NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Lab Assignment Assessing the Abdomen INS
Sample Answer for NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Lab Assignment Assessing the Abdomen INS Included After Question
Practicum Applications must be submitted in a timely manner to ensure that your Preceptor and Practicum Site meet the requirements of the College of Nursing and Walden University. For this Assignment, you will either submit your Practicum Application or you will submit a revised/updated Practicum Plan that indicates when you plan to take the Practicum courses.
To Prepare
- Review the Practicum Application Deadlines found on the College of Nursing Field Experience website to determine when you need to submit your Practicum Application.
- Review the Practicum Application Tutorial for submitting applications in Meditrek.
Meditrek Credentials (Username and Password):
- Your credentials have been emailed to your Walden student email address. Search your Walden student issued email to locate the email from [email protected]. (Note: Do not email Meditrek directly, please use the following methods if you are unable to locate your Meditrek credentials.)
- If you are unable to find your email, you may request your credentials emailed to you online by requesting a password reset online: https://edu.meditrek.com/public/ForgotPassword.aspx
- If you are unable to reset your password online, call the Customer Care Team Support at 800-925-3368 or live chat via your student portal.
The Assignment:
You must complete either Part 1 or Part 2 of this Assignment:
Part 1: Practicum Application
- Login into Meditrek and complete your Practicum Application. When the application is complete, submit it and create a PDF of the confirmation email you received.
Part 2: Practicum Plan
- Using the affiliation agreement search within Meditrek and identify potential Practicum Sites that are in your area to assist you in identifying potential Preceptors.
- Complete the Practicum Plan form found in Meditrek, submit it and create a PDF of the confirmation email you received.
By Day 7 of Week 10
Submit either your Practicum Application or Practicum Plan submission confirmation email PDF.
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
- Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK10Assgn2+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
- Click the Week 10 Assignment 2 Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
- Click the Week 10 Assignment 2 link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
- Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK10Assgn2+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
- If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
- Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Lab Assignment Assessing the Abdomen INS
Title: NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Lab Assignment Assessing the Abdomen INS
The SOAP note represents the subjective and objective findings of JR, a 47-year-old male presenting with symptoms of generalized abdominal pain and diarrhea. This paper aims to analyze the subjective, objective, and assessment portion of the SOAP note. The appropriate diagnostic tests and differential diagnoses for this case study will also be discussed.
Analysis of the Subjective Portion
HPI: The HPI states that the patient has generalized abdominal pain that had its onset three days ago. The severity of the pain has also be provided, and an associated symptom of nausea after eating. However, the HPI has missing information on the character of the abdominal pain, whether it is dull or sharp, radiating or non-radiating, and whether constant or intermittent. Additional information should also be provided on the presence or absence of other associated symptoms with the abdominal pain. In addition, factors that aggravate or relieve abdominal pain should have been provided. The HPI should also state whether the patient took any non-pharmacological interventions to relieve the pain and the degree of relief.
The HPI has not addressed the history of diarrhea. Information on the onset of diarrhea should have been indicated, including whether it was acute or gradual. Besides, the HPI should describe the character of diarrhea, including the frequency of loose stools per day, consistency, color, and volume of stools, or whether bloody or non-blood (Desselberger, 2017). Furthermore, associated enteric symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, fever, or rectal bleeding should be indicated. The HPI should also address food ingestion history or travel history that could have contributed to diarrhea (Desselberger, 2017). Factors that trigger or relieve diarrhea should also be provided, and any non-pharmacological measures the patient took to control diarrhea.
PMH: The PMH states that the patient has a history of Hypertension, Diabetes, and GI bleed four years ago. However, information on when the patient was diagnosed with Hypertension and Diabetes should be indicated and whether the Hypertension is controlled or uncontrolled.
Medications: Information on the patient’s current medications and the dosage has been included. However, additional information on the frequency of each drug should be provided. The subjective portion should also include additional information on past surgical and immunization history.
The social and personal history should include additional information, including the patient’s occupation, interests, the performance of ADLs, exercise, sleeping and eating habits, safety measures, and health promotion activities. The subjective portion has not included the review of systems that presents other symptoms the patient has that have not been included in the chief complaint and the HPI.
