Case Discussion Pulmonary – Part 2 Follow up Visit
Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is for students to:
- Improve their ability to formulate diagnoses based on the clinical presentation of patients
- Improve their ability to understand and apply National Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Pulmonary disorders
- Design a relevant treatment plan
Activity Learning Outcomes
Through this discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:
- Utilize healthcare delivery system resources in a fiscally responsible manner in the diagnosis and treatment of patients and families across the lifespan. (PO 5)
- Develop management plans based on current scientific evidence and national guidelines. (PO 5)
- Educate patients on treatment decisions (WO1)
- Select an evidence-based article to support the plan of care for the case study patient. (WO2)
- Analyze national guidelines and apply them to specific case study situations. (WO3)
- Review appropriate antibiotic prescribing guidelines. (WO4)
Requirements: (IMPORTANT INFORMATION HERE)
Michelle continues to work in the bakery and her asthma has been well controlled on a low-dose inhaled corticosteroid inhaler, Singular 10mg daily, and Albuterol prn which she uses 1-2 times per week. Michelle presents to the clinic with an acute illness that developed 2 days ago and has a respiratory rate of 24, mild SOB with exertion, O2 saturation of 94%, and complaint of inspiratory and expiratory wheezing. She is able to speak and states her temperature over the last 2 days has been 101 to 102 F. Cough is productive of white sputum. Influenza A is going around the bakery. Exam findings show a woman who appears her stated age and is alert and oriented and though calm, is having mild work of breathing. AR 110 BPM, BP is 150/85, RR: 24, Temp 101.4. She has a nonproductive, dry cough, is mildly short of breath, fair chest expansion, + inspiratory/expiratory wheezes, no rales, no rhonchi. Auscultation reveals no thrills, gallops or extra heart sounds. Apical rate is elevated at 110. Physical exam is otherwise unremarkable. The MA has swabbed her for Influenza A- test is positive.
Discussion Questions Part Two:
- Determine an appropriate treatment plan for Michelle. Discuss medications, doses, Durable Medical Equipment, and any testing, and apply these directly to her case. Provide your rationale with evidence.
- Decide whether she is safe to return home, include any prescriptions, or if a referral to a higher level of care is required. Discuss the criteria used to make your decision, how a referral is made, and defend your position.
- Discuss relevant education and follow up plan.
DISCUSSION CONTENT
Application of Course Knowledge
Post contributes clinically accurate perspectives/insights applicable to the results from the physical exam and new diagnoses. Initial post includes the most likely diagnosis/specific treatment plan given case study information supported by rationale and answers all questions presented in the case. Demonstrates course knowledge/assigned readings by: linking tests/interventions accurately to diagnoses, applies learned knowledge specifically to the symptoms and patient information using original dialogue i.e., little to no direct quotes.
Evidence Based resources
Discussion post supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. The focus of journal articles represents a logical link between the article content and the case study information. In-text citations and full references are provided.
DISCUSSION FORMAT
Category
Organization
Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Headings reflect the separation of criterion outlined in assignment guidelines.
**Direct quote should not exceed 15 words & must add substantively to the discussion
APA/Grammar/Spelling
Discussion post has minimal grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation and APA* errors. Direct quotes (if used) is limited to 1 short statement** which adds substantively to the post.
* APA style references and in text citations are required; however, there are no deductions for errors in indentation or spacing of references. All elements of the reference otherwise must be included.