Category: Nursing

  • [Solved] SWOT Analysis

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    **files (2)** – ## SWOTAnalysis.docx – ## ReducingMedicationErrorsthroughMedicationReconciliationatAdmissionandDischarge-Literature1.docx **## SWOTAnalysis.docx** 1. You are going to construct an APA formatted paper for the assignment. 2. Provide an APA formatted title page. 3. Develop an introdu…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    **files (2)**

    – ## SWOTAnalysis.docx

    – ## ReducingMedicationErrorsthroughMedicationReconciliationatAdmissionandDischarge-Literature1.docx

    **## SWOTAnalysis.docx**

    1. You are going to construct an APA formatted paper for the assignment.

    2. Provide an APA formatted title page.

    3. Develop an introduction section that discusses the professional nurses’ role for implementation of an improvement project.

    4. Provide a review of the practice problem and supporting evidence of its existence and significance using the
    **original article only** from the Unit 4 literature list (include any suggested edits from the faculty).

    5. Review the evidence-based intervention and rationale for its selection at your clinical practice from the Unit 5 paper.

    1. Make sure to clarify your clinical practice setting and why this intervention was the best choice for this setting (this should not be generalized, but specific to your current clinical practice setting)

    6. Create a
    **SWOT chart** that provides three (3) bullet points each for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that may be observed with the implementation process for the intervention you selected in the unit 5 assignment.

    7. Write a narrative discussion for each SWOT (based on the knowledge-to-action framework). Address EACH bullet point listed in the chart within the narrative of the corresponding section:

    1.
    **Strengths** of the
    practice that would support change were you to implement the selected intervention.

    2.
    **Weaknesses** of the
    practice that would resist change were you to implement the selected intervention.

    3.
    **Opportunities** that a change might
    result in were you to implement the selected intervention.

    4.
    **Threats** that represent actual or potential
    barriers were you to implement the selected intervention.

    8. Develop a conclusion section for the paper that summarizes the content and your thoughts about the significance of completing a SWOT analysis prior to implementing an intervention to address a practice problem.

    9. Provide an APA formatted reference page and include citations for each source in the body of the assignment where appropriate.

    **The assignment requirements include that you upload a file of the full-text article for each listed reference.**

    Breuker, C., Macioce, V., Mura, T., Castet-Nicolas, A., Audurier, Y., Boegner, C., &

    Sultan, A. (2021). Medication errors at hospital admission and discharge:

    Risk factors and impact of medication reconciliation process to improve

    healthcare.

    Journal of Patient Safety,

    17(7), e645-e652.

    [https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420](https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420)

    **## ReducingMedicationErrorsthroughMedicationReconciliationatAdmissionandDischarge-Literature1.docx**

    1

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Student’s Name

    Institutional Affiliation

    Course

    Instructor

    Date

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Professional nurses are strategically positioned to identify practice problems because they work at the point where patient needs, care processes, and clinical outcomes intersect. In everyday practice, nurses detect gaps in safety and quality through medication administration, admission assessment, discharge planning, incident review, and participation in quality improvement activities. Evidence from the literature allows nurses to move beyond recognizing a problem to selecting and implementing interventions that are credible, measurable, and relevant to practice. One persistent problem observed during transitions of care is medication discrepancy at hospital admission and discharge, when incomplete medication histories, inconsistent documentation, and communication failures can lead to preventable medication errors. This paper examines that practice problem using Breuker et al. (2021) as the original source article and argues that a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement is the most appropriate evidence-based intervention for an acute care medical-surgical setting.

    **Practice Problem**

    Breuker et al. (2021) identified unintended medication discrepancies at admission and discharge as a significant patient safety problem in hospitalized adults. In their prospective observational study of 904 patients, 29.4% experienced at least one unintended medication discrepancy across these transitions. Of those discrepancies, 98.2% were classified as medication errors, demonstrating that the problem extends well beyond minor documentation inconsistencies. Omissions were the most common error type, accounting for 59.3% of cases. The seriousness of the problem is further underscored by the authors’ finding that 36% of the errors were serious or very serious and that nearly 40% had the potential for moderate clinical impact. The study also identified polypharmacy as a major risk factor, with error rates increasing as the number of medications increased.

    The significance of this problem is substantial for both patients and healthcare systems. Medication discrepancies at transition points can contribute to adverse drug events, treatment delays, avoidable readmissions, prolonged hospitalization, and increased cost. Breuker et al. (2021) demonstrate that these events are common rather than exceptional, particularly in patients with complex medication regimens. Their findings make clear that medication reconciliation is not simply a regulatory documentation requirement; it is a high-value safety process that requires sustained attention from clinicians. Because nurses routinely obtain histories, compare medication lists, administer medications, communicate with prescribers and pharmacists, and reinforce discharge teaching, the problem is especially relevant to nursing practice.

    **Literature Review: Standardized Interdisciplinary Medication Reconciliation with Strong Nursing Involvement**

    Recent literature supports one intervention as the best fit for practice: a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement at admission and discharge. Rather than relying on informal medication review, this intervention uses a structured workflow for obtaining the best possible medication history, reconciling medications in the electronic health record, clarifying discrepancies with pharmacists and prescribers, educating patients and families, and monitoring compliance through audits or feedback. Across the literature, the most effective versions of this intervention share the same core features—standardization, role clarity, interdisciplinary communication, and accountability.

    The first major theme in the literature is that standardization reduces discrepancy rates and improves completion of reconciliation tasks. In a multicenter quality improvement project across 18 hospitals, Alghamdi et al. (2023) implemented standardized medication reconciliation protocols, interdisciplinary workflows, documentation expectations, and improvement cycles. The project reduced the percentage of patients with at least one outstanding unintentional discrepancy from 27% to 7% at admission and from 17% to 5% at discharge, while also improving documentation compliance within 24 hours. Similarly, Xu et al. (2025) reported that when an interdisciplinary team introduced a standardized admission medication reconciliation workflow, targeted education, and feedback in post-acute care facilities, completion rates improved from 13% to 87% in one unit and from 51% to 82% in another. Together, these studies show that reliable structures, not individual vigilance alone, are central to safer transitions of care.

    A second theme is that nursing involvement is not peripheral to reconciliation success; it is one of the mechanisms by which the intervention works. Han et al. (2024) describe nurse-led medication management during transitional care as a critical component in preventing drug-related problems. Their review highlights nursing responsibilities in information collection and evaluation, communication and education, support for medication adherence, and coordination among healthcare professionals. This perspective is important because it helps explain why reconciliation improves outcomes when nurses are deliberately integrated into the process. Nurses are often the clinicians with the most sustained patient contact during admission, hospitalization, and discharge, which places them in a strong position to identify inconsistencies, reinforce education, and recognize barriers such as low health literacy, regimen complexity, or medication access problems.

    A third theme is implementation feasibility. The evidence suggests that a nurse-integrated reconciliation process can be incorporated into routine practice without depending exclusively on additional pharmacy staffing. Xu et al. (2025) found improvement through workflow redesign, EHR optimization, provider education, and feedback rather than through expansion of pharmacy resources. Alghamdi et al. (2023) likewise demonstrated that large-scale improvement was possible across diverse hospitals when roles, measures, and accountability structures were clarified. In practical terms, the literature supports an intervention that can be adapted to real clinical environments: nurses can lead medication history collection, discrepancy identification, and discharge teaching; pharmacists can focus on complex review and high-risk cases; and prescribers can make final decisions and order corrections. Synthesized across the three studies, the evidence indicates that the strongest intervention is not a single isolated task, but a coordinated, standardized reconciliation process in which nursing participation is explicit and central.

    **Why This Is the Best Evidence-Based Intervention for My Clinical Practice Setting**

    For an acute care medical-surgical setting, this intervention is the best evidence-based choice because it aligns closely with how care is actually delivered. Nurses provide continuous bedside coverage and are present at the exact moments when discrepancies are most likely to surface, during admission assessment, medication administration, patient teaching, and discharge preparation. A standardized reconciliation process supports nurses in these responsibilities by giving them a clear workflow and defined expectations rather than leaving safety to variable individual practice.