Analysis of the Objective Portion
The objective portion has provided vital signs measurements and physical findings of the heart, lungs, skin, and abdomen. However, it has not addressed the general patient’s survey findings. This entails the patient’s general state of health, level of conscience, dressing, grooming, and hygiene. The patient’s attitude towards the examiner, facial expressions, eye contact, affect, and mannerism should also be included. Besides, the general survey should provide information on the patient’s motor activity, posture, balance, and gait. This being a focused abdominal assessment, the abdominal exam findings are incomplete. It should have included detailed exam findings from the inspection, auscultation, percussion, and auscultation of the abdomen.
Additional information on the inspection findings should be provided, including contour, symmetry, pigmentation, scars, respiratory movements, and visible peristalsis. Auscultation findings should be included, such as the presence of bruits and friction rubs. Furthermore, percussion findings, including areas of tympany or dullness, liver span, the distance of the spleen from the left coastal margin, and tenderness on percussion, should be indicated. Additional information on palpation findings such as the presence of masses, muscle guarding, organ enlargement, or rebound tenderness should also be included in the abdominal exam.
Analysis of Assessment Portion
The assessment findings include Left lower quadrant pain and Gastroenteritis. Left lower quadrant pain is only supported by the objective findings but not the subjective information. In the subjective history, the patient reports experiencing moderate generalized abdominal pain, and the specific quadrant has not been indicated.
Gastroenteritis is supported by subjective information of generalized abdominal pain and diarrhea. Objective findings that support Gastroenteritis include a mild fever of 99.8 F, hyperactive bowel sounds, and pain on the left lower quadrant.
Appropriate diagnostic tests
Diagnostic tests appropriate to make a diagnosis for this case include:
- Complete Blood Count (CBC): A CBC test will establish the white blood cell count to assess leukocytosis. An elevated white blood cell count will indicate an underlying infection or inflammation (Mealie & Manthey, (2019). Mild leukocytosis will point to a viral infection, while a high white blood cell count will indicate a bacterial infection.
- Abdominal Ultrasound: An abdominal ultrasound will help in visualizing the presence of inflammation or organ enlargement of abdominal organs (Mealie & Manthey, (2019).
- Stool culture: A stool culture will establish the presence of pathogens that could be the causative agent of diarrhea (Desselberger, 2017).
Differential Diagnoses
The differential diagnoses in the assessment portion are Left lower quadrant pain and Gastroenteritis. I would reject the diagnosis of Left lower quadrant pain because this is a physical sign rather than a diagnosis. The left lower quadrant pain is a sign that suggests an underlying problem in an organ in the left lower quadrant, thus ruling it out as a differential diagnosis. I would accept Gastroenteritis as a differential diagnosis based on the patient’s history of generalized abdominal pain, diarrhea, low-grade fever, and hyperactive bowel sounds.
Conditions that may be considered as differential diagnoses for this patient include:
Diverticulitis
Diverticulitis is characterized by inflammation or infection of the diverticula, which are small pouches in the colonic wall (Onur et al., 2017). Diverticulitis can either be complicated or uncomplicated. Uncomplicated diverticulitis occurs without any associated complications. On the other hand, complicated diverticulitis occurs due to the formation of an abscess, fistula, bowel obstruction, or frank perforation (Swanson & Strate, 2018). The clinical manifestations of Diverticulitis include abdominal pain, which commonly occurs in the left lower quadrant (Onur et al., 2017). The abdominal pain can be constant or intermittent.
Abdominal pain is associated with a change in bowel patterns, which can either be diarrhea or constipation (Swanson & Strate, 2018). Fever is usually present in the case of an abscess or perforation. Other symptoms that present in diverticulitis include nausea, vomiting, flatulence, and abdominal bloating.
On physical examination, there is hypo-or hyperactive bowel sounds, tympanic abdomen on percussion, abdominal distension, and localized tenderness to palpation over the area of inflammation (Onur et al., 2017). A tender mass may be perceived if an abscess is present. Besides, patients can present with abdominal rigidity, guarding, or rebound tenderness with diverticular perforation.
Diverticulitis is a differential diagnosis based on the patient’s history of abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, low-grade fever, hyperactive bowel sounds, and tenderness on the left lower quadrant.
