Identify any potential health-related risks based upon the patient’s age, gender, ethnicity, or environmental setting that should be taken into consideration

Identify any potential health-related risks based upon the patient’s age, gender, ethnicity, or environmental setting that should be taken into consideration

This is a discussion 350 words with 3 references due by Wednesday Morning. Will scan and attach chapter one Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2015). Seidel’s guide to physical examination (8th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby. • Chapter 1, “The History and Interviewing Process” (pp. 1–21) . The focus is only on one of the patients. Discussion: Building a Health History Effective communication is vital to constructing an accurate and detailed patient history. A patient’s health or illness is influenced by many factors, including age, gender, ethnicity, and environmental setting. As an advanced practice nurse, you must be aware of these factors and tailor your communication techniques accordingly. Doing so will not only help you establish rapport with your patients, but it will also enable you to more effectively gather the information needed to assess your patients’ health risks. For this Discussion, you will take on the role of a clinician who is building a health history for one of the following new patients: • 76-year-old Black/African-American male with disabilities living in an urban setting • Adolescent Hispanic/Latino boy living in a middle-class suburb • 55-year-old Asian female living in a high-density poverty housing complex • Pre-school aged white female living in a rural community • 16-year-old white pregnant teenager living in an inner-city neighborhood To prepare: With the information presented in Chapter 1 in mind, consider the following: • How would your communication and interview techniques for building a health history differ with each patient? • How might you target your questions for building a health history based on the patient’s age, gender, ethnicity, or environment? • What risk assessment instruments would be appropriate to use with each patient? • What questions would you ask each patient to assess his or her health risks? • Select one patient from the list above on which to focus for this Discussion. • Identify any potential health-related risks based upon the patient’s age, gender, ethnicity, or environmental setting that should be taken into consideration. • Select one of the risk assessment instruments presented in Chapter 1 or Chapter 26 of the Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination text, or another tool with which you are familiar, related to your selected patient. • Develop at least five targeted questions you would ask your selected patient to assess his or her health risks and begin building a health history. By Day 3 Post a description of the interview and communication techniques you would use with your selected patient. Explain why you would use these techniques. Identify the risk assessment instrument you selected, and justify why it would be applicable to the selected patient. Provide at least five targeted questions you would ask the patient. Rubric Detail Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout. Name: NURS_6512_Week_1_Discussion_Rubric • Grid View • List View Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement Main Posting: Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. 44 (44%) – 44 (44%) Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s) is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. supported by at least 3 current, credible sources 40 (40%) – 43 (43%) Responds to the discussion question(s) is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to most of the discussion question(s) is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references 31 (31%) – 34 (34%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s) one to 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 fewer than 2 credible references 0 (0%) – 30 (30%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) 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 1 or no credible references Main Posting: Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) Written clearly and concisely Contains no grammatical or spelling errors Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%) Written clearly and concisely May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Written concisely May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%) Written somewhat concisely May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors Contains some APA formatting errors 0 (0%) – 4 (4%) Not written clearly or concisely Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style Main Posting: Timely and full participation 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts main discussion by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%) 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 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic, lacks depth First Response: Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) 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 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%) Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response 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 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) 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 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%) Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited 0 (0%) – 4 (4%) Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited First Response: Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%) 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 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic, lacks depth Second Response: Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) 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 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%) Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response 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 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) 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 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%) Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited 0 (0%) – 4 (4%) Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited Second Response: Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely and full participation Posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation Total Points: 100 Name: NURS_6512_Week_1_Discussion_Rubric

ANSWER.

PAPER DETAILS
Academic Level Masters
Subject Area Nursing
Paper Type  Assignment
Number of Pages 2 Page(s)/550 words
Sources 3
Paper Format APA
Spacing Double Spaced

If this is not the paper you were searching for, you can order your 100% plagiarism free, custom written paper now!

We Write Essays For Students

Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper

Write My Essay For Me

The post Identify any potential health-related risks based upon the patient’s age, gender, ethnicity, or environmental setting that should be taken into consideration appeared first on Nursing Papers Market.

Struggling with paper writing? Look no further, as you have found the ideal paper writing company! We are a reputable essay writing service that offers high-quality papers at affordable prices. On our user-friendly website, you can request a wide range of assignments. Rest assured that our work is entirely original. Each essay is crafted from scratch, tailored to meet the precise requirements of your assignment. We guarantee that it will successfully pass any plagiarism check.

Get Your Assignments Completed by Expert Writers. Hire Essay Helpers for Any Task

Order essays, term papers, research papers, reaction paper, research proposal, capstone project, discussion, projects, case study, speech/presentation, article, article critique, coursework, book report/review, movie review, annotated bibliography, or another assignment without having to worry about its originality – we offer 100% original content written completely from scratch

PLACE YOUR ORDER