    This intervention is also realistic and sustainable. It builds on resources already present in most hospital settings by clarifying who does what: nurses collect and verify medication information, identify discrepancies, and provide patient education; pharmacists review complex regimens and high-risk concerns; and prescribers resolve discrepancies through order decisions. That role differentiation is especially valuable in settings with high admission and discharge volumes, where medication errors are more likely if responsibilities are ambiguous. The intervention directly addresses the polypharmacy-related risk identified by Breuker et al. (2021) and offers measurable outcomes, such as discrepancy rates, reconciliation completion rates, documentation compliance, and safety event trends.

    Finally, this intervention fits the Knowledge-to-Action approach because it translates a clearly identified knowledge-practice gap into a feasible change process. The evidence does not merely confirm that discrepancies exist; it shows how organizations can reduce them through education, workflow redesign, interdisciplinary coordination, and ongoing monitoring. In that sense, the intervention is both evidence based and practice ready.

    **Conclusion**

    Medication discrepancies at hospital admission and discharge represent a prevalent and clinically meaningful practice problem. Breuker et al. (2021) establish the seriousness of the issue by showing that nearly one-third of hospitalized patients experienced at least one unintended discrepancy and that many of those errors carried the potential for significant harm. Current evidence supports a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement as the most appropriate intervention for reducing this risk. The literature shows that medication reconciliation is most effective when it is structured, team based, and reinforced through education, role clarity, EHR support, and accountability measures. For nursing, the problem is especially important because nurses are central to assessment, communication, patient education, and continuity across transitions of care. Using evidence from the literature to guide practice change strengthens patient safety, improves care coordination, and demonstrates the value of professional nursing judgment in addressing real clinical problems.

    **References**

    Alghamdi, D. S., Alhrasen, M., Kassem, A., Alwagdani, A., Tourkmani, A. M., Alnowaiser, N., Al Barakah, Y., & Alotaibi, Y. K. (2023). Implementation of medication reconciliation at admission and discharge in Ministry of Defense Health Services hospitals: A multicentre study. BMJ Open Quality, 12(2), e002121.
    [https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121](https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121)

    Breuker, C., Macioce, V., Mura, T., Castet-Nicolas, A., Audurier, Y., Boegner, C., & Sultan, A. (2021). Medication errors at hospital admission and discharge: Risk factors and impact of medication reconciliation process to improve healthcare. Journal of Patient Safety, 17(7), e645-e652.
    [https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420](https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420)

    Han, Y., Chen, J., Xu, Y., Huang, P., & Hou, L. (2024). Nurse-led medication management as a critical component of transitional care for preventing drug-related problems. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 36, 151.
    [https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3)

    Xu, K., Renzi, N., & Ragusa, L. (2025). Iterative interventions to improve admission medication reconciliation completion rates and reduce medication errors at post-acute care facilities. Patient Safety, 7(2).
    [https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045](https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045)

    **## ReducingMedicationErrorsthroughMedicationReconciliationatAdmissionandDischarge-Literature1.docx**

    1

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Student’s Name

    Institutional Affiliation

    Course

    Instructor

    Date

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Professional nurses are strategically positioned to identify practice problems because they work at the point where patient needs, care processes, and clinical outcomes intersect. In everyday practice, nurses detect gaps in safety and quality through medication administration, admission assessment, discharge planning, incident review, and participation in quality improvement activities. Evidence from the literature allows nurses to move beyond recognizing a problem to selecting and implementing interventions that are credible, measurable, and relevant to practice. One persistent problem observed during transitions of care is medication discrepancy at hospital admission and discharge, when incomplete medication histories, inconsistent documentation, and communication failures can lead to preventable medication errors. This paper examines that practice problem using Breuker et al. (2021) as the original source article and argues that a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement is the most appropriate evidence-based intervention for an acute care medical-surgical setting.

    **Practice Problem**

    Breuker et al. (2021) identified unintended medication discrepancies at admission and discharge as a significant patient safety problem in hospitalized adults. In their prospective observational study of 904 patients, 29.4% experienced at least one unintended medication discrepancy across these transitions. Of those discrepancies, 98.2% were classified as medication errors, demonstrating that the problem extends well beyond minor documentation inconsistencies. Omissions were the most common error type, accounting for 59.3% of cases. The seriousness of the problem is further underscored by the authors’ finding that 36% of the errors were serious or very serious and that nearly 40% had the potential for moderate clinical impact. The study also identified polypharmacy as a major risk factor, with error rates increasing as the number of medications increased.

    The significance of this problem is substantial for both patients and healthcare systems. Medication discrepancies at transition points can contribute to adverse drug events, treatment delays, avoidable readmissions, prolonged hospitalization, and increased cost. Breuker et al. (2021) demonstrate that these events are common rather than exceptional, particularly in patients with complex medication regimens. Their findings make clear that medication reconciliation is not simply a regulatory documentation requirement; it is a high-value safety process that requires sustained attention from clinicians. Because nurses routinely obtain histories, compare medication lists, administer medications, communicate with prescribers and pharmacists, and reinforce discharge teaching, the problem is especially relevant to nursing practice.

    **Literature Review: Standardized Interdisciplinary Medication Reconciliation with Strong Nursing Involvement**

    Recent literature supports one intervention as the best fit for practice: a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement at admission and discharge. Rather than relying on informal medication review, this intervention uses a structured workflow for obtaining the best possible medication history, reconciling medications in the electronic health record, clarifying discrepancies with pharmacists and prescribers, educating patients and families, and monitoring compliance through audits or feedback. Across the literature, the most effective versions of this intervention share the same core features—standardization, role clarity, interdisciplinary communication, and accountability.

    The first major theme in the literature is that standardization reduces discrepancy rates and improves completion of reconciliation tasks. In a multicenter quality improvement project across 18 hospitals, Alghamdi et al. (2023) implemented standardized medication reconciliation protocols, interdisciplinary workflows, documentation expectations, and improvement cycles. The project reduced the percentage of patients with at least one outstanding unintentional discrepancy from 27% to 7% at admission and from 17% to 5% at discharge, while also improving documentation compliance within 24 hours. Similarly, Xu et al. (2025) reported that when an interdisciplinary team introduced a standardized admission medication reconciliation workflow, targeted education, and feedback in post-acute care facilities, completion rates improved from 13% to 87% in one unit and from 51% to 82% in another. Together, these studies show that reliable structures, not individual vigilance alone, are central to safer transitions of care.

    A second theme is that nursing involvement is not peripheral to reconciliation success; it is one of the mechanisms by which the intervention works. Han et al. (2024) describe nurse-led medication management during transitional care as a critical component in preventing drug-related problems. Their review highlights nursing responsibilities in information collection and evaluation, communication and education, support for medication adherence, and coordination among healthcare professionals. This perspective is important because it helps explain why reconciliation improves outcomes when nurses are deliberately integrated into the process. Nurses are often the clinicians with the most sustained patient contact during admission, hospitalization, and discharge, which places them in a strong position to identify inconsistencies, reinforce education, and recognize barriers such as low health literacy, regimen complexity, or medication access problems.

    A third theme is implementation feasibility. The evidence suggests that a nurse-integrated reconciliation process can be incorporated into routine practice without depending exclusively on additional pharmacy staffing. Xu et al. (2025) found improvement through workflow redesign, EHR optimization, provider education, and feedback rather than through expansion of pharmacy resources. Alghamdi et al. (2023) likewise demonstrated that large-scale improvement was possible across diverse hospitals when roles, measures, and accountability structures were clarified. In practical terms, the literature supports an intervention that can be adapted to real clinical environments: nurses can lead medication history collection, discrepancy identification, and discharge teaching; pharmacists can focus on complex review and high-risk cases; and prescribers can make final decisions and order corrections. Synthesized across the three studies, the evidence indicates that the strongest intervention is not a single isolated task, but a coordinated, standardized reconciliation process in which nursing participation is explicit and central.

    **Why This Is the Best Evidence-Based Intervention for My Clinical Practice Setting**

    For an acute care medical-surgical setting, this intervention is the best evidence-based choice because it aligns closely with how care is actually delivered. Nurses provide continuous bedside coverage and are present at the exact moments when discrepancies are most likely to surface, during admission assessment, medication administration, patient teaching, and discharge preparation. A standardized reconciliation process supports nurses in these responsibilities by giving them a clear workflow and defined expectations rather than leaving safety to variable individual practice.

