NURS 6501 Week 4: Case Study Analysis 

Sample Answer for NURS 6501 Week 4: Case Study Analysis  Included After Question

An understanding of the cardiovascular and respiratory systems is a critically important component of disease diagnosis and treatment. This importance is magnified by the fact that these two systems work so closely together. A variety of factors and circumstances that impact the emergence and severity of issues in one system can have a role in the performance of the other. 

Effective disease analysis often requires an understanding that goes beyond these systems and their capacity to work together. The impact of patient characteristics, as well as racial and ethnic variables, can also have an important impact. 

An understanding of the symptoms of alterations in cardiovascular and respiratory systems is a critical step in diagnosis and treatment of many diseases. For APRNs this understanding can also help educate patients and guide them through their treatment plans. 

In this Assignment, you examine a case study and analyze the symptoms presented. You identify the elements that may be factors in the diagnosis, and you explain the implications to patient health. 

Resources 

NURS 6501 Week 4: Case Study Analysis 
NURS 6501 Week 4: Case Study Analysis

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.  

WEEKLY RESOURCES 

To prepare: 

By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to a specific case study scenario for this Case Study Assignment. Please see the “Announcements” section of the classroom for your assignment from your Instructor. 

The Assignment 

In your Case Study Analysis related to the scenario provided, explain the following 

  • The cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes that result in the patient presenting these symptoms. 
  • Any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning. 
  • How these processes interact to affect the patient. 

By day 7 of Week 4 

Submit your Case Study Analysis Assignment by Day 7 of Week 4 

Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The sample paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates  

Links to an external site.). All papers submitted must use this formatting. 

submission information 

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.  

  1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as MD2Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial  
  1. Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page. 
  1. Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review. 

 

Unable to load the shape

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 6501 Week 4: Case Study Analysis 

Title: NURS 6501 Week 4: Case Study Analysis 

The case study presents a 38-year-old female patient who arrives at the emergency room with symptoms of dyspnea and left leg pain. The patient has a medical history of systemic lupus erythematosus and has recently traveled by airplane. Additionally, she is using oral contraception. This paper elucidates the pulmonary pathophysiologic processes and explores the influence of racial/ethnic variables on these processes, highlighting their combined impact on the patient in question. 

Pulmonary Pathophysiologic Processes 

The patient exhibits dyspnea and left leg pain, which are typical symptoms of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). SLE can lead to various pulmonary conditions, including pleural effusion/pleuritis. This condition is characterized by chest pain, cough, dyspnea, and fluid accumulation in the pleural space (Dörner & Furie, 2019). Pleuritis, with or without pleural effusion, is a prevalent manifestation of acute pulmonary involvement in SLE. Immune complex deposits in different organs primarily cause the pathology in SLE. This activates complement and other inflammatory mediators, resulting in symptoms like leg pain and inflammation (Aringer, 2020).  

Racial/Ethnic Variables 

Compared to non-Hispanic Whites, Black and White Hispanics have a higher incidence and severity of SLE (Barber et al., 2021). SLE is three times more common in African-American women than in White women, and although the prevalence of SLE in Hispanic women is unknown, it is greater than in White women (Tsokos, 2020). A large percentage of Amerindian ancestry is correlated with an increased number of risk alleles for SLE, and there is abundant evidence that distinct susceptibility genes for SLE exist between Blacks and Whites or Hispanics (Fanouriakis et al., 2020).  

Interaction of Processes 

The patient’s medical history of systemic lupus erythematosus, recent airplane travel, and use of oral birth control may all contribute to her current clinical condition. Combined hormonal contraceptives, like the birth control pill, may be appropriate for certain lupus patients. However, caution should be exercised in individuals with highly active disease or heightened susceptibility to blood clots, such as those with positive antiphospholipid antibodies and previous instances of blood clots, among other risk factors (Basta et al., 2020). Extended periods of sitting can pose challenges for individuals with joint or muscle pain. Individuals with lupus may have an increased susceptibility to the formation of blood clots due to prolonged periods of sitting. It is advisable to take stretch breaks every hour while driving for extended periods, stand up, and frequently engage in movement during prolonged flights. 

Conclusion 

The patient has a history of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, she experiences flare-up symptoms due to risk factors, such as prolonged sitting during air travel. When managing this patient, it is essential to consider the genetic factors that contribute to the disease, particularly in patients from diverse racial backgrounds.     

 

References 

Aringer, M. (2020). Inflammatory markers in systemic lupus erythematosus. Journal of Autoimmunity, 110, 102374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2019.102374 

Barber, M. R., Drenkard, C., Falasinnu, T., Hoi, A., Mak, A., Kow, N. Y., Svenungsson, E., Peterson, J., Clarke, A. E., & Ramsey‐Goldman, R. (2021). Global epidemiology of systemic lupus erythematosus. Nature Reviews Rheumatology, 17(9), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41584-021-00668-1 

Basta, F., Fasola, F., Triantafyllias, K., & Schwarting, A. (2020). Systemic Lupus erythematosus (SLE) therapy: the old and the new. Rheumatology and Therapy, 7(3), 433–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-020-00212-9 

Dörner, T., & Furie, R. (2019). Novel paradigms in systemic lupus erythematosus. The Lancet, 393(10188), 2344–2358. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30546-x 

Fanouriakis, A., Tziolos, N., Βertsias, G., & Boumpas, D. T. (2020). Update οn the diagnosis and management of systemic lupus erythematosus. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 80(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-218272 

Tsokos, G. C. (2020). Autoimmunity and organ damage in systemic lupus erythematosus. Nature Immunology, 21(6), 605–614. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-020-0677-6 

 

NURS 6501 Week 4: Case Study Analysis Rubric 

 

NURS_6501_Module2_Case Study_Assignment_Rubric  
Criteria  Ratings  Pts  
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Develop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examing the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following:Explain both the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes of why the patient presents these symptoms.  
30 to >27.0 pts  

Excellent 

The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed reasons, with explanation for both the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 

27 to >24.0 pts  

Good 

The response describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate reasons, with explanation for both the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 

24 to >22.0 pts  

Fair 

The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. … The response includes reasons for the cardiovascular and/or cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes, with explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. 

22 to >0 pts  

Poor 

The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. … The response does not include reasons for either the cardiovascular or cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. 

 

30 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Explain how the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient.  
30 to >27.0 pts  

Excellent 

The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. 

27 to >24.0 pts  

Good 

The response includes an accurate explanation of how the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. 

24 to >22.0 pts  

Fair 

The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. 

22 to >0 pts  

Poor 

The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. 

 

30 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Explain any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning.  
25 to >22.0 pts  

Excellent 

The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 

22 to >19.0 pts  

Good 

The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 

19 to >17.0 pts  

Fair 

The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations based on inappropriate evidence/research. 

17 to >0 pts  

Poor 

The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. 

 

25 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.  
5 to >4.0 pts  

Excellent 

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. 

4 to >3.0 pts  

Good 

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive. 

3 to >2.0 pts  

Fair 

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. 

2 to >0 pts  

Poor 

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. 

 

5 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation  
5 to >4.0 pts  

Excellent 

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 

4 to >3.0 pts  

Good 

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 

3 to >2.0 pts  

Fair 

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 

2 to >0 pts  

Poor 

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. 

 

5 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.  
5 to >4.0 pts  

Excellent 

Uses correct APA format with no errors. 

4 to >3.0 pts  

Good 

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 

3 to >2.0 pts  

Fair 

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 

2 to >0 pts  

Poor 

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. 

 

5 pts 
Total Points: 100