representations of various skin conditions, describe your observations, and use the techniques of differential diagnosis to determine the most likely condition.

To Prepare

• Review the Skin Conditions document provided in this week’s Learning Resources, and select one condition to closely examine for this Lab Assignment.
• Consider the abnormal physical characteristics you observe in the graphic you selected. How would you describe the characteristics using clinical terminologies?
• Explore different conditions that could be the cause of the skin abnormalities in the graphics you selected.
• Consider which of the conditions is most likely to be the correct diagnosis, and why.
• Search the Walden library for one evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed article based on the skin condition you chose for this Lab Assignment.
• Review the Comprehensive SOAP Exemplar found in this week’s Learning Resources to guide you as you prepare your SOAP note.
• Download the SOAP Template found in this week’s Learning Resources, and use this template to complete this Lab Assignment.

The Lab Assignment

• Choose one skin condition graphic (identify by number in your Chief Complaint) to document your assignment in the SOAP (Subjective, Objective, Assessment, and Plan) note format rather than the traditional narrative style. Refer to Chapter 2 of the Sullivan text and the Comprehensive SOAP Template in this week’s Learning Resources for guidance. Remember that not all comprehensive SOAP data are included in every patient case.
• Use clinical terminologies to explain the physical characteristics featured in the graphic. Formulate a differential diagnosis of three to five possible conditions for the skin graphic that you chose. Determine which is most likely to be the correct diagnosis and explain your reasoning using at least three different references, one reference from current evidence-based literature from your search and two different references from this week’s Learning Resources.

By Day 7 of Week 4

Submit your Lab Assignment.
Week 9
Shadow Health Comprehensive SOAP Note Template
 
Patient Initials: _______ Age: _______ Gender: _______
 
 
SUBJECTIVE DATA:
 
Chief Complaint (CC):
 
History of Present Illness (HPI):
 
Medications:
 
Allergies:
 
Past Medical History (PMH):
 
Past Surgical History (PSH):
 
Sexual/Reproductive History:
 
Personal/Social History:
 
Health Maintenance:
 
Immunization History:
 
Significant Family History:
 
Review of Systems:
 
General:
HEENT:
Respiratory:
Cardiovascular/Peripheral Vascular:
Gastrointestinal:
Genitourinary:
Musculoskeletal:
Neurological:
Psychiatric:
Skin/hair/nails:
 
 
OBJECTIVE DATA:
 
Physical Exam:
Vital signs:
General:
HEENT:
Neck:
Chest/Lungs:.
Heart/Peripheral Vascular:
Abdomen:
Genital/Rectal:
Musculoskeletal:
Neurological:
Skin:
 
Diagnostic results:
 
ASSESSMENT:
 
PLAN: This section is not required for the assignments in this course (NURS 6512), but will be required for future courses.
 
 
 
© 2021 Walden University Page 2 of 3

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: 

NURS 6231: HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS AND QUALITY OUTCOMES

NURS 6231: HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS AND QUALITY OUTCOMES

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our  Erudite WRITERS:NURS 6231 week 4: HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS AND QUALITY OUTCOMES

Order a Different One   Get Quote   Urgent Paper

Learning Resources

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.

Required Readings

Hickey, J. V., & Brosnan, C. A. (2017). Evaluation  of health care quality in for DNPs (2nd  ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
Chapter 10, “Evaluation of Patient Care Standards, Guidelines, and Protocols” (pp. 207-226)
Chapter 12, “Evaluating Populations and Population Health” (pp. 265-280)Chapter 10 reviews methods for using national, local, and organizational standards to evaluate the quality of health care practices. Chapter 12 examines strategies for identifying quality issues through the evaluation of populations.

Sadeghi, S., Barzi, A., Mikhail, O., & Shabot, M. M. (2013). Integrating quality and strategy in health care organizations, Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Chapter 3, “General Concepts in Quality” (pp. 45–82)See the six aims for quality proposed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM).

Bellot, J. (2011). Defining and assessing organizational culture. Nursing Forum, 46(1), 29–37.

Defining and assessing organizational culture by Bellot, J., in Nursing Forum, 46(1),  29–37. Copyright 2011 by John Wiley & Sons – Journals. Reprinted by permission of John Wiley & Sons – Journals via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Bellot reviews the definition of organizational culture, methods for evaluating organizational culture, and the application of Schein’s framework to defining the culture of health care organizations.