    This intervention is also realistic and sustainable. It builds on resources already present in most hospital settings by clarifying who does what: nurses collect and verify medication information, identify discrepancies, and provide patient education; pharmacists review complex regimens and high-risk concerns; and prescribers resolve discrepancies through order decisions. That role differentiation is especially valuable in settings with high admission and discharge volumes, where medication errors are more likely if responsibilities are ambiguous. The intervention directly addresses the polypharmacy-related risk identified by Breuker et al. (2021) and offers measurable outcomes, such as discrepancy rates, reconciliation completion rates, documentation compliance, and safety event trends.

    Finally, this intervention fits the Knowledge-to-Action approach because it translates a clearly identified knowledge-practice gap into a feasible change process. The evidence does not merely confirm that discrepancies exist; it shows how organizations can reduce them through education, workflow redesign, interdisciplinary coordination, and ongoing monitoring. In that sense, the intervention is both evidence based and practice ready.

    **Conclusion**

    Medication discrepancies at hospital admission and discharge represent a prevalent and clinically meaningful practice problem. Breuker et al. (2021) establish the seriousness of the issue by showing that nearly one-third of hospitalized patients experienced at least one unintended discrepancy and that many of those errors carried the potential for significant harm. Current evidence supports a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement as the most appropriate intervention for reducing this risk. The literature shows that medication reconciliation is most effective when it is structured, team based, and reinforced through education, role clarity, EHR support, and accountability measures. For nursing, the problem is especially important because nurses are central to assessment, communication, patient education, and continuity across transitions of care. Using evidence from the literature to guide practice change strengthens patient safety, improves care coordination, and demonstrates the value of professional nursing judgment in addressing real clinical problems.

    **References**

    Alghamdi, D. S., Alhrasen, M., Kassem, A., Alwagdani, A., Tourkmani, A. M., Alnowaiser, N., Al Barakah, Y., & Alotaibi, Y. K. (2023). Implementation of medication reconciliation at admission and discharge in Ministry of Defense Health Services hospitals: A multicentre study. BMJ Open Quality, 12(2), e002121.
    [https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121](https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121)

    Breuker, C., Macioce, V., Mura, T., Castet-Nicolas, A., Audurier, Y., Boegner, C., & Sultan, A. (2021). Medication errors at hospital admission and discharge: Risk factors and impact of medication reconciliation process to improve healthcare. Journal of Patient Safety, 17(7), e645-e652.
    [https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420](https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420)

    Han, Y., Chen, J., Xu, Y., Huang, P., & Hou, L. (2024). Nurse-led medication management as a critical component of transitional care for preventing drug-related problems. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 36, 151.
    [https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3)

    Xu, K., Renzi, N., & Ragusa, L. (2025). Iterative interventions to improve admission medication reconciliation completion rates and reduce medication errors at post-acute care facilities. Patient Safety, 7(2).
    [https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045](https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045)

    **## SWOTAnalysis.docx**

    1. You are going to construct an APA formatted paper for the assignment.

    2. Provide an APA formatted title page.

    3. Develop an introduction section that discusses the professional nurses’ role for implementation of an improvement project.

    4. Provide a review of the practice problem and supporting evidence of its existence and significance using the
    **original article only** from the Unit 4 literature list (include any suggested edits from the faculty).

    5. Review the evidence-based intervention and rationale for its selection at your clinical practice from the Unit 5 paper.

    1. Make sure to clarify your clinical practice setting and why this intervention was the best choice for this setting (this should not be generalized, but specific to your current clinical practice setting)

    6. Create a
    **SWOT chart** that provides three (3) bullet points each for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that may be observed with the implementation process for the intervention you selected in the unit 5 assignment.

    7. Write a narrative discussion for each SWOT (based on the knowledge-to-action framework). Address EACH bullet point listed in the chart within the narrative of the corresponding section:

    1.
    **Strengths** of the
    practice that would support change were you to implement the selected intervention.

    2.
    **Weaknesses** of the
    practice that would resist change were you to implement the selected intervention.

    3.
    **Opportunities** that a change might
    result in were you to implement the selected intervention.

    4.
    **Threats** that represent actual or potential
    barriers were you to implement the selected intervention.

    8. Develop a conclusion section for the paper that summarizes the content and your thoughts about the significance of completing a SWOT analysis prior to implementing an intervention to address a practice problem.

    9. Provide an APA formatted reference page and include citations for each source in the body of the assignment where appropriate.

    **The assignment requirements include that you upload a file of the full-text article for each listed reference.**

    Breuker, C., Macioce, V., Mura, T., Castet-Nicolas, A., Audurier, Y., Boegner, C., &

    Sultan, A. (2021). Medication errors at hospital admission and discharge:

    Risk factors and impact of medication reconciliation process to improve

    healthcare.

    Journal of Patient Safety,

    17(7), e645-e652.

    [https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420](https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420)

    **## ReducingMedicationErrorsthroughMedicationReconciliationatAdmissionandDischarge-Literature1.docx**

    1

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Student’s Name

    Institutional Affiliation

    Course

    Instructor

    Date

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Professional nurses are strategically positioned to identify practice problems because they work at the point where patient needs, care processes, and clinical outcomes intersect. In everyday practice, nurses detect gaps in safety and quality through medication administration, admission assessment, discharge planning, incident review, and participation in quality improvement activities. Evidence from the literature allows nurses to move beyond recognizing a problem to selecting and implementing interventions that are credible, measurable, and relevant to practice. One persistent problem observed during transitions of care is medication discrepancy at hospital admission and discharge, when incomplete medication histories, inconsistent documentation, and communication failures can lead to preventable medication errors. This paper examines that practice problem using Breuker et al. (2021) as the original source article and argues that a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement is the most appropriate evidence-based intervention for an acute care medical-surgical setting.

    **Practice Problem**

    Breuker et al. (2021) identified unintended medication discrepancies at admission and discharge as a significant patient safety problem in hospitalized adults. In their prospective observational study of 904 patients, 29.4% experienced at least one unintended medication discrepancy across these transitions. Of those discrepancies, 98.2% were classified as medication errors, demonstrating that the problem extends well beyond minor documentation inconsistencies. Omissions were the most common error type, accounting for 59.3% of cases. The seriousness of the problem is further underscored by the authors’ finding that 36% of the errors were serious or very serious and that nearly 40% had the potential for moderate clinical impact. The study also identified polypharmacy as a major risk factor, with error rates increasing as the number of medications increased.

    The significance of this problem is substantial for both patients and healthcare systems. Medication discrepancies at transition points can contribute to adverse drug events, treatment delays, avoidable readmissions, prolonged hospitalization, and increased cost. Breuker et al. (2021) demonstrate that these events are common rather than exceptional, particularly in patients with complex medication regimens. Their findings make clear that medication reconciliation is not simply a regulatory documentation requirement; it is a high-value safety process that requires sustained attention from clinicians. Because nurses routinely obtain histories, compare medication lists, administer medications, communicate with prescribers and pharmacists, and reinforce discharge teaching, the problem is especially relevant to nursing practice.

    **Literature Review: Standardized Interdisciplinary Medication Reconciliation with Strong Nursing Involvement**

    Recent literature supports one intervention as the best fit for practice: a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement at admission and discharge. Rather than relying on informal medication review, this intervention uses a structured workflow for obtaining the best possible medication history, reconciling medications in the electronic health record, clarifying discrepancies with pharmacists and prescribers, educating patients and families, and monitoring compliance through audits or feedback. Across the literature, the most effective versions of this intervention share the same core features—standardization, role clarity, interdisciplinary communication, and accountability.

    The first major theme in the literature is that standardization reduces discrepancy rates and improves completion of reconciliation tasks. In a multicenter quality improvement project across 18 hospitals, Alghamdi et al. (2023) implemented standardized medication reconciliation protocols, interdisciplinary workflows, documentation expectations, and improvement cycles. The project reduced the percentage of patients with at least one outstanding unintentional discrepancy from 27% to 7% at admission and from 17% to 5% at discharge, while also improving documentation compliance within 24 hours. Similarly, Xu et al. (2025) reported that when an interdisciplinary team introduced a standardized admission medication reconciliation workflow, targeted education, and feedback in post-acute care facilities, completion rates improved from 13% to 87% in one unit and from 51% to 82% in another. Together, these studies show that reliable structures, not individual vigilance alone, are central to safer transitions of care.