-
Acute Viral Gastroenteritis
Acute Viral Gastroenteritis (GE) refers to infection of the gastrointestinal tract by viral pathogens such as Rotavirus and norovirus (Desselberger, 2017). The primary manifestation of viral GE is diarrhea, which occurs as loose or watery diarrhea consisting of 3 or more bowel movements in a day (Stuempfig & Seroy, 2019). Other symptoms may include nausea, vomiting, fever, and abdominal pain. The symptoms typically last for less than a week and usually improve within 1 to 3 days (Stuempfig & Seroy, 2019). The symptoms have a sudden onset and may vary from mild to severe. Patients commonly present with mild fever, mild abdominal pain, and mild, diffuse abdominal tenderness (Desselberger, 2017). Vomiting is present in most, but not all cases.
Acute Viral GE is a differential diagnosis based on pertinent positive findings of abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, low-grade fever, hyperactive bowel sounds, and abdominal tenderness.
-
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is defined as abdominal pain or discomfort with altered bowel habits, either diarrhea, constipation, or both (Weaver, Melkus & Henderson, 2017). Common sites of abdominal pain include lower abdomen particularly left lower quadrant. Meals trigger pain while defecation alleviates the pain. Other common symptoms of IBS include bloating, distention, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, fever, rectal bleeding, and steatorrhea (Weaver, Melkus & Henderson, 2017). IBS is a differential diagnosis based on pertinent positive findings of abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, low-grade fever, and left lower quadrant pain.
References
Desselberger U. (2017). Viral gastroenteritis. Medicine (Abingdon, England: UK ed.), 45(11), 690–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.2017.08.005
Mealie, C. A., & Manthey, D. E. (2019). Abdominal exam. In StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing.
Onur, M. R., Akpinar, E., Karaosmanoglu, A. D., Isayev, C., & Karcaaltincaba, M. (2017). Diverticulitis: a comprehensive review with usual and unusual complications. Insights into Imaging, 8(1), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-016-0532-3
Stuempfig, N. D., & Seroy, J. (2019). Viral Gastroenteritis. In StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing.
Swanson, S. M., & Strate, L. L. (2018). Acute Colonic Diverticulitis. Annals of internal medicine, 168(9), ITC65–ITC80. https://doi.org/10.7326/AITC201805010
Weaver, K. R., Melkus, G. D., & Henderson, W. A. (2017). Irritable Bowel Syndrome. The American journal of nursing, 117(6), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000520253.57459.01
Week 6: Assessment of the Abdomen and Gastrointestinal System
On your way home from dinner, you start experiencing sharp pains in your abdomen. You ate seafood—could you have food poisoning? What else might be causing your pain? Appendicitis? Should you head to the emergency room, or should you wait and see how you feel in the morning?
Numerous ailments can affect the GI system and the abdomen. Because the organs are so close, it can be difficult to conduct an accurate assessment. Also, pain in another area of the body can affect the GI system. For example, patients with chronic migraines often report nausea.
This week, you will explore how to assess the abdomen and gastrointestinal system.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
- Evaluate abnormal abdomen and gastrointestinal findings
- Apply concepts, theories, and principles relating to health assessment techniques and diagnoses for the abdomen and gastrointestinal system
- Analyze chest X-Ray and abdominal X-Ray imaging
- Identify concepts, theories, and principles related to advanced health assessment
Learning Resources
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)
Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.
- Chapter 6, “Vital Signs and Pain Assessment”This chapter describes the experience of pain and its causes. The authors also describe the process of pain assessment.
- Chapter 18, “Abdomen”In this chapter, the authors summarize the anatomy and physiology of the abdomen. The authors also explain how to conduct an assessment of the abdomen.
Dains, J. E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. (2019). Advanced health assessment and clinical diagnosis in primary care (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.
Credit Line: Advanced Health Assessment and Clinical Diagnosis in Primary Care, 6th Edition by Dains, J.E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. Copyright 2019 by Mosby. Reprinted by permission of Mosby via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Colyar, M. R. (2015). Advanced practice nursing procedures. Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.
Credit Line: Advanced practice nursing procedures, 1st Edition by Colyar, M. R. Copyright 2015 by F. A. Davis Company. Reprinted by permission of F. A. Davis Company via the Copyright Clearance Center.
These sections below explain the procedural knowledge needed to perform gastrointestinal procedures.
Chapter 115, “X-Ray Interpretation of Abdomen” (pp. 514–520)
Note: Download this Student Checklist and Abdomen Key Points to use during your practice abdominal examination.
Document: Midterm Exam Review (Word document)
Optional Resource
LeBlond, R. F., Brown, D. D., & DeGowin, R. L. (2020). DeGowin’s diagnostic examination (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical.
- Chapter 9, “The Abdomen, Perineum, Anus, and Rectosigmoid”This chapter explores the health assessment processes for the abdomen, perineum, anus, and rectosigmoid. This chapter also examines the symptoms of many conditions in these areas.
- Chapter 10, “The Urinary System”In this chapter, the authors provide an overview of the physiology of the urinary system. The chapter also lists symptoms and conditions of the urinary system.
Required Media (click to expand/reduce)
Assessment of the Abdomen and Gastrointestinal System – Week 6 (14m)
Online media for Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination
It is highly recommended that you access and view the resources included with the course text, Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination. Focus on the videos and animations in Chapter 17 that relate to the assessment of the abdomen and gastrointestinal system. Refer to Week 4 for access instructions on https://evolve.elsevier.com/
Assignment 1: Lab Assignment: Assessing the Abdomen
Photo Credit: Getty Images/Hero Images
A male went to the emergency room for severe midepigastric abdominal pain. He was diagnosed with AAA ; however, as a precaution, the doctor ordered a CTA scan.
Because of a high potential for misdiagnosis, determining the precise cause of abdominal pain can be time consuming and challenging. By analyzing case studies of abnormal abdominal findings, nurses can prepare themselves to better diagnose conditions in the abdomen.
In this Lab Assignment, you will analyze an Episodic note case study that describes abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting. You will consider what history should be collected from the patients as well as which physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted. You will also formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible conditions.
To Prepare
Review the Episodic note case study your instructor provides you for this week’s Assignment. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your Episodic note case study.
- With regard to the Episodic note case study provided:
- Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study.
- Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient in the case study.
- Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
- Identify at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.
The Assignment
- Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
- Analyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
- Is the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not?
- What diagnostic tests would be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
- Would you reject/accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not? Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differential diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
By Day 7 of Week 6
Submit your Lab Assignment.
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
- Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK6Assgn1+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
- Click the Week 6 Assignment 1 Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
- Click the Week 6 Assignment 1 link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
- Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK6Assgn1+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
- If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
- Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 6 Assignment 1 Rubric
Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity
To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:
Submit your Week 6 Assignment 1 draft and review the originality report.
Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 6
To participate in this Assignment:
Week 6 Assignment 1
Exam: Week 6 Midterm Exam
This exam is a test of your knowledge in preparation for your certification exam. No outside resources, including books, notes, websites, or any other type of resource, are to be used to complete this exam. You are expected to comply with Walden University’s Code of Conduct.
This exam will be on topics covered in weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Prior to starting the exam, you should review all of your materials. This exam is timed with a limit of 2 hours for completion. When time is up, your exam will automatically submit.
By Day 7 of Week 6
Submit your Midterm Exam.
Submission and Grading Information
Submit Your Midterm Exam by Day 7 of Week 6.
To Complete this Exam:
Week 6 Exam
Assignment 2: Lab Assignment DCE
The causes of abdominal pain can be extremely varied due to the sheer number of structures, organs, and functions within the abdomen. If abdominal pain is caused by a life-threatening condition, then swift and accurate assessment is essential.
In preparation for the Comprehensive (Head-to-Toe) Physical Assessment due in Week 9, it is recommended that you practice performing an abdominal examination this week.
Focused Exam: Abdominal Assignment:
- Complete the following in Shadow Health:
- Abdominal Concept Lab (Required)
- Gastrointestinal (Practice)
- Focused Exam: Abdominal Pain (Practice)
What’s Coming Up in Week 7?
Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
Next week, you will explore how to assess the heart, lungs, and peripheral vascular system as you complete your Discussion.
Week 7 Required Media
Photo Credit: [fergregory]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
Next week, you will need to view several videos and animations in the Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination as well as other media, as required, prior to completing your Discussion. There are several videos of various lengths. Please plan ahead to ensure you have time to view these media programs to complete your Discussion on time.
A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Lab Assignment Assessing the Abdomen INS
Title: NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Lab Assignment Assessing the Abdomen INS
The abdominal compartment situated between the thorax and pelvis houses the gastrointestinal system as well as other organs such as the kidneys and spleen. The abdomen and the gastrointestinal system encounter physiologic disturbances resulting in several pathologies that range in severity from mild to life-threatening. Consequently, clinical assessment of the abdomen and gastrointestinal system is imperative to assist in prompt diagnosis of these pathologies and initiation of the necessary therapeutic approaches. This paper will explore a case study concerning LZ, a 65-year-old African American male who presents to the emergency department with a two-day history of epigastric pain radiating to the back. The subsequent paragraphs will explore subjective and objective details as well as the assessment of this case scenario.
Subjective
LZ presents with a sudden onset two-day history of intermittent epigastric pain that radiates to the back. The pain has persisted despite the use of proton pump inhibitors. However, he reports an increase in severity and vomiting although there is no associated fever or diarrhea. Epigastric abdominal pain is a non-specific symptom that may indicate both gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal etiologies. Consequently, further evaluation is required, and the additional history to inquire about the history of presenting illness includes the following: The character of the pain must be mentioned since some pathologies present with sharp pain while others present with a colicky pain. Similarly, it is important to ask about the timing of the pain. For instance, if it is worse at any particular time of the day. Factors aggravating and relieving the pain provide an important clue to the underlying etiology. Consequently, it is worth inquiring about the effects of a change of position on the pain. For instance, if it is worse or better in any distinct position. Similarly, noting the impact of eating on the pain is equally important.
Associated factors are crucial as most pathologies that present with epigastric pain also manifest with other symptoms. Apart from fever and diarrhea, questions regarding symptoms such as cough, chest pain, nausea, anorexia, hematuria, hematemesis, bloating, belching, nocturnal pain, indigestion, weight loss, dizziness, diaphoresis, anxiety, and alterations in bowel habits must be raised. LZ also vomited after taking his lunch. Subsequently, additional questions to ask include the number of episodes, constituents, amount, and the color of the vomitus, if other family members who ate the same meal vomited, and associated factors since vomiting is a non-specific symptom. Other parts of history that are considered significant include history of medication use particularly NSAIDs, steroids, and anticonvulsants among others, history of trauma, nutritional history including the diet and caffeine intake, and family history of similar presentation.
Additionally, LZ has a positive history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and GERD as well as a history of alcohol and smoking. The aforementioned factors are regarded as significant risk factors underlying several gastrointestinal pathologies. Consequently, it is important to quantify both smoking and alcohol intake and determine if the blood pressure and hyperlipidemia are well controlled. Finally, it is necessary to ask if he is stressed following divorce.
Objective
The analysis of the vital signs demonstrates that LZ with a blood pressure of 91/60 mmHg is hypotensive since he is a known hypertensive patient on metoprolol. Similarly, he is overweight which carries moderate health risks. The respiratory, dermatological, and cardiovascular systems revealed no abnormalities. Nevertheless, exhaustive examination with regards to inspection, palpation, auscultation, and percussion is crucial, particularly for the chest. auscultation particularly for the chest Findings noted on the abdominal exam include tenderness in the epigastric area with guarding although no masses or rebound tenderness. Additional features that are crucial to highlight in the physical examination include the general exam which focuses on the general appearance of the patient. Similarly, a detailed abdominal examination including comprehensive findings on auscultation, inspection, palpation, and percussion is crucial since different diseases present with different abdominal signs. Finally, a neurological examination is also significant as vomiting can be a manifestation of neurologic disease.
Assessment
Investigations necessary to assist in the diagnosis of his condition and rule out other causes of epigastric pain include both laboratory and radiological studies. Laboratory investigations include complete blood count with differential, urea, creatinine, and electrolytes, liver function tests, coagulation profile, serum amylase, and lipase levels, ESR/CRP, procalcitonin, blood glucose levels, LDH, lactate levels, serum triglycerides, calcium levels, stool for H. pylori antigen, and serum gastrin levels. The abovementioned laboratory tests are vital in evaluating the common causes of epigastric pain radiating to the back such as acute pancreatitis and peptic ulcer disease (Patterson et al., 2022).
On the other hand, imaging tests include ECG to rule out pericarditis, abdominal ultrasound to check for gallstones, liver or renal problems, abdominal X-ray which may reveal pneumoperitoneum in the case of a perforated ulcer, Chest X-ray and CT thorax, abdomen and Pelvis to identify possible pancreatitis and abdominal aortic aneurysm (Patterson et al., 2022). Finally, endoscopy is critical as both GERD and peptic ulcer disease are possible differentials.
Abdominal aortic aneurysm, acute pancreatitis, and perforated peptic ulcer are among the potential diagnosis for LZ’s presentation. Abdominal aortic aneurism refers to focal dilatation of the abdominal aorta to more than 1.5 times its ordinary diameter (Sakalihasan et al., 2018). Predisposing factors for this condition include advanced age, smoking, arterial hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia which LZ possesses (Sakalihasan et al., 2018). It is usually asymptomatic but may present with epigastric pain radiating to the back and pulsatile abdominal mass. A perforated peptic ulcer is another possible cause of his symptoms. Peptic ulcer disease shares similar risk factors as GERD including alcohol use and smoking. Psychological stress probably due to divorce is also a risk factor. The patient usually presents with epigastric pain which may radiate to the back. However, if perforated, features of peritonitis such as tenderness and guarding may be evident with no palpable mass (Malik et al., 2022). Acute pancreatitis similarly manifests with severe epigastric pain radiating to the back, abdominal tenderness, guarding, and nausea and vomiting (Shah et al., 2018). Additionally, LZ has a history of alcohol use and hyperlipidemia which may precipitate pancreatitis.
The other possible differential diagnoses for his condition include causes of acute abdomen particularly those causing epigastric pain such as acute mesenteric ischemia, myocardial infarction, acute gastritis, and Mallory Weiss syndrome (Patterson et al., 2022). For instance, acute mesenteric ischemia may present with epigastric pain, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting, and signs of peritonitis while Mallory Weiss syndrome manifests with epigastric pain/back pain, hematemesis, and signs of shock. Finally, myocardial infarction at times manifests as epigastric pain accompanied by nausea and vomiting, dizziness, dyspnea with exertion, and diaphoresis (Saleh & Ambrose, 2018). This is a potential differential diagnosis as LZ has risk factors for cardiovascular disease such as hypertension, smoking, alcohol use, and hyperlipidemia.
Conclusion
Meticulous evaluation of the abdominal and gastrointestinal systems is essential as it may point out an underlying diagnosis. Abdominal pain is a very non-specific symptom and may result from gastrointestinal or non-gastrointestinal causes. However, severe epigastric pain radiating to the back may be an indication of abdominal aortic aneurysm, acute pancreatitis, and perforated peptic ulcer.
References
Malik, T. F., Gnanapandithan, K., & Singh, K. (2022). Peptic ulcer disease. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30521213/
Patterson, J. W., Kashyap, S., & Dominique, E. (2022). Acute Abdomen. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29083722/
Sakalihasan, N., Michel, J.-B., Katsargyris, A., Kuivaniemi, H., Defraigne, J.-O., Nchimi, A., Powell, J. T., Yoshimura, K., & Hultgren, R. (2018). Abdominal aortic aneurysms. Nature Reviews. Disease Primers, 4(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-018-0030-7
Saleh, M., & Ambrose, J. A. (2018). Understanding myocardial infarction. F1000Research, 7, 1378. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15096.1
Shah, A. P., Mourad, M. M., & Bramhall, S. R. (2018). Acute pancreatitis: current perspectives on diagnosis and management. Journal of Inflammation Research, 11, 77–85. https://doi.org/10.2147/JIR.S135751
Rubric Detail
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| With regard to the SOAP note case study provided, address the following:
Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation. |
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 12 (12%)
The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation. |
Points Range: 7 (7%) – 9 (9%)
The response accurately analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 6 (6%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy lists additional information to be included in the documentation. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
The response inaccurately analyzes or is missing analysis of the subjective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation. |
|
| Analyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation. | Points Range: 10 (10%) – 12 (12%)
The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation. |
Points Range: 7 (7%) – 9 (9%)
The response accurately analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 6 (6%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or inaccurately lists additional information to be included in the documentation. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
The response inaccurately analyzes or is missing analysis of the objective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation. |
|
| Is the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not? | Points Range: 14 (14%) – 16 (16%)
The response clearly and accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a thorough and detailed explanation. |
Points Range: 11 (11%) – 13 (13%)
The response accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an explanation. |
Points Range: 8 (8%) – 10 (10%)
The response vaguely and/or inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a vague explanation. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 7 (7%)
The response inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an inaccurate or missing explanation. |
|
| What diagnostic tests would be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis? | Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response thoroughly and accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly, thoroughly, and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. |
Points Range: 15 (15%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. |
Points Range: 12 (12%) – 14 (14%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
The response inaccurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case, with an inaccurate or missing explanation of how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. |
|
| · Would you reject or accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not? · Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differenial diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature. |
Points Range: 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)
The response states clearly whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a thorough, accurate, and detailed explanation of sound reasoning. The response clearly, thoroughly, and accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained clearly, accurately, and thoroughly using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature. |
Points Range: 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)
The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an accurate explanation of sound reasoning. The response accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained accurately using three different references from current evidence-based literature. |
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 19 (19%)
The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a vague explanation of the reasoning. The response identifies two or three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained vaguely and/or inaccurately using three references from current evidence-based literature. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 16 (16%)
The response inaccurately or is missing a statement of whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an explanation that is inaccurate and/or missing. The response identifies two or fewer conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is missing or explained inaccurately using three or fewer references from current evidence-based literature. |
|
| 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. |
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
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. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
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. |
Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
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. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. |
|
| Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation |
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
|
| 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. | Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. |
Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. |
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||
Name: NURS_6512_Week_6_Assignment_1_Rubric
NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Lab Assignment Assessing the Abdomen INS Grading Rubric
| Performance Category | 100% or highest level of performance
100% 16 points |
Very good or high level of performance
88% 14 points |
Acceptable level of performance
81% 13 points |
Inadequate demonstration of expectations
68% 11 points |
Deficient level of performance
56% 9 points
|
Failing level
of performance 55% or less 0 points |
| Total Points Possible= 50 | 16 Points | 14 Points | 13 Points | 11 Points | 9 Points | 0 Points |
| Scholarliness
Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic topics. |
Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three or more of the following elements
|
| 16 Points | 14 Points | 13 Points | 11 Points | 9 Points | 0 Points | |
| Application of Course Knowledge
Demonstrate the ability to analyze and apply principles, knowledge and information learned in the outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations |
Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in the all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three of the following elements
|
| 10 Points | 9 Points | 6 Points | 0 Points | |||
| Interactive Dialogue
Initial post should be a minimum of 300 words (references do not count toward word count) The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each (references do not count toward word count) Responses are substantive and relate to the topic. |
Demonstrated all of the following:
|
Demonstrated 3 of the following:
|
Demonstrated 2 of the following:
|
Demonstrated 1 or less of the following:
|
||
| 8 Points | 7 Points | 6 Points | 5 Points | 4 Points | 0 Points | |
| Grammar, Syntax, APA
Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition Error is defined to be a unique APA error. Same type of error is only counted as one error. |
The following was present:
AND
AND
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
| 0 Points Deducted | 5 Points Lost | |||||
| Participation
Requirements |
Demonstrated the following:
|
Failed to demonstrate the following:
|
||||
| 0 Points Lost | 5 Points Lost | |||||
| Due Date Requirements | Demonstrated all of the following:
A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT. |
Demonstrates one or less of the following.
A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT. |
Check Out Also: NURS 6512 Assignment 1 Case Study Assignment Assessment Tools and Diagnostic Tests in Adults and Children IN