Dixon, M. A., & Dougherty, D. S. (2010). Managing the multiple meanings of organizational culture in interdisciplinary collaboration and consulting. Journal of Business Communication, 47(1), 3–19.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
This article demonstrates the importance of not only understanding the culture of an organization, but also how these dynamics affect workplace performance and retention of employees.

Dorgham, S. R. (2012). Relationship between organization work climate & staff nurses organizational commitment. Nature and Science, 10(5), 80–91. Retrieved from http://www.sciencepub.net/nature/ns1005/009_9000ns1005_80_91.pdf
The correlation between organizational climate and commitment and its effect on an organization is evaluated in this study.

Hartnell, C. A., Ou, A. Y., & Kinicki, A. (2011). Organizational culture and organizational effectiveness: A meta-analytic investigation of the competing values framework’s theoretical suppositions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 677–694.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
This article presents a study on the relationship between culture types and organizational effectiveness. The authors apply specific values frameworks to determine the relationships while also assessing the competing values framework.

Schein, E. H. (1996). Three cultures of management: The key to organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 9–20.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
In this seminal article, Schein identifies three subcultures found within an organization and the effects of these competing cultures on an organization’s effectiveness.

Wait, S. T., & Dayman, M. A. (2012, July/August). Company culture drives business value. Value Examiner, 30–31.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
The authors connect company culture to innovation and success.

Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Retrieved from /orders/www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2001/Crossing-the-Quality-Chasm/Quality%20Chasm%202001%20%20report%20brief.pdf
This report briefly outlines the six aims of the IOM to improve the quality of health care.

Schein, E. H. (1997). Organizational culture & leadership. Retrieved from http://www.tnellen.com/ted/tc/schein.html
Edgar Schein is one of the early writers on organizational culture. In this foundational article, Schein outlines various dimensions of organizational culture, and how leaders create, transmit, and embed organizational culture.

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:
Week 4 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6

To participate in this Discussion:
Week 4 Discussion

Project 1: Promoting Health Care Quality

Section 1: Organizational Systems and Structures Evaluation

As you continue your evaluation of a health care organization, it is essential to pay attention to culture. Organizational culture provides the context in which all interactions and processes occur, and is therefore central to any effort to enact change.
To prepare:

• Continue to analyze your selected organization, as indicated in Week 3 (Section 1 of the Course Project).
• In addition, consider the ideas and information exchanged in this week’s Discussion. Continue to analyze essential elements of organizational culture and evaluate the influence of culture on the ability to achieve goals within your selected organization.

To complete:
Write a 3- to 5-page paper in which you:

• Provide a description of the organization you selected
• Present your analysis of the organization with attention to:
  • Its mission, vision, values
  • Strategic plan, goals, and objectives
  • Key operational processes and patterns
  • Information technology use
  • Organizational priorities and investments, as indicated by financial data
  • The essential elements of the organization’s culture
  • The influence of culture on meeting organizational goals

PLEASE DON’T SAY YOU CAN DO THIS ASSIGNMENT UNLESS YOU HAVE READ AND COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS NEED TO COMPLETE THE ASSIGNMENT CORRECTLY.

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium.

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

Week 3 6001 Discussion

As a nurse embarking on an advanced degree, you are developing the characteristics of a scholar-practitioner, which includes strong communication skills. Writing in a scholarly manner involves supporting your thoughts with evidence from the literature and appropriately using APA formatting.
One of the challenges of scholarly writing is paraphrasing the thoughts of others in your work. Paraphrasing, and correctly citing the original author for his or her ideas, allows you to take the ideas of others, summarize them, and incorporate them into your own writing. When summarizing the ideas of others, it is important to avoid plagiarizing (copying the words and ideas of others as though they were your own). In addition to expanding your knowledge of APA, this week’s Learning Resources help you to distinguish between paraphrasing and plagiarizing.
To prepare:

• Think about the sometimes subtle difference between plagiarizing and paraphrasing.
• Read the following paragraphs, which were written by Patricia O’Conner:

A good writer is one you can read without breaking a sweat. If you want a workout, you don’t lift a book—you lift weights. Yet we’re brainwashed to believe that the more brilliant the writer, the tougher the going.
The truth is that the reader is always right. Chances are, if something you’re reading doesn’t make sense, it’s not your fault—it’s the writer’s. And if something you write doesn’t get your point across, it’s probably not the reader’s fault—it’s yours. Too many readers are intimidated and humbled by what they can’t understand, and in some cases that’s precisely the effect the writer is after. But confusion is not complexity; it’s just confusion. A venerable tradition, dating back to the ancient Greek orators, teaches that if you don’t know what you’re talking about, just ratchet up the level of difficulty and no one will ever know.
Don’t confuse simplicity, though, with simplemindedness. A good writer can express an extremely complicated idea clearly and make the job look effortless. But such simplicity is a difficult thing to achieve because to be clear in your writing you have to be clear in your thinking. This is why the simplest and clearest writing has the greatest power to delight, surprise, inform, and move the reader. You can’t have this kind of shared understanding if writer and reader are in an adversary relationship. (pp. 195–196)

Source: O’Conner, P. (2003). Woe is I: The grammarphobe’s guide to better English in plain English. New York: Riverhead Books.

• Paraphrase this passage from O’Conner using no more than 75–100 words. Remember that paraphrasing means summarizing the essence of the original text. It does not mean creating a thesaurus-based revision of the author’s original words or copying the piece, or any part of it, word for word. For this activity, do not use any direct quotes.
• Turn your paraphrase into Grammarly and SafeAssign.
• Review your reports.
• Review the other tools, resources, and services available to you through the Walden Writing Center that support your growth as a scholarly writer.
• Consider which of these resources you find to be most useful.
• Review learning resources on APA formatting rules and information within the Walden Writing Center on APA

Post a description of your experience of using Grammarly and SafeAssign and share at least one insight you gained about paraphrasing and avoiding plagiarism as a matter of academic integrity.  Recommend at least one other online resource that supports scholarly writing, and explain your rationale. Lastly, share two APA formatting rules with the class and a specific page number in the APA manual where this rule can be located
Support your Discussion assignment with specific resources used in its preparation using APA formatting. You are asked to provide a reference for all resources, including those in the Learning Resources for this course.

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: 

Case Study Assignment: Assessing Neurological Symptoms

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.

Week7 6050 Discussion Moledule4

Discussion Moledule4

When politics and medical science intersect, there can be much debate. Sometimes anecdotes or hearsay are misused as evidence to support a particular point. Despite these and other challenges, however, evidence-based approaches are increasingly used to inform health policy decision-making regarding causes of disease, intervention strategies, and issues impacting society. One example is the introduction of childhood vaccinations and the use of evidence-based arguments surrounding their safety.
In this Discussion, you will identify a recently proposed health policy and share your analysis of the evidence in support of this policy.

Discussion 1: Evidence Base in Design

When politics and medical science intersect, there can be much debate. Sometimes anecdotes or hearsay are misused as evidence to support a particular point. Despite these and other challenges, however, evidence-based approaches are increasingly used to inform health policy decision-making regarding causes of disease, intervention strategies, and issues impacting society. One example is the introduction of childhood vaccinations and the use of evidence-based arguments surrounding their safety.
In this Discussion, you will identify a recently proposed health policy and share your analysis of the evidence in support of this policy.
To Prepare:

• Review the Congress website provided in the Resources and identify one recent (within the past 5 years) proposed health policy.
• Review the health policy you identified and reflect on the background and development of this health policy.

By Day 3 of Week 7

Post a description of the health policy you selected and a brief background for the problem or issue being addressed. Explain whether you believe there is an evidence base to support the proposed policy and explain why. Be specific and provide examples.

Learning Resources

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.

Required Readings

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Chapter 5, “Public Policy Design” (pp. 87–95 only)
Chapter 8, “The Impact of EHRs, Big Data, and Evidence-Informed Practice” (pp. 137–146)
Chapter 9, “Interprofessional Practice” (pp. 152–160 only)
Chapter 10, “Overview: The Economics and Finance of Health Care” (pp. 183–191 only)

American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). Advocacy. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from /orders/www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/advocacy/

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (n.d.). Step by step: Evaluating violence and injury prevention policies: Brief 4: Evaluating policy implementation. Retrieved from /orders/www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/policy/Brief%204-a.pdf 

Congress.gov. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2018, from /orders/www.congress.gov/

Klein, K. J., & Sorra, J. S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1055–1080. doi:10.5465/AMR.1996.9704071863
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Sacristán, J., & Dilla, T. D. (2015). No big data without small data: Learning health care systems begin and end with the individual patient. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 21(6), 1014–1017. doi:10.1111/jep.12350
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527–547. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.841978.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Required Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Getting your Program Designed and Implemented [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Accessible player –Downloads–Download Video w/CCDownload AudioDownload Transcript