    A second theme is that nursing involvement is not peripheral to reconciliation success; it is one of the mechanisms by which the intervention works. Han et al. (2024) describe nurse-led medication management during transitional care as a critical component in preventing drug-related problems. Their review highlights nursing responsibilities in information collection and evaluation, communication and education, support for medication adherence, and coordination among healthcare professionals. This perspective is important because it helps explain why reconciliation improves outcomes when nurses are deliberately integrated into the process. Nurses are often the clinicians with the most sustained patient contact during admission, hospitalization, and discharge, which places them in a strong position to identify inconsistencies, reinforce education, and recognize barriers such as low health literacy, regimen complexity, or medication access problems.

    A third theme is implementation feasibility. The evidence suggests that a nurse-integrated reconciliation process can be incorporated into routine practice without depending exclusively on additional pharmacy staffing. Xu et al. (2025) found improvement through workflow redesign, EHR optimization, provider education, and feedback rather than through expansion of pharmacy resources. Alghamdi et al. (2023) likewise demonstrated that large-scale improvement was possible across diverse hospitals when roles, measures, and accountability structures were clarified. In practical terms, the literature supports an intervention that can be adapted to real clinical environments: nurses can lead medication history collection, discrepancy identification, and discharge teaching; pharmacists can focus on complex review and high-risk cases; and prescribers can make final decisions and order corrections. Synthesized across the three studies, the evidence indicates that the strongest intervention is not a single isolated task, but a coordinated, standardized reconciliation process in which nursing participation is explicit and central.

    **Why This Is the Best Evidence-Based Intervention for My Clinical Practice Setting**

    For an acute care medical-surgical setting, this intervention is the best evidence-based choice because it aligns closely with how care is actually delivered. Nurses provide continuous bedside coverage and are present at the exact moments when discrepancies are most likely to surface, during admission assessment, medication administration, patient teaching, and discharge preparation. A standardized reconciliation process supports nurses in these responsibilities by giving them a clear workflow and defined expectations rather than leaving safety to variable individual practice.

    This intervention is also realistic and sustainable. It builds on resources already present in most hospital settings by clarifying who does what: nurses collect and verify medication information, identify discrepancies, and provide patient education; pharmacists review complex regimens and high-risk concerns; and prescribers resolve discrepancies through order decisions. That role differentiation is especially valuable in settings with high admission and discharge volumes, where medication errors are more likely if responsibilities are ambiguous. The intervention directly addresses the polypharmacy-related risk identified by Breuker et al. (2021) and offers measurable outcomes, such as discrepancy rates, reconciliation completion rates, documentation compliance, and safety event trends.

    Finally, this intervention fits the Knowledge-to-Action approach because it translates a clearly identified knowledge-practice gap into a feasible change process. The evidence does not merely confirm that discrepancies exist; it shows how organizations can reduce them through education, workflow redesign, interdisciplinary coordination, and ongoing monitoring. In that sense, the intervention is both evidence based and practice ready.

    **Conclusion**

    Medication discrepancies at hospital admission and discharge represent a prevalent and clinically meaningful practice problem. Breuker et al. (2021) establish the seriousness of the issue by showing that nearly one-third of hospitalized patients experienced at least one unintended discrepancy and that many of those errors carried the potential for significant harm. Current evidence supports a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement as the most appropriate intervention for reducing this risk. The literature shows that medication reconciliation is most effective when it is structured, team based, and reinforced through education, role clarity, EHR support, and accountability measures. For nursing, the problem is especially important because nurses are central to assessment, communication, patient education, and continuity across transitions of care. Using evidence from the literature to guide practice change strengthens patient safety, improves care coordination, and demonstrates the value of professional nursing judgment in addressing real clinical problems.

    **References**

    Alghamdi, D. S., Alhrasen, M., Kassem, A., Alwagdani, A., Tourkmani, A. M., Alnowaiser, N., Al Barakah, Y., & Alotaibi, Y. K. (2023). Implementation of medication reconciliation at admission and discharge in Ministry of Defense Health Services hospitals: A multicentre study. BMJ Open Quality, 12(2), e002121.
    [https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121](https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121)

    Breuker, C., Macioce, V., Mura, T., Castet-Nicolas, A., Audurier, Y., Boegner, C., & Sultan, A. (2021). Medication errors at hospital admission and discharge: Risk factors and impact of medication reconciliation process to improve healthcare. Journal of Patient Safety, 17(7), e645-e652.
    [https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420](https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420)

    Han, Y., Chen, J., Xu, Y., Huang, P., & Hou, L. (2024). Nurse-led medication management as a critical component of transitional care for preventing drug-related problems. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 36, 151.
    [https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3)

    Xu, K., Renzi, N., & Ragusa, L. (2025). Iterative interventions to improve admission medication reconciliation completion rates and reduce medication errors at post-acute care facilities. Patient Safety, 7(2).
    [https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045](https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045)

    **## SWOTAnalysis.docx**

    1. You are going to construct an APA formatted paper for the assignment.

    2. Provide an APA formatted title page.

    3. Develop an introduction section that discusses the professional nurses’ role for implementation of an improvement project.

    4. Provide a review of the practice problem and supporting evidence of its existence and significance using the
    **original article only** from the Unit 4 literature list (include any suggested edits from the faculty).

    5. Review the evidence-based intervention and rationale for its selection at your clinical practice from the Unit 5 paper.

    1. Make sure to clarify your clinical practice setting and why this intervention was the best choice for this setting (this should not be generalized, but specific to your current clinical practice setting)

    6. Create a
    **SWOT chart** that provides three (3) bullet points each for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that may be observed with the implementation process for the intervention you selected in the unit 5 assignment.

    7. Write a narrative discussion for each SWOT (based on the knowledge-to-action framework). Address EACH bullet point listed in the chart within the narrative of the corresponding section:

    1.
    **Strengths** of the
    practice that would support change were you to implement the selected intervention.

    2.
    **Weaknesses** of the
    practice that would resist change were you to implement the selected intervention.

    3.
    **Opportunities** that a change might
    result in were you to implement the selected intervention.

    4.
    **Threats** that represent actual or potential
    barriers were you to implement the selected intervention.

    8. Develop a conclusion section for the paper that summarizes the content and your thoughts about the significance of completing a SWOT analysis prior to implementing an intervention to address a practice problem.

    9. Provide an APA formatted reference page and include citations for each source in the body of the assignment where appropriate.

    **The assignment requirements include that you upload a file of the full-text article for each listed reference.**

    Breuker, C., Macioce, V., Mura, T., Castet-Nicolas, A., Audurier, Y., Boegner, C., &

    Sultan, A. (2021). Medication errors at hospital admission and discharge:

    Risk factors and impact of medication reconciliation process to improve

    healthcare.

    Journal of Patient Safety,

    17(7), e645-e652.

    [https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420](https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420)

    **## ReducingMedicationErrorsthroughMedicationReconciliationatAdmissionandDischarge-Literature1.docx**

    1

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Student’s Name

    Institutional Affiliation

    Course

    Instructor

    Date

    **Reducing Medication Errors through Medication Reconciliation at Admission and Discharge**

    Professional nurses are strategically positioned to identify practice problems because they work at the point where patient needs, care processes, and clinical outcomes intersect. In everyday practice, nurses detect gaps in safety and quality through medication administration, admission assessment, discharge planning, incident review, and participation in quality improvement activities. Evidence from the literature allows nurses to move beyond recognizing a problem to selecting and implementing interventions that are credible, measurable, and relevant to practice. One persistent problem observed during transitions of care is medication discrepancy at hospital admission and discharge, when incomplete medication histories, inconsistent documentation, and communication failures can lead to preventable medication errors. This paper examines that practice problem using Breuker et al. (2021) as the original source article and argues that a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement is the most appropriate evidence-based intervention for an acute care medical-surgical setting.

    **Practice Problem**

    Breuker et al. (2021) identified unintended medication discrepancies at admission and discharge as a significant patient safety problem in hospitalized adults. In their prospective observational study of 904 patients, 29.4% experienced at least one unintended medication discrepancy across these transitions. Of those discrepancies, 98.2% were classified as medication errors, demonstrating that the problem extends well beyond minor documentation inconsistencies. Omissions were the most common error type, accounting for 59.3% of cases. The seriousness of the problem is further underscored by the authors’ finding that 36% of the errors were serious or very serious and that nearly 40% had the potential for moderate clinical impact. The study also identified polypharmacy as a major risk factor, with error rates increasing as the number of medications increased.

    The significance of this problem is substantial for both patients and healthcare systems. Medication discrepancies at transition points can contribute to adverse drug events, treatment delays, avoidable readmissions, prolonged hospitalization, and increased cost. Breuker et al. (2021) demonstrate that these events are common rather than exceptional, particularly in patients with complex medication regimens. Their findings make clear that medication reconciliation is not simply a regulatory documentation requirement; it is a high-value safety process that requires sustained attention from clinicians. Because nurses routinely obtain histories, compare medication lists, administer medications, communicate with prescribers and pharmacists, and reinforce discharge teaching, the problem is especially relevant to nursing practice.

    **Literature Review: Standardized Interdisciplinary Medication Reconciliation with Strong Nursing Involvement**

    Recent literature supports one intervention as the best fit for practice: a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement at admission and discharge. Rather than relying on informal medication review, this intervention uses a structured workflow for obtaining the best possible medication history, reconciling medications in the electronic health record, clarifying discrepancies with pharmacists and prescribers, educating patients and families, and monitoring compliance through audits or feedback. Across the literature, the most effective versions of this intervention share the same core features—standardization, role clarity, interdisciplinary communication, and accountability.

    The first major theme in the literature is that standardization reduces discrepancy rates and improves completion of reconciliation tasks. In a multicenter quality improvement project across 18 hospitals, Alghamdi et al. (2023) implemented standardized medication reconciliation protocols, interdisciplinary workflows, documentation expectations, and improvement cycles. The project reduced the percentage of patients with at least one outstanding unintentional discrepancy from 27% to 7% at admission and from 17% to 5% at discharge, while also improving documentation compliance within 24 hours. Similarly, Xu et al. (2025) reported that when an interdisciplinary team introduced a standardized admission medication reconciliation workflow, targeted education, and feedback in post-acute care facilities, completion rates improved from 13% to 87% in one unit and from 51% to 82% in another. Together, these studies show that reliable structures, not individual vigilance alone, are central to safer transitions of care.

    A second theme is that nursing involvement is not peripheral to reconciliation success; it is one of the mechanisms by which the intervention works. Han et al. (2024) describe nurse-led medication management during transitional care as a critical component in preventing drug-related problems. Their review highlights nursing responsibilities in information collection and evaluation, communication and education, support for medication adherence, and coordination among healthcare professionals. This perspective is important because it helps explain why reconciliation improves outcomes when nurses are deliberately integrated into the process. Nurses are often the clinicians with the most sustained patient contact during admission, hospitalization, and discharge, which places them in a strong position to identify inconsistencies, reinforce education, and recognize barriers such as low health literacy, regimen complexity, or medication access problems.

    A third theme is implementation feasibility. The evidence suggests that a nurse-integrated reconciliation process can be incorporated into routine practice without depending exclusively on additional pharmacy staffing. Xu et al. (2025) found improvement through workflow redesign, EHR optimization, provider education, and feedback rather than through expansion of pharmacy resources. Alghamdi et al. (2023) likewise demonstrated that large-scale improvement was possible across diverse hospitals when roles, measures, and accountability structures were clarified. In practical terms, the literature supports an intervention that can be adapted to real clinical environments: nurses can lead medication history collection, discrepancy identification, and discharge teaching; pharmacists can focus on complex review and high-risk cases; and prescribers can make final decisions and order corrections. Synthesized across the three studies, the evidence indicates that the strongest intervention is not a single isolated task, but a coordinated, standardized reconciliation process in which nursing participation is explicit and central.

    **Why This Is the Best Evidence-Based Intervention for My Clinical Practice Setting**

    For an acute care medical-surgical setting, this intervention is the best evidence-based choice because it aligns closely with how care is actually delivered. Nurses provide continuous bedside coverage and are present at the exact moments when discrepancies are most likely to surface, during admission assessment, medication administration, patient teaching, and discharge preparation. A standardized reconciliation process supports nurses in these responsibilities by giving them a clear workflow and defined expectations rather than leaving safety to variable individual practice.

    This intervention is also realistic and sustainable. It builds on resources already present in most hospital settings by clarifying who does what: nurses collect and verify medication information, identify discrepancies, and provide patient education; pharmacists review complex regimens and high-risk concerns; and prescribers resolve discrepancies through order decisions. That role differentiation is especially valuable in settings with high admission and discharge volumes, where medication errors are more likely if responsibilities are ambiguous. The intervention directly addresses the polypharmacy-related risk identified by Breuker et al. (2021) and offers measurable outcomes, such as discrepancy rates, reconciliation completion rates, documentation compliance, and safety event trends.

    Finally, this intervention fits the Knowledge-to-Action approach because it translates a clearly identified knowledge-practice gap into a feasible change process. The evidence does not merely confirm that discrepancies exist; it shows how organizations can reduce them through education, workflow redesign, interdisciplinary coordination, and ongoing monitoring. In that sense, the intervention is both evidence based and practice ready.

    **Conclusion**

    Medication discrepancies at hospital admission and discharge represent a prevalent and clinically meaningful practice problem. Breuker et al. (2021) establish the seriousness of the issue by showing that nearly one-third of hospitalized patients experienced at least one unintended discrepancy and that many of those errors carried the potential for significant harm. Current evidence supports a standardized interdisciplinary medication reconciliation process with strong nursing involvement as the most appropriate intervention for reducing this risk. The literature shows that medication reconciliation is most effective when it is structured, team based, and reinforced through education, role clarity, EHR support, and accountability measures. For nursing, the problem is especially important because nurses are central to assessment, communication, patient education, and continuity across transitions of care. Using evidence from the literature to guide practice change strengthens patient safety, improves care coordination, and demonstrates the value of professional nursing judgment in addressing real clinical problems.

    **References**

    Alghamdi, D. S., Alhrasen, M., Kassem, A., Alwagdani, A., Tourkmani, A. M., Alnowaiser, N., Al Barakah, Y., & Alotaibi, Y. K. (2023). Implementation of medication reconciliation at admission and discharge in Ministry of Defense Health Services hospitals: A multicentre study. BMJ Open Quality, 12(2), e002121.
    [https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121](https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002121)

    Breuker, C., Macioce, V., Mura, T., Castet-Nicolas, A., Audurier, Y., Boegner, C., & Sultan, A. (2021). Medication errors at hospital admission and discharge: Risk factors and impact of medication reconciliation process to improve healthcare. Journal of Patient Safety, 17(7), e645-e652.
    [https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420](https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000420)

    Han, Y., Chen, J., Xu, Y., Huang, P., & Hou, L. (2024). Nurse-led medication management as a critical component of transitional care for preventing drug-related problems. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 36, 151.
    [https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02799-3)

    Xu, K., Renzi, N., & Ragusa, L. (2025). Iterative interventions to improve admission medication reconciliation completion rates and reduce medication errors at post-acute care facilities. Patient Safety, 7(2).
    [https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045](https://doi.org/10.33940/001c.134045)

  • [Solved] Nursing Module 4 Assignment

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    3 pages (excluding title and reference page in APA style). The purpose is to better understand gynecological health care for lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals and it should include: – Gender and sexuality concepts. – Social and political context. – Social determinants of health affecting…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    3 pages (excluding title and reference page in APA style). The purpose is to better understand gynecological health care for lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals and it should include:

    – Gender and sexuality concepts.
    – Social and political context.
    – Social determinants of health affecting lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals.
    – Barriers to health care.
    – Health care disparities.

    You should also incorporate current practice guidelines for diagnosis and treatment and a minimum of 4 current (published within the last five years) scholarly journal articles referenced
    – Schuiling, K. D., & Likis, F. E. (2022). Gynecologic Health Care: with an Introduction toPrenatal and Postpartum Care (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.ISBN: 9781284182347

  • [Solved] Soap note

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    **files (2)** – ## SOAPNote2.docx – ## SOAPNoteRubric.pdf **## SOAPNote2.docx** | | | | — | — | | SOAP NOTE TEMPLATE<br>Review the Rubric for more Guidance | | _Demographics_ | C.H. 73-year-old White, Hispanic, Male | | _Chief Complaint (Reason for seeking health care)_ | “I’m here because I hav…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    **files (2)**

    – ## SOAPNote2.docx

    – ## SOAPNoteRubric.pdf

    **## SOAPNote2.docx**

    | | |
    | — | — |
    | SOAP NOTE TEMPLATE<br>Review the Rubric for more Guidance |
    | _Demographics_ | C.H. 73-year-old White, Hispanic, Male |
    | _Chief Complaint (Reason for seeking health care)_ | “I’m here because I have been suffering from pain to my lower extremities” |
    | _History of Present Illness (HPI)_ | |
    | _Allergies_ | |
    | _Review of Systems (ROS)_ | General: <br>HEENT:<br>Neck: <br>Lungs:<br>Cardio<br>Breast: <br>GI: <br>M/F genital:<br>GU: <br>Neuro<br>Musculo:<br>Activity:<br>Psychosocial: <br>Derm: <br>Nutrition:<br>Sleep/Rest:<br>LMP: <br>STI Hx: |
    | _Vital Signs_ | |
    | _Labs_ | |
    | _Medications_ | |
    | _Past Medical History_ | |
    | _Past Surgical History_ | |
    | _Family History_ | |
    | _Social History_ | |
    | _Health Maintenance/ Screenings_ | |
    | _Physical Examination_ | General: <br>HEENT:<br>Neck: <br>Lungs:<br>Cardio<br>Breast: <br>GI: <br>M/F genital:<br>GU: <br>Neuro<br>Musculo:<br>Activity:<br>Psychosocial: <br>Derm: |
    | _Diagnosis_ | |
    | _Differential Diagnosis_ | |
    | _ICD 10 Coding_ | |
    | _Pharmacologic treatment plan_ | |
    | _Diagnostic/Lab Testing_ | |
    | _Education_ | |
    | _Anticipatory Guidance_ | |
    | _Follow up plan_ | |
    | _Prescription_ | See Below (scroll down) |
    | _References_ | |
    | _Grammar_ | |

    | |
    | — |
    | EA#: 101010101 STU Clinic LIC# 10000000 |
    | Tel: (000) 555-1234 FAX: (000) 555-12222 |
    | Patient Name: (Initials)______________________________ Age ___________<br>Date: _______________<br>RX ______________________________________<br>SIG:<br>Dispense: ___________ Refill: _________________<br>No Substitution<br> <br>Signature:____________________________________________________________ |

    Signature (with appropriate credentials):_____________________________________

    References (must use current evidence-based guidelines used to guide the care [Mandatory])

    **## SOAPNoteRubric.pdf**

    SOAP Note Rubric

    Criteria Ratings Point
    s

    Demographics 1 to >0.8 pts
    Begins with patient
    initials, age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender (5
    demographics)

    0.8 to >0.25 pts
    Begins with 4 of
    the 5 patient
    demographics
    (patient initials,
    age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender)

    0.25 to
    >0.0 pts
    Begins with 3
    or less patient
    demographics
    (patient
    initials, age,
    race, ethnicity
    and gender)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    1
    point

    Chief
    Complaint
    (Reason for
    seeking health
    care)

    4 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from patient
    about presenting
    problem

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from
    patient and
    other unrelated
    information

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    information
    but
    information is
    NOT a direct
    quote

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    History of the
    Present
    Illness (HPI)

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting problem
    and the 8
    dimensions of the
    problem (OLD
    CARTS – Onset,
    Location, Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors, Relieving
    factors, Timing and
    Severity)

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 7
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset, Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors, Timing
    and Severity)

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 6
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset,
    Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors,
    Timing and
    Severity)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Allergies 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes NKA
    (including = Drug,
    Environmental,
    Food, Herbal,
    and/or Latex or if
    allergies are
    present (reports for
    each severity of
    allergy AND
    description of
    allergy)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    type Drug,
    environmental
    factor, herbal,
    food, latex name
    and includes
    severity of
    allergy OR
    description of
    allergy

    1 to >0.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    only the type
    of allergy
    name

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Review of
    Systems
    (ROS)

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 9 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint
    AND uses the
    words “admits” and
    “denies”

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses 5-8
    body systems
    directed to chief
    complaint AND
    uses the words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses less
    than 5 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint OR
    student does
    not use the
    words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Vital Signs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes all 8 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient position),
    HR, RR,
    temperature (with
    Fahrenheit or
    Celsius and route
    of temperature
    collection), weight,
    height, BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 7 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient
    position), HR,
    RR, temperature
    (with Fahrenheit
    or Celsius and
    route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 6 or
    less vital
    signs, (BP
    (with patient
    position), HR,
    RR,
    temperature
    (with F or C
    and route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population)
    and pain.)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Labs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs reviewed at
    the visit, values of
    lab results and
    highlights
    abnormal values
    OR acknowledges
    no labs/diagnostic
    tests were
    reviewed.

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs
    reviewed at the
    visit, values of
    lab results but
    does not
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of the labs
    reviewed at
    the visit but
    does not
    include the
    values of lab
    results or
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Medications 4 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a list of all
    of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for the
    medication
    (including name,

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    all of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for
    the medication
    (including 3 of

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of all of the
    patient
    reported
    medications
    (including 2 of
    the 4: name,

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    the 4: name,
    dose,
    medications
    route,
    frequency)

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    Past Medical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations),
    for each medical
    diagnosis, year of
    diagnosis and
    whether the
    diagnosis is active
    or current

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations)
    , for each
    medical
    diagnosis, either
    year of
    diagnosis OR
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or current

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes each
    medical
    diagnosis but
    does not
    include year of
    diagnosis or
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or
    current

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Past Surgical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes, for each
    surgical procedure,
    the year of
    procedure and the
    indication for the
    procedure

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure, the
    year of
    procedure OR
    indication of the
    procedure

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure but
    not the year of
    procedure or
    indication of
    the procedure

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Family History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of at
    least 4 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum, genetic
    disorders, diabetes,
    heart disease and
    cancer.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 2
    family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Social History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes all of the
    required following:
    tobacco use, drug
    use, alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment status,
    current/previous
    occupation, sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive use,
    and living situation.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 10 of
    the 11 required
    following:
    tobacco use,
    drug use,
    alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment
    status,
    current/previous
    occupation,
    sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 9 or
    less of the
    required
    information.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    use, and living
    situation.

    Health
    Maintenance /
    Screenings

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and other
    health maintenance
    needs such as age-
    appropriate
    screenings and
    preventive
    measures Includes
    an assessment of
    at least 5 screening
    tests

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    partial
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, missing
    some key
    components.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 4
    screening tests

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    minimal
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, lacking
    detail.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3
    screening
    tests

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Physical
    Examination

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 4
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 5 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to chief
    complaint

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 2
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate principal
    diagnosis AND lists
    the remaining
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit (in descending
    priority)

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit but does
    not list the
    diagnoses in
    descending
    order of priority

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 1
    differential
    diagnosis for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Differential
    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    differential
    diagnoses for the
    principal diagnosis

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    ICD 10 Coding 3 to >2.0 pts
    Correctly includes
    all ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Correctly
    includes most
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes some
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at
    the visit

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan for
    each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”. The
    plan includes ALL
    of the required
    following: drug
    name, dose, route,
    frequency, duration
    and cost as well as
    education related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan
    for each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes 4 of the
    required
    following 7: the
    drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency,
    duration and
    cost as well as
    education
    related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic
    problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan for each
    of the
    diagnoses
    listed under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes less
    than 4 of the
    information:

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Diagnostic /
    Lab Testing

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 100% of the
    time OR
    acknowledges “no
    diagnostic testing
    clinically required
    at this time”

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 50% of
    the time OR
    acknowledges
    “no diagnostic
    testing clinically
    required at this
    time”

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic
    testing less
    than 50% of
    the time.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Education 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills for
    managing their
    illness and at least
    3 self-management
    methods on how to
    incorporate healthy
    behaviors into their
    lives.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness and
    at least 2 self-
    management
    methods on how
    to incorporate
    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness
    and at least 1
    self-
    management
    methods on
    how to
    incorporate

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives

    Anticipatory
    Guidance

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    primary prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. immunizations,
    pediatric and pre-
    natal milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance)) and at
    least 2 secondary
    prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations,
    pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipator
    guidance)) and
    at least 2
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations
    , pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance))
    and at least 1
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    screening))

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Follow Up
    Plan

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    recommendation
    for follow up,
    including time
    frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months
    )

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes recommendation for
    follow up, but does not include
    time frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Prescription 3 to >2.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes all
    required
    components:
    patient information,
    date, drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency, quantity
    to be dispensed,
    refills, and
    provider’s
    signature and
    credentials

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes most
    required
    components,
    but is missing 1-
    2 elements such
    as quantity to be
    dispensed or
    refills

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Prescription is
    missing 3 or
    more required
    components
    such as
    patient
    information,
    date, or
    provider’s
    signature

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Writing
    Mechanics,
    Citations, and
    APA Style

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Effectively uses the
    literature and other
    resources to inform
    their work.
    Exceptional use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing. APA

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Moderately use
    the literature
    and other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Moderately use
    of citations and

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Ineffectively
    uses the
    literature and
    other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Ineffectively

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    style is correct, and
    writing is free of
    grammar and
    spelling errors.

    extended
    referencing. APA
    style and writing
    mechanics need
    more precision
    and attention to
    detail.

    use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing.
    APA style and
    writing
    mechanics
    need serious
    attention.

    Total 100

    **## SOAPNoteRubric.pdf**

    SOAP Note Rubric

    Criteria Ratings Point
    s

    Demographics 1 to >0.8 pts
    Begins with patient
    initials, age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender (5
    demographics)

    0.8 to >0.25 pts
    Begins with 4 of
    the 5 patient
    demographics
    (patient initials,
    age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender)

    0.25 to
    >0.0 pts
    Begins with 3
    or less patient
    demographics
    (patient
    initials, age,
    race, ethnicity
    and gender)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    1
    point

    Chief
    Complaint
    (Reason for
    seeking health
    care)

    4 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from patient
    about presenting
    problem

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from
    patient and
    other unrelated
    information

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    information
    but
    information is
    NOT a direct
    quote

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    History of the
    Present
    Illness (HPI)

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting problem
    and the 8
    dimensions of the
    problem (OLD
    CARTS – Onset,
    Location, Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors, Relieving
    factors, Timing and
    Severity)

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 7
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset, Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors, Timing
    and Severity)

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 6
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset,
    Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors,
    Timing and
    Severity)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Allergies 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes NKA
    (including = Drug,
    Environmental,
    Food, Herbal,
    and/or Latex or if
    allergies are
    present (reports for
    each severity of
    allergy AND
    description of
    allergy)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    type Drug,
    environmental
    factor, herbal,
    food, latex name
    and includes
    severity of
    allergy OR
    description of
    allergy

    1 to >0.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    only the type
    of allergy
    name

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Review of
    Systems
    (ROS)

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 9 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint
    AND uses the
    words “admits” and
    “denies”

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses 5-8
    body systems
    directed to chief
    complaint AND
    uses the words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses less
    than 5 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint OR
    student does
    not use the
    words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Vital Signs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes all 8 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient position),
    HR, RR,
    temperature (with
    Fahrenheit or
    Celsius and route
    of temperature
    collection), weight,
    height, BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 7 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient
    position), HR,
    RR, temperature
    (with Fahrenheit
    or Celsius and
    route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 6 or
    less vital
    signs, (BP
    (with patient
    position), HR,
    RR,
    temperature
    (with F or C
    and route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population)
    and pain.)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Labs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs reviewed at
    the visit, values of
    lab results and
    highlights
    abnormal values
    OR acknowledges
    no labs/diagnostic
    tests were
    reviewed.

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs
    reviewed at the
    visit, values of
    lab results but
    does not
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of the labs
    reviewed at
    the visit but
    does not
    include the
    values of lab
    results or
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Medications 4 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a list of all
    of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for the
    medication
    (including name,

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    all of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for
    the medication
    (including 3 of

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of all of the
    patient
    reported
    medications
    (including 2 of
    the 4: name,

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    the 4: name,
    dose,
    medications
    route,
    frequency)

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    Past Medical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations),
    for each medical
    diagnosis, year of
    diagnosis and
    whether the
    diagnosis is active
    or current

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations)
    , for each
    medical
    diagnosis, either
    year of
    diagnosis OR
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or current

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes each
    medical
    diagnosis but
    does not
    include year of
    diagnosis or
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or
    current

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Past Surgical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes, for each
    surgical procedure,
    the year of
    procedure and the
    indication for the
    procedure

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure, the
    year of
    procedure OR
    indication of the
    procedure

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure but
    not the year of
    procedure or
    indication of
    the procedure

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Family History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of at
    least 4 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum, genetic
    disorders, diabetes,
    heart disease and
    cancer.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 2
    family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Social History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes all of the
    required following:
    tobacco use, drug
    use, alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment status,
    current/previous
    occupation, sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive use,
    and living situation.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 10 of
    the 11 required
    following:
    tobacco use,
    drug use,
    alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment
    status,
    current/previous
    occupation,
    sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 9 or
    less of the
    required
    information.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    use, and living
    situation.

    Health
    Maintenance /
    Screenings

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and other
    health maintenance
    needs such as age-
    appropriate
    screenings and
    preventive
    measures Includes
    an assessment of
    at least 5 screening
    tests

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    partial
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, missing
    some key
    components.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 4
    screening tests

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    minimal
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, lacking
    detail.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3
    screening
    tests

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Physical
    Examination

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 4
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 5 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to chief
    complaint

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 2
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate principal
    diagnosis AND lists
    the remaining
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit (in descending
    priority)

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit but does
    not list the
    diagnoses in
    descending
    order of priority

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 1
    differential
    diagnosis for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Differential
    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    differential
    diagnoses for the
    principal diagnosis

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    ICD 10 Coding 3 to >2.0 pts
    Correctly includes
    all ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Correctly
    includes most
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes some
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at
    the visit

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan for
    each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”. The
    plan includes ALL
    of the required
    following: drug
    name, dose, route,
    frequency, duration
    and cost as well as
    education related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan
    for each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes 4 of the
    required
    following 7: the
    drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency,
    duration and
    cost as well as
    education
    related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic
    problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan for each
    of the
    diagnoses
    listed under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes less
    than 4 of the
    information:

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Diagnostic /
    Lab Testing

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 100% of the
    time OR
    acknowledges “no
    diagnostic testing
    clinically required
    at this time”

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 50% of
    the time OR
    acknowledges
    “no diagnostic
    testing clinically
    required at this
    time”

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic
    testing less
    than 50% of
    the time.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Education 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills for
    managing their
    illness and at least
    3 self-management
    methods on how to
    incorporate healthy
    behaviors into their
    lives.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness and
    at least 2 self-
    management
    methods on how
    to incorporate
    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness
    and at least 1
    self-
    management
    methods on
    how to
    incorporate

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives

    Anticipatory
    Guidance

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    primary prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. immunizations,
    pediatric and pre-
    natal milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance)) and at
    least 2 secondary
    prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations,
    pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipator
    guidance)) and
    at least 2
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations
    , pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance))
    and at least 1
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    screening))

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Follow Up
    Plan

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    recommendation
    for follow up,
    including time
    frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months
    )

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes recommendation for
    follow up, but does not include
    time frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Prescription 3 to >2.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes all
    required
    components:
    patient information,
    date, drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency, quantity
    to be dispensed,
    refills, and
    provider’s
    signature and
    credentials

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes most
    required
    components,
    but is missing 1-
    2 elements such
    as quantity to be
    dispensed or
    refills

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Prescription is
    missing 3 or
    more required
    components
    such as
    patient
    information,
    date, or
    provider’s
    signature

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Writing
    Mechanics,
    Citations, and
    APA Style

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Effectively uses the
    literature and other
    resources to inform
    their work.
    Exceptional use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing. APA

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Moderately use
    the literature
    and other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Moderately use
    of citations and

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Ineffectively
    uses the
    literature and
    other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Ineffectively

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    style is correct, and
    writing is free of
    grammar and
    spelling errors.

    extended
    referencing. APA
    style and writing
    mechanics need
    more precision
    and attention to
    detail.

    use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing.
    APA style and
    writing
    mechanics
    need serious
    attention.

