Dermatology Fluid Resuscitation of Children with Burns Presentation
Dermatology Fluid Resuscitation of Children with Burns Presentation
Description
In your presentation, include the following:
Include at least one type of visual aid in your presentation such as PowerPoint slides, diagrams, white board use, etc.
You are expected to explain the processes or concepts in your own words using references to support your explanations. Include a reference list at the end and cite references verbally or with on screen citations.
- Use appropriate master’s level terminology.
- Include all necessary physiology and/or pathophysiology in your explanation.
- Use detailed explanations to teach or explain. Your audience is your classmates and professional colleagues.
- Reference a minimum of two sources; you may cite your etext as a source. Use APA format to style your visual aids and cite your sources. Include a reference page in your video.
- Your presentation must include both audio and visual components and be professional in nature.
- Possible Topics:
- Describe the pathophysiology for the vesiculobullous disorders, bullous pemphigoid, and pemphigus.
Describe the clinical manifestations and treatment options for psoriasis.
Distinguish between rubella and rubeola. What are the differences between them in pathology, manifestation, and treatment?
- Provide an overview of common insect bites and parasites affecting children.
- Develop a treatment plan for a child diagnosed with head lice.
- Describe the cellular alterations associated with shock.
- Compare and contrast the different types of shock: cardiogenic, hypovolemic, neurogenic (vasogenic), anaphylactic, and septic.
- Define multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), discuss risk factors associated with MODS, explain the pathogenesis of MODS, and compare primary and secondary MODS.
- Identify the clinical manifestations of MODS by organ system.
- Compare and contrast assessment techniques used to determine the amount of burn injury.
- Discuss burn shock and fluid resuscitation in burns and discuss common treatment methods for burn injuries. Also explain the three essential elements of survival of a major burn injury.
- Compare compensated and uncompensated shock in children.
- Describe the common causes of scald injuries and contact, flame, electrical, and chemical burns in children and Identify factors contributing to the depth of burn injuries in children.
- Explain and characterize the changes in the standard rule-of-nines for burns involving children.
- Define and describe the pathophysiology of reperfusion injury.
- Identify and discuss fluid resuscitation, wound management, pulmonary support, nutritional support, comfort management, and community reintegration of children with burns.
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Postinga | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or 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 two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
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 one or no credible sources.
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 Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses 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. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses 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. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||