Case Study: Mr. C. RN-BSN-prepared Nurse

Case Study: Mr. C. RN-BSN-prepared Nurse
Case Study: Mr. C. RN-BSN-prepared Nurse
Case Study: Mr. C.
It is necessary for an RN-BSN-prepared nurse to demonstrate an enhanced understanding of the pathophysiological processes of disease, the clinical manifestations and treatment protocols, and how they affect clients across the life span.
Evaluate the Health History and Medical Information for Mr. C., presented below.
Based on this information, formulate a conclusion based on your evaluation, and complete the Critical Thinking Essay assignment, as instructed below.
Health History and Medical Information
Health History
Mr. C., a 32-year-old single male, is seeking information at the outpatient center regarding possible bariatric surgery for his obesity. He currently works at a catalog telephone center. He reports that he has always been heavy, even as a small child, gaining approximately 100 pounds in the last 2-3 years. Previous medical evaluations have not indicated any metabolic diseases, but he says he has sleep apnea and high blood pressure, which he tries to control by restricting dietary sodium. Mr. C. reports increasing shortness of breath with activity, swollen ankles, and pruritus over the last 6 months.
Objective Data:
Height: 68 inches; weight 134.5 kg
BP: 172/98, HR 88, RR 26
3+ pitting edema bilateral feet and ankles
Fasting blood glucose: 146 mg/dL
Total cholesterol: 250 mg/dL
Triglycerides: 312 mg/dL
HDL: 30 mg/dL
Serum creatinine 1.8 mg/dL
BUN 32 mg/dl
Critical Thinking Essay
In 750-1,000 words, critically evaluate Mr. C.’s potential diagnosis and intervention(s). Include the following:
Describe the clinical manifestations present in Mr. C.
Describe the potential health risks for obesity that are of concern for Mr. C. Discuss whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention.
Assess each of Mr. C.’s functional health patterns using the information given. Discuss at least five actual or potential problems can you identify from the functional health patterns and provide the rationale for each. (Functional health patterns include health-perception, health-management, nutritional, metabolic, elimination, activity-exercise, sleep-rest, cognitive-perceptual, self-perception/self-concept, role-relationship, sexuality/reproductive, coping-stress tolerance.)
Explain the staging of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and contributing factors to consider.
Consider ESRD prevention and health promotion opportunities. Describe what type of patient education should be provided to Mr. C. for prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status.
Explain the type of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care and the type of multidisciplinary approach that would be beneficial for these patients. Consider aspects such as devices, transportation, living conditions, return-to-employment issues.
You are required to cite to a minimum of two sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and relevant to nursing practice.
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.
Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.
Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.
The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Case Study: Mr. C. – Rubric
Criteria Description
Clinical Manifestations of Mr. C.
5. Excellent
12 points
Subjective and objective clinical manifestations are detailed. The clinical manifestations are accurate and clearly report the observed and perceived signs and symptoms.
4. Good
10.68 points
Subjective and objective clinical manifestations are described. Overall, the clinical manifestations are accurate and reflect observed and perceived signs and symptoms.
3. Satisfactory
9.48 points
Clinical manifestations are summarized. An overview of the general symptoms is presented. Some findings are incomplete.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
Clinical manifestations are partially presented. There are major omissions and inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Clinical manifestations are omitted.
Criteria Description
Potential Health Risks for Obesity and Bariatric Surgery
5. Excellent
12 points
A detailed discussion of the potential health risks for obesity is presented. A through and compelling discussion on whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented. The discussion is well-developed and supported by evidence and additional rationale.
4. Good
10.68 points
A discussion on the potential health risks for obesity is presented. A discussion on whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented but needs some evidence or rationale for support.
3. Satisfactory
9.48 points
A summary on the potential health risks for obesity and whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented. There are some inaccuracies. More evidence or rationale is needed to support discussion.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
A partial summary on the potential health risks for obesity and whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented. There are major inaccuracies. More information is needed. No evidence or rationale is provided to support discussion.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Potential health risks for obesity and whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention are not discussed.
Criteria Description
Functional Health Patterns
5. Excellent
18 points
Five or more actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are discussed. The discussion is insightful, and the identified problems are highly relevant for the patient and his condition. The discussion is well-supported by rationale and evidence.
4. Good
16.02 points
Five or more actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are discussed. The identified problems are relevant for the patient and his condition. Overall, the discussion is supported by rationale and evidence. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.
3. Satisfactory
14.22 points
At least five actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are summarized. The identified problems are generally relevant for the patient and his condition. Some rationale and evidence is required for support.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
13.5 points
At least four actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are presented. The identified problems are not entirely relevant for the patient and his condition. Rationale or evidence is required for support.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Actual or potential problems based on the assessment of functional health patterns of the patient are omitted or are irrelevant for the patient and his condition. The overall criteria for this assignment are not met.
Criteria Description
Staging and Contributing Factors of End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD)
5. Excellent
12 points
The staging of ESRD and the contributing factors for ESRD are explained. The information is accurate and reflects contemporary practice and research.
4. Good
10.68 points
The staging of ESRD and the contributing factors for ESRD are explained. Some information or detail is needed for clarity or detail.
3. Satisfactory
9.48 points
The staging of ESRD and the contributing factors for ESRD are generally explained. Some information is required; there are minor inaccuracies.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
Staging of ESRD is partially summarized. The contributing factors for ESRD are vague. There are inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Staging and contributing factors for ESRD are omitted or inaccurate.
Criteria Description
Health Promotion and Prevention for ESRD
5. Excellent
24 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is thoroughly described. The proposed items are clearly presented and highly relevant and supportive of patient and his health status. Strong evidence and rationale generally support the discussion.
4. Good
21.36 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is described. The proposed items are relevant and appropriate for the patient and his health status. Evidence and rationale generally support the discussion.
3. Satisfactory
18.96 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is generally described. There are minor inaccuracies. Overall, the proposed items are relevant for the patient and his health status. Some evidence and rationale are needed to support the discussion.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
18 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is partially summarized. There are inaccuracies. Some aspects are not relevant for the patient and his health status.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is omitted.
Criteria Description
Resources for ESRD Patients for Nonacute Care and Multidisciplinary Approach
5. Excellent
18 points
A clear and detailed explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. The explanation demonstrates insight into both resources and multidisciplinary approaches for nonacute care for ESRD patients.
4. Good
16.02 points
An explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. Some detail is required for clarity.
3. Satisfactory
14.22 points
A general explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. There are minor inaccuracies. Some additional information is required.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
13.5 points
An incomplete explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. There are major inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, are not discussed.
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent
6 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good
5.34 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory
4.74 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent
6 points
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good
5.34 points
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory
4.74 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent
6 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good
5.34 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory
4.74 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent
2.4 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good
2.14 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. Satisfactory
1.9 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
1.8 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent
3.6 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good
3.2 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory
2.84 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
2.7 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 120 points

Read more

Case Study: Mr. C. RN-BSN-prepared Nurse

Case Study: Mr. C. RN-BSN-prepared Nurse
Case Study: Mr. C. RN-BSN-prepared Nurse
Case Study: Mr. C.
It is necessary for an RN-BSN-prepared nurse to demonstrate an enhanced understanding of the pathophysiological processes of disease, the clinical manifestations and treatment protocols, and how they affect clients across the life span.
Evaluate the Health History and Medical Information for Mr. C., presented below.
Based on this information, formulate a conclusion based on your evaluation, and complete the Critical Thinking Essay assignment, as instructed below.
Health History and Medical Information
Health History
Mr. C., a 32-year-old single male, is seeking information at the outpatient center regarding possible bariatric surgery for his obesity. He currently works at a catalog telephone center. He reports that he has always been heavy, even as a small child, gaining approximately 100 pounds in the last 2-3 years. Previous medical evaluations have not indicated any metabolic diseases, but he says he has sleep apnea and high blood pressure, which he tries to control by restricting dietary sodium. Mr. C. reports increasing shortness of breath with activity, swollen ankles, and pruritus over the last 6 months.
Objective Data:
Height: 68 inches; weight 134.5 kg
BP: 172/98, HR 88, RR 26
3+ pitting edema bilateral feet and ankles
Fasting blood glucose: 146 mg/dL
Total cholesterol: 250 mg/dL
Triglycerides: 312 mg/dL
HDL: 30 mg/dL
Serum creatinine 1.8 mg/dL
BUN 32 mg/dl
Critical Thinking Essay
In 750-1,000 words, critically evaluate Mr. C.’s potential diagnosis and intervention(s). Include the following:
Describe the clinical manifestations present in Mr. C.
Describe the potential health risks for obesity that are of concern for Mr. C. Discuss whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention.
Assess each of Mr. C.’s functional health patterns using the information given. Discuss at least five actual or potential problems can you identify from the functional health patterns and provide the rationale for each. (Functional health patterns include health-perception, health-management, nutritional, metabolic, elimination, activity-exercise, sleep-rest, cognitive-perceptual, self-perception/self-concept, role-relationship, sexuality/reproductive, coping-stress tolerance.)
Explain the staging of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and contributing factors to consider.
Consider ESRD prevention and health promotion opportunities. Describe what type of patient education should be provided to Mr. C. for prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status.
Explain the type of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care and the type of multidisciplinary approach that would be beneficial for these patients. Consider aspects such as devices, transportation, living conditions, return-to-employment issues.
You are required to cite to a minimum of two sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and relevant to nursing practice.
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.
Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.
Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.
The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Case Study: Mr. C. – Rubric
Criteria Description
Clinical Manifestations of Mr. C.
5. Excellent
12 points
Subjective and objective clinical manifestations are detailed. The clinical manifestations are accurate and clearly report the observed and perceived signs and symptoms.
4. Good
10.68 points
Subjective and objective clinical manifestations are described. Overall, the clinical manifestations are accurate and reflect observed and perceived signs and symptoms.
3. Satisfactory
9.48 points
Clinical manifestations are summarized. An overview of the general symptoms is presented. Some findings are incomplete.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
Clinical manifestations are partially presented. There are major omissions and inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Clinical manifestations are omitted.
Criteria Description
Potential Health Risks for Obesity and Bariatric Surgery
5. Excellent
12 points
A detailed discussion of the potential health risks for obesity is presented. A through and compelling discussion on whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented. The discussion is well-developed and supported by evidence and additional rationale.
4. Good
10.68 points
A discussion on the potential health risks for obesity is presented. A discussion on whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented but needs some evidence or rationale for support.
3. Satisfactory
9.48 points
A summary on the potential health risks for obesity and whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented. There are some inaccuracies. More evidence or rationale is needed to support discussion.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
A partial summary on the potential health risks for obesity and whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention is presented. There are major inaccuracies. More information is needed. No evidence or rationale is provided to support discussion.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Potential health risks for obesity and whether bariatric surgery is an appropriate intervention are not discussed.
Criteria Description
Functional Health Patterns
5. Excellent
18 points
Five or more actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are discussed. The discussion is insightful, and the identified problems are highly relevant for the patient and his condition. The discussion is well-supported by rationale and evidence.
4. Good
16.02 points
Five or more actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are discussed. The identified problems are relevant for the patient and his condition. Overall, the discussion is supported by rationale and evidence. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.
3. Satisfactory
14.22 points
At least five actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are summarized. The identified problems are generally relevant for the patient and his condition. Some rationale and evidence is required for support.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
13.5 points
At least four actual or potential problems identified from the functional health patterns are presented. The identified problems are not entirely relevant for the patient and his condition. Rationale or evidence is required for support.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Actual or potential problems based on the assessment of functional health patterns of the patient are omitted or are irrelevant for the patient and his condition. The overall criteria for this assignment are not met.
Criteria Description
Staging and Contributing Factors of End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD)
5. Excellent
12 points
The staging of ESRD and the contributing factors for ESRD are explained. The information is accurate and reflects contemporary practice and research.
4. Good
10.68 points
The staging of ESRD and the contributing factors for ESRD are explained. Some information or detail is needed for clarity or detail.
3. Satisfactory
9.48 points
The staging of ESRD and the contributing factors for ESRD are generally explained. Some information is required; there are minor inaccuracies.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
Staging of ESRD is partially summarized. The contributing factors for ESRD are vague. There are inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Staging and contributing factors for ESRD are omitted or inaccurate.
Criteria Description
Health Promotion and Prevention for ESRD
5. Excellent
24 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is thoroughly described. The proposed items are clearly presented and highly relevant and supportive of patient and his health status. Strong evidence and rationale generally support the discussion.
4. Good
21.36 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is described. The proposed items are relevant and appropriate for the patient and his health status. Evidence and rationale generally support the discussion.
3. Satisfactory
18.96 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is generally described. There are minor inaccuracies. Overall, the proposed items are relevant for the patient and his health status. Some evidence and rationale are needed to support the discussion.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
18 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is partially summarized. There are inaccuracies. Some aspects are not relevant for the patient and his health status.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Patient education for the prevention of future events, health restoration, and avoidance of deterioration of renal status is omitted.
Criteria Description
Resources for ESRD Patients for Nonacute Care and Multidisciplinary Approach
5. Excellent
18 points
A clear and detailed explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. The explanation demonstrates insight into both resources and multidisciplinary approaches for nonacute care for ESRD patients.
4. Good
16.02 points
An explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. Some detail is required for clarity.
3. Satisfactory
14.22 points
A general explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. There are minor inaccuracies. Some additional information is required.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
13.5 points
An incomplete explanation on the types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, is presented. There are major inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Types of resources available for ESRD patients for nonacute care, and the beneficial types of multidisciplinary approaches, are not discussed.
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent
6 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good
5.34 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory
4.74 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent
6 points
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good
5.34 points
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory
4.74 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent
6 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good
5.34 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory
4.74 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent
2.4 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good
2.14 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. Satisfactory
1.9 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
1.8 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent
3.6 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good
3.2 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory
2.84 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
2.7 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 120 points

Read more
Enjoy affordable prices and lifetime discounts
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Order Now Order in Chat

Start off on the right foot this semester. Get expert-written solutions at a 20% discount