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Health policy and politics [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
three sources for the discussion

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: 

Preschool Child

 
. CASE STUDY:
Preschool Child: Ricky Ricky, age 4 years, arrives in the clinic with his mother. Ricky lives with his mother and father, who both work full-time, and his infant sister. Their extended family lives in a different state more than 100 miles away. Both parents are of average height and in good health. Ricky’s mother mentions that Ricky often expresses frustration, particularly in regard to food. Conflict over food occurs every day. Mealtime is a battle to get him to eat, unless his mother feeds him. Ricky’s baby sister seems to tolerate all baby foods but requires her mother to spoon-feed. Ricky’s mother is quite frustrated and concerned that he will become malnourished.
Reflective Questions
1. What additional assessment information would you collect?
2. What questions would you ask, and how would you further explore this issue with the mother?
3. In what ways does the distance of the extended family influence this family’s approach to health promotion?
4. What factors would you consider to determine whether malnourishment is a factor in this family?
Pathways Mental Health
Psychiatric Patient Evaluation

Narrative Answers

 
 
References

[Add APA-formatted citations for any sources you referenced]

 
Delete instructions and placeholder text when you add your citations.

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: 

NURS 5052 ESSENTIALS

Discussion: Validity in Quantitative Research Designs
 
Validity in research refers to the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships. If there is low validity in a study, it usually means that the research design is flawed and the results will be of little or no value. Four different aspects of validity should be considered when reviewing a research design: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. In this Discussion, you consider the importance of each of these aspects in judging the validity of quantitative research.
 
To prepare:
 
Review the information in Chapter 10 of the course text on rigor and validity.
 
Read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies (also located in this week’s Learning Resources). Identify at least one potential concern that could be raised about the study’s internal validity.
Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.
Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.
Yuan, S., Chou, M., Hwu, L., Chang, Y., Hsu, W., & Kuo, H. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.
Consider strategies that could be used to strengthen the study’s internal validity and how this would impact the three other types of validity.
Think about the consequences of an advanced practice nurse neglecting to consider the validity of a research study when reviewing the research for potential use in developing an evidence-based practice.
 
Post the title of the study that you selected and your analysis of the potential concerns that could be raised about the study’s internal validity. Propose recommendations to strengthen the internal validity and assess the effect your changes could have with regard to the other three types of validity. Discuss the dangers of failing to consider the validity of a research study.
 
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
Respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:
Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence. Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own review of the literature in the Walden Library.
Validate an idea with your own experience and additional sources.
Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
 
Please use the below link for template formatting:
 
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates
 
Required Readings
 
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Chapter 10, “Rigor and Validity in Quantitative Research”
This chapter introduces the concept of validity in research and describes the different types of validity that must be addressed. Key threats to validity are also explored.
 
Chapter 11, “Specific Types of Quantitative Research”
This chapter focuses on the specific types of quantitative research that can be selected. The focus is on the purpose of the research rather than the research design. These include such approaches as clinical trials, evaluation research, health services and outcomes research, needs assessments, or replication studies.
Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
 
The author of this article discusses the primary aspects of a prominent quantitative research design. The article examines the advantages and disadvantages of the design.
Schultz, L. E., Rivers, K. O., & Ratusnik, D. L. (2008). The role of external validity in evidence-based practice for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(3), 294–302.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
 
This article details the results of a study that sought to balance concern for rigor with concern for relevance. The authors of the article derive and determine a rating format for relevance and apply it to cognitive rehabilitation.
 
Note: For the Discussion this week, you will need to read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies. Refer to the details provided in the Week 6 Discussion area.
Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Yuan, S.-C., Chou, M.-C., Hwu, L.-J., Chang, Y.-O., Hsu, W.-H., & Kuo, H.-W. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Walden University. (n.d.a.). Paper templates. Retrieved July 23, 2012, from http://writingcenter.waldenu.edu/57.htm
 
This resource provides you access to the School of Nursing Sample Paper, which will serve as a template for formatting your papers.
 
Document: Critique Template for a Qualitative Study (Word document)
 
Note: You will use this document to complete this week’s Assignment.
 
Document: Critique Template for a Quantitative Study (Word document)
 
Note: You will use this document to complete this week’s Assignment.
 
Document: Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study (Word document)
 
Note: You will use this document to complete this week’s Assignment.

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: