Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NRS 429 Week 2 Discussion 2 How do health care providers overcome differing points of view regarding health promotion and disease prevention?

NRS 429 Week 2 Discussion 2 How do health care providers overcome differing points of view regarding health promotion and disease prevention?

The desire for different healthcare institutions to adhere to the quality healthcare delivery calls for the application of different models. These models are often used in health promotion and disease preventions. There are different models that can be used in public health settings to enhance clinical processes. These models provide guidelines and the practices that ought to be followed for effective treatment outcomes (Delgadillo et al., 2018). Healthcare models are always designed to reflect the operational processes within a healthcare institution. Development of effective models require comprehensive research processes to determine some of the best practices to be integrated into the system.

One of the models that can be used in public health settings is the Feedback Informed Treatment Model. The model is also called Client Directed Outcome Informed Treatment. The models is based on the incorporation of different approaches that lead to effective treatment outcomes (Dobud, 2017). Under the above model, there are different models that are used of followed by different healthcare institution to enhance treatment outcome and quality care processes. The above model is often used in various department to enhance care given to the patients. Some of the models under Feedback Informed Treatment framework include cognitive behavior therapy, mostly used in therapeutic processes to enhance recovery of the patients suffering from various mental health conditions (Tilsen & McNamee, 2015). An example of Feedback Informed Treatment Model in use is in the treatment of the patients with different mental illnesses. Also, the model is applicable in the therapeutic processes to enhance recovery of the patients. One of the aspect of the model incorporated from the Minnesota Department of Health, public health intervention is cognitive behavior therapy.

References

Delgadillo, J., de Jong, K., Lucock, M., Lutz, W., Rubel, J., Gilbody, S., … & O’Hayon, H. (2018). Feedback-informed treatment versus usual psychological treatment for depression and anxiety: a multisite, open-label, cluster randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Psychiatry5(7), 564-572.

Dobud, W. (2017). Towards an evidence-informed adventure therapy: Implementing feedback-informed treatment in the field. Journal of evidence-informed social work14(3), 172-182.

Tilsen, J., & McNamee, S. (2015). Feedback informed treatment: Evidence‐based practice meets social construction. Family process54(1), 124-137.

 

Topic 2 DQ 2

Family health is a part and element of community health. It considers family interactions in terms of health (physical and psychological) and the relationships between the family and the social environment at all stages of the family life in its various structural types. The concept of family health is important because the family is a health unit. If one of the family members is ill, the entire family is affected by being exposed to a health risk such as an infectious disease (Barnes et al., 2020). In addition, the basic principle fundamental to family health is that there are particular biological and psycho-social needs intrinsic in the process of human growth and development, which must be met to ensure the survival and healthy development of children in the family and future adults (Michaelson et al., 2021). Therefore, the family should be viewed as a unit for care since it offers the prospect of a global approach that can render care for individuals more accessible, acceptable, and effective.

Health promotion refers to actions taken to promote optimal health and wellbeing. It aims at empowering individuals to increase control over their health and improve it. The Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion outlines five health promotion strategies: Build healthy public policy, create supportive environments, strengthen community action, develop personal skills, and Reorient health services (Lin et al., 2021).

A nurse can determine the best strategy for health promotion by identifying the health needs of the target populations and then tailoring the strategy and associated activities to meet these needs. In addition, the nurse can evaluate the target population’s literacy levels and select the strategy that best matches the individuals’ ability to interpret and implement health information (Michaelson et al., 2021). In this case, the nurse has to establish an individual’s health literacy level before selecting the strategy for developing personal skills. This is the person’s health literacy level because it greatly influences how they will apply the skills to improve their health. Furthermore, a nurse has to consider a person’s cultural values and select interventions in the strategy that are culturally acceptable.

References

Barnes, M. D., Hanson, C. L., Novilla, L. B., Magnusson, B. M., Crandall, A. C., & Bradford, G. (2020). Family-Centered Health Promotion: Perspectives for Engaging Families and Achieving Better Health Outcomes. Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing57, 46958020923537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0046958020923537

Lin, M. H., Chiu, S. Y., Ho, W. C., & Huang, H. Y. (2021). Application of the Ottawa Charter Five Priority Areas of Action for Public Health to an Institution-Wide Diabetes Care Promotion. International journal of environmental research and public health18(4), 1543. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041543

Michaelson, V., Pilato, K. A., & Davison, C. M. (2021). Family as a health promotion setting: A scoping review of conceptual models of the health-promoting family. PloS one16(4), e0249707. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249707

NRS 429 Week 2 Discussion 2 How do health care providers overcome differing points of view regarding health promotion and disease prevention

NRS 429 Week 2 Discussion 2 How do health care providers overcome differing points of view regarding health promotion and disease prevention

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NRS 429 Week 2 Discussion 2 How do health care providers overcome differing points of view regarding health promotion and disease prevention?

I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!

Name:  Discussion Rubric

  Excellent

90–100

Good

80–89

Fair

70–79

Poor

0–69

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.

40 (40%) – 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.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

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 the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three 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.

Cited with fewer than two 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 one or no credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

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

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

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 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and 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%)

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 (4%) – 4 (4%)

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.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

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, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

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 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and 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%)

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 (4%) – 4 (4%)

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.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

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, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric

 

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.