    Total 100

    **## SOAPNote2.docx**

    | | |
    | — | — |
    | SOAP NOTE TEMPLATE<br>Review the Rubric for more Guidance |
    | _Demographics_ | C.H. 73-year-old White, Hispanic, Male |
    | _Chief Complaint (Reason for seeking health care)_ | “I’m here because I have been suffering from pain to my lower extremities” |
    | _History of Present Illness (HPI)_ | |
    | _Allergies_ | |
    | _Review of Systems (ROS)_ | General: <br>HEENT:<br>Neck: <br>Lungs:<br>Cardio<br>Breast: <br>GI: <br>M/F genital:<br>GU: <br>Neuro<br>Musculo:<br>Activity:<br>Psychosocial: <br>Derm: <br>Nutrition:<br>Sleep/Rest:<br>LMP: <br>STI Hx: |
    | _Vital Signs_ | |
    | _Labs_ | |
    | _Medications_ | |
    | _Past Medical History_ | |
    | _Past Surgical History_ | |
    | _Family History_ | |
    | _Social History_ | |
    | _Health Maintenance/ Screenings_ | |
    | _Physical Examination_ | General: <br>HEENT:<br>Neck: <br>Lungs:<br>Cardio<br>Breast: <br>GI: <br>M/F genital:<br>GU: <br>Neuro<br>Musculo:<br>Activity:<br>Psychosocial: <br>Derm: |
    | _Diagnosis_ | |
    | _Differential Diagnosis_ | |
    | _ICD 10 Coding_ | |
    | _Pharmacologic treatment plan_ | |
    | _Diagnostic/Lab Testing_ | |
    | _Education_ | |
    | _Anticipatory Guidance_ | |
    | _Follow up plan_ | |
    | _Prescription_ | See Below (scroll down) |
    | _References_ | |
    | _Grammar_ | |

    | |
    | — |
    | EA#: 101010101 STU Clinic LIC# 10000000 |
    | Tel: (000) 555-1234 FAX: (000) 555-12222 |
    | Patient Name: (Initials)______________________________ Age ___________<br>Date: _______________<br>RX ______________________________________<br>SIG:<br>Dispense: ___________ Refill: _________________<br>No Substitution<br> <br>Signature:____________________________________________________________ |

    Signature (with appropriate credentials):_____________________________________

    References (must use current evidence-based guidelines used to guide the care [Mandatory])

    **## SOAPNoteRubric.pdf**

    SOAP Note Rubric

    Criteria Ratings Point
    s

    Demographics 1 to >0.8 pts
    Begins with patient
    initials, age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender (5
    demographics)

    0.8 to >0.25 pts
    Begins with 4 of
    the 5 patient
    demographics
    (patient initials,
    age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender)

    0.25 to
    >0.0 pts
    Begins with 3
    or less patient
    demographics
    (patient
    initials, age,
    race, ethnicity
    and gender)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    1
    point

    Chief
    Complaint
    (Reason for
    seeking health
    care)

    4 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from patient
    about presenting
    problem

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from
    patient and
    other unrelated
    information

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    information
    but
    information is
    NOT a direct
    quote

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    History of the
    Present
    Illness (HPI)

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting problem
    and the 8
    dimensions of the
    problem (OLD
    CARTS – Onset,
    Location, Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors, Relieving
    factors, Timing and
    Severity)

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 7
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset, Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors, Timing
    and Severity)

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 6
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset,
    Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors,
    Timing and
    Severity)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Allergies 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes NKA
    (including = Drug,
    Environmental,
    Food, Herbal,
    and/or Latex or if
    allergies are
    present (reports for
    each severity of
    allergy AND
    description of
    allergy)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    type Drug,
    environmental
    factor, herbal,
    food, latex name
    and includes
    severity of
    allergy OR
    description of
    allergy

    1 to >0.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    only the type
    of allergy
    name

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Review of
    Systems
    (ROS)

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 9 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint
    AND uses the
    words “admits” and
    “denies”

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses 5-8
    body systems
    directed to chief
    complaint AND
    uses the words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses less
    than 5 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint OR
    student does
    not use the
    words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Vital Signs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes all 8 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient position),
    HR, RR,
    temperature (with
    Fahrenheit or
    Celsius and route
    of temperature
    collection), weight,
    height, BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 7 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient
    position), HR,
    RR, temperature
    (with Fahrenheit
    or Celsius and
    route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 6 or
    less vital
    signs, (BP
    (with patient
    position), HR,
    RR,
    temperature
    (with F or C
    and route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population)
    and pain.)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Labs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs reviewed at
    the visit, values of
    lab results and
    highlights
    abnormal values
    OR acknowledges
    no labs/diagnostic
    tests were
    reviewed.

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs
    reviewed at the
    visit, values of
    lab results but
    does not
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of the labs
    reviewed at
    the visit but
    does not
    include the
    values of lab
    results or
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Medications 4 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a list of all
    of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for the
    medication
    (including name,

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    all of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for
    the medication
    (including 3 of

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of all of the
    patient
    reported
    medications
    (including 2 of
    the 4: name,

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    the 4: name,
    dose,
    medications
    route,
    frequency)

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    Past Medical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations),
    for each medical
    diagnosis, year of
    diagnosis and
    whether the
    diagnosis is active
    or current

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations)
    , for each
    medical
    diagnosis, either
    year of
    diagnosis OR
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or current

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes each
    medical
    diagnosis but
    does not
    include year of
    diagnosis or
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or
    current

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Past Surgical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes, for each
    surgical procedure,
    the year of
    procedure and the
    indication for the
    procedure

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure, the
    year of
    procedure OR
    indication of the
    procedure

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure but
    not the year of
    procedure or
    indication of
    the procedure

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Family History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of at
    least 4 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum, genetic
    disorders, diabetes,
    heart disease and
    cancer.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 2
    family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Social History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes all of the
    required following:
    tobacco use, drug
    use, alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment status,
    current/previous
    occupation, sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive use,
    and living situation.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 10 of
    the 11 required
    following:
    tobacco use,
    drug use,
    alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment
    status,
    current/previous
    occupation,
    sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 9 or
    less of the
    required
    information.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    use, and living
    situation.

    Health
    Maintenance /
    Screenings

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and other
    health maintenance
    needs such as age-
    appropriate
    screenings and
    preventive
    measures Includes
    an assessment of
    at least 5 screening
    tests

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    partial
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, missing
    some key
    components.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 4
    screening tests

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    minimal
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, lacking
    detail.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3
    screening
    tests

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Physical
    Examination

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 4
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 5 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to chief
    complaint

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 2
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate principal
    diagnosis AND lists
    the remaining
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit (in descending
    priority)

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit but does
    not list the
    diagnoses in
    descending
    order of priority

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 1
    differential
    diagnosis for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Differential
    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    differential
    diagnoses for the
    principal diagnosis

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    ICD 10 Coding 3 to >2.0 pts
    Correctly includes
    all ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Correctly
    includes most
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes some
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at
    the visit

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan for
    each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”. The
    plan includes ALL
    of the required
    following: drug
    name, dose, route,
    frequency, duration
    and cost as well as
    education related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan
    for each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes 4 of the
    required
    following 7: the
    drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency,
    duration and
    cost as well as
    education
    related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic
    problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan for each
    of the
    diagnoses
    listed under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes less
    than 4 of the
    information:

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Diagnostic /
    Lab Testing

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 100% of the
    time OR
    acknowledges “no
    diagnostic testing
    clinically required
    at this time”

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 50% of
    the time OR
    acknowledges
    “no diagnostic
    testing clinically
    required at this
    time”

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic
    testing less
    than 50% of
    the time.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Education 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills for
    managing their
    illness and at least
    3 self-management
    methods on how to
    incorporate healthy
    behaviors into their
    lives.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness and
    at least 2 self-
    management
    methods on how
    to incorporate
    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness
    and at least 1
    self-
    management
    methods on
    how to
    incorporate

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives

    Anticipatory
    Guidance

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    primary prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. immunizations,
    pediatric and pre-
    natal milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance)) and at
    least 2 secondary
    prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations,
    pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipator
    guidance)) and
    at least 2
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations
    , pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance))
    and at least 1
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    screening))

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Follow Up
    Plan

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    recommendation
    for follow up,
    including time
    frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months
    )

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes recommendation for
    follow up, but does not include
    time frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Prescription 3 to >2.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes all
    required
    components:
    patient information,
    date, drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency, quantity
    to be dispensed,
    refills, and
    provider’s
    signature and
    credentials

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes most
    required
    components,
    but is missing 1-
    2 elements such
    as quantity to be
    dispensed or
    refills

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Prescription is
    missing 3 or
    more required
    components
    such as
    patient
    information,