NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Discussion: Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice
NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Discussion: Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice
The Discussion for this week is to provide you an opportunity to discuss with your colleagues the case studies presented in the interactive media program. These case studies involve ethical dilemmas or other issues encountered in advanced nursing practice.
ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Discussion: Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice HERE
Thanks for stopping by this assessment. We can assist you in completing it and other subsequent ones. Our expert writers will comprehensively review instructions, synthesize external evidence sources, and customize an A-grade paper for YOU!!!
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Schuiling, K. D., & Likis, F. E. (2022). Gynecologic health care (4th ed.). Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Chapter 3,” Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans) pp. 39–49)
Chapter 13, “Contraception” (pp. 236–266)
Morreim, H., Antiel, R. M., Zacharias, D. G., & Hall, D. E. (2014). Should age be a basis for rationing health care?
Links to an external site. The Virtual Mentor: VM, 16(5), 339–347. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2014.16.05.ecas2-1405
World Health Organization. (2020). Ageing and life course
Links to an external site.. https://www.who.int/ageing/en/
Adult Gerontology Resources
Harrison, B. J., Hilton, T. N., Rivière, R. N., Ferraro, Z. M., Deonandan, R., & Walker, M. C. (2017). Advanced maternal age: Ethical and medical considerations for assisted reproductive technology
Links to an external site.. International Journal of Women’s Health, 9, 561–570.
Clinical Guideline Resources
As you review the following resources, you may want to include a topic in the search area to gather detailed information (e.g., breast cancer screening guidelines; CDC – for zika in pregnancy, etc.).
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).
Links to an external site. (2020). https://www.acog.org/
American Cancer Society, Inc. (ACS). (2020). Information and Resources about Cancer: Breast, Colon, Lung, Prostate, Skin.
Links to an external site. https://www.cancer.org/
American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). Lead the profession to share the future of nursing and health care
Links to an external site.. https://www.nursingworld.org/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (CDC). (n.d.). CDC in action
Links to an external site.. https://www.cdc.gov/
HealthyPeople 2030. (2020). Healthy People 2030 Framework
Links to an external site.. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/About-Healthy-People/Development-Healthy-People-2030/Framework
The American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP). (2020). What’s Happening at your association
Links to an external site.. https://www.aanp.org/
Required Media
Unfolding Case Study 1 – Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice
Links to an external site.
In this interactive media program, you will be presented with various case studies with a variety of decision paths to take as an Advanced Nurse Practitioner.
Unfolding Case Study 2 – Ethical Dilemmas in Advance Nursing Practice
Links to an external site.
In this interactive media program, you will be presented with various case studies with a variety of decision paths to take as an Advanced Nurse Practitioner.
Optional Resources
Note: In Weeks 1-10, these resources are optional for your review. In Week 11, you will be required to review each of the PowerPoint slides from the text Gynecologic Health Care (4th ed.).
Chapter 3, “Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans”
Download “Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans”
Chapter 13, “Contraception”
Download “Contraception”
By Day 3
To prepare:
Review the interactive case studies in this week’s Learning Resources. Select one of the cases to prepare your discussion post. Your post should address the following:
Summary of your chosen case study
What is your differential diagnosis?
Why did you make this diagnosis decision?
What is your treatment plan?
What evidence-based research can you provide to support your decision (choice for differential diagnosis and plan/intervention)?
What resources did you use to meet your best practice guidelines?
Address the ethical dilemmas and/or other issues for your case study:
Ethical issues
Physical issues
Financial issues
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts (from a different group) on two different days and provide additional insight that might be useful and appropriate for the issue addressed. Use your learning resources and/or evidence from the literature to support your position.
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the Reply button to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Post Reply, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Post Reply!
NRNP_6552_Week9_Case_Study_Discussion_Rubric
NRNP_6552_Week9_Case_Study_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:
Response to the case study discussion questions includes appropriate diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options as directed, is based on evidence-based research where appropriate, and is incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
44 to >39.16 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s)… Post includes appropriate diagnoses including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options… Incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of post the post having exceptional depth and breadth… Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.
39.16 to >34.76 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Responds to most of the discussion question(s).. Post includes appropriate diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options… Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the post having exceptional depth and breadth… Supported by at least 3 credible references.
34.76 to >30.36 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Responds to some of the discussion question(s)… Post contains incomplete or vague diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options… Is somewhat lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources… Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.
30.36 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Does not respond to the discussion question(s)… Post contains incomplete diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options, or diagnoses and/or explanations are missing… Lacks synthesis gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources… Contains only 1 or no credible references.
44 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:
Writing
6 to >5.34 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Written clearly and concisely… Contains no grammatical or spelling errors… Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
5.34 to >4.74 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Written concisely… May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors… Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
4.74 to >4.14 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Written somewhat concisely… May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors… Contains some APA formatting errors.
4.14 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Not written clearly or concisely… Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors… Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:
Timely and full participation
10 to >8.9 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts main discussion by due date.
8.9 to >7.9 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Posts main discussion by due date… Meets requirements for full participation.
7.9 to >6.9 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Posts main discussion by due date.
6.9 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post main discussion by due date.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 to >8.01 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings… Responds to questions posed by faculty… The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NRNP 6552 Week 9 Case Study Discussion: Working Through Ethical Dilemmas and Other Issues in Advanced Nursing Practice HERE
8.01 to >7.11 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7.11 to >6.21 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
6.21 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:
Writing
6 to >5.34 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are fully 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.
5.34 to >4.74 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed… Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources… Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
4.74 to >4.14 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication… Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed… Few or no credible sources are cited.
4.14 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication… Response to faculty questions are missing… No credible sources are cited.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:
Timely and full participation
5 to >4.45 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts by due date.
4.45 to >3.95 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Meets requirements for full participation… Posts by due date.
3.95 to >3.45 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Posts by due date.
3.45 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post by due date.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 to >8.01 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings… Responds to questions posed by faculty… The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
8.01 to >7.11 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7.11 to >6.21 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
6.21 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:
Writing
6 to >5.34 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are fully 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.
5.34 to >4.74 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed… Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources… Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
4.74 to >4.14 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication… Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed… Few or no credible sources are cited.
4.14 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication… Response to faculty questions are missing… No credible sources are cited.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 to >4.45 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts by due date.
4.45 to >3.95 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Meets requirements for full participation… Posts by due date.
3.95 to >3.45 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Posts by due date.
3.45 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post by due date.
5 pts
Total Points: 100