(240)-343-2585 info@essaymerit.com

NUR 660 Week 11 Discussion 1: Question-Based Discussion NUR 660 Week 11 Discussion 1: Question-Based Discussion NUR 660 Week 11 Discussion 1: Question-Based Discussion Value: 100 points Due: To facilitate scholarly discourse, create your initial post by Day 3, and reply to at least two of your classmates, on two separate days, by Day 7. Gradebook Category: Discussions Initial Post It is understood that thoughtful responses to your topic question(s) will take some time and thought. Please organize your thoughts before creating your initial post. Based on your assigned team, create an initial post by answering all questions in your team’s case study, making sure to address all components of all questions. By Day 3, post your initial response to your assigned part of the case study as a reply to the appropriate discussion thread. Please be sure to number the questions addressed and include all components of each question in your response. Each initial response must have a reference, including at least two scholarly references other than your textbook or course materials. Your post should comprehensively address the questions posed. Team A Renal Disorders Explain why hematuria and proteinuria reflect a glomerular problem rather than a tubular problem in the kidney. Explain the change in filtration if excess glucose is present in the blood entering the kidney. Explain factors that may contribute to elevated blood pressure in a patient with renal disease. Compare acute and chronic renal failure with respect to cause, reversibility, and urinary output at onset. Why is there an increased risk of drug toxicity in the later stages of renal failure? Why is protein intake restricted in patients with kidney disease? Compare the causes and pathophysiology of acute pyelonephritis, APSGN, and nephrotic syndrome. Team B Urinary Disorders Explain how decreased fluid intake or dehydration predisposes to calculi in the urinary tract. Explain what the presence of the following in the urine indicates: blood (microscopic and gross), protein, pus, casts, and glucose. Compare the signs/symptoms of cystitis and pyelonephritis. Which of these indicate that kidney involvement (local or systemic) is occurring? Where is the urinary bladder located relative to the uterus and rectum in a woman? Briefly explain two possible implications of this location. Why does male anatomy make it likely that a reproductive system infection may extend into the urinary system? Explain the difference in causes of frequent voiding associated with cystitis versus those associated with renal insufficiency. How might urinary tract infections lead to calculus formation? Team C Reproductive Disorders/STIs Compare the typical signs of acute bacterial prostatitis, chronic bacterial prostatitis, and acute nonbacterial prostatitis. Compare BPH and prostatic cancer in terms of the characteristic location of the tumor and the early signs. What are the risk factors for each condition? Describe each of the following: (1) second-degree uterine prolapse, (2) cystocele, and (3) retroversion of the uterus. Explain the secondary problems that may occur with second- or third-degree prolapse. How can infection in the vagina can cause PID? What signs and symptoms would you expect? Why is this considered a serious condition? Describe the causative organisms for (1) chlamydial infection, (2) gonorrhea, (3) syphilis, (4) trichomoniasis, and (5) genital herpes. Compare the early manifestations of chlamydial infection, gonorrhea, trichomoniasis, syphilis, and genital herpes. Why are these STIs difficult to control (that is, why is it hard to reduce the incidence)? Describe three factors predisposing patients to vaginal candidiasis and identify the causative organism. Reply Posts Review all your peers’ posts, as they will help you prepare for the quiz next week. Select posts from two peers that addressed a case study from a different team than you. For example, students from Team A reply to one post from Team B and one post from Team C. Each reply must use at least one scholarly reference other than your textbook. Thinking about your population-specific NP track and anticipated practice area: Identify and explain two “pearls of wisdom” or “key concepts/ideas” you learned from reading your peers’ responses. Describe a patient you might encounter in your future practice where you could apply the information learned in your peer’s post. Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded. Posting to the Discussion Forum Select the appropriate Thread. Select Reply. Create your post. Select Post to Forum. Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NUR 660 Week 11 Discussion 1: Question-Based Discussion Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points) Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points Criteria Exemplary Exceeds Expectations Advanced Meets Expectations Intermediate Needs Improvement Novice Inadequate Total Points Quality of Initial Post Provides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points 40 Peer Response Post Offers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post. Response is supported by course content and a minimum of one scholarly reference per each peer post. All instruction requirements noted. 35 points Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference supports the content in the peer post without adding new information or insight. Missing reference from one peer post. Partially followed instructions regarding number of reply posts. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Post is primarily a summation of peer’s post without further synthesis of course content. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. Did not follow instructions regarding number of reply posts. Missing reference from peer posts. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points 40 Frequency of Distribution Initial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days. All instruction requirements noted. 10 points Initial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days. 8 points Minimum of two post options (initial and/or peer) made on separate days. 7 points All posts made on same day. Submission demonstrates inadequate preparation. No post submitted. 6 points 10 Organization Well-organized content with a clear and complex purpose statement and content argument. Writing is concise with a logical flow of ideas. 5 points Organized content with an informative purpose statement, supportive content, and summary statement. Argument content is developed with minimal issues in content flow. 4 points Poor organization and flow of ideas distract from content. Narrative is difficult to follow and frequently causes reader to reread work. Purpose statement is noted. 3 points Illogical flow of ideas. Prose rambles. Purpose statement is unclear or missing. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No purpose statement. Submits assignment late. 2 points 5 APA, Grammar, and Spelling Correct APA formatting with no errors. The writer correctly identifies reading audience, as demonstrated by appropriate language (avoids jargon and simplifies complex concepts appropriately). Writing is concise, in active voice, and avoids awkward transitions and overuse of conjunctions. There are no spelling, punctuation, or word-usage errors. 5 points Correct and consistent APA formatting of references and cites all references used. No more than two unique APA errors. The writer demonstrates correct usage of formal English language in sentence construction. Variation in sentence structure and word usage promotes readability. There are minimal to no grammar, punctuation, or word-usage errors. 4 points Three to four unique APA formatting errors. The writer occasionally uses awkward sentence construction or overuses/inappropriately uses complex sentence structure. Problems with word usage (evidence of incorrect use of thesaurus) and punctuation persist, often causing some difficulties with grammar. Some words, transitional phrases, and conjunctions are overused. Multiple grammar, punctuation, or word usage errors. 3 points Five or more unique formatting errors or no attempt to format in APA. The writer demonstrates limited understanding of formal written language use; writing is colloquial (conforms to spoken language). The writer struggles with limited vocabulary and has difficulty conveying meaning such that only the broadest, most general messages are presented. Grammar and punctuation are consistently incorrect. Spelling errors are numerous. Submits assignment late. 2 points 5 Total Points 100 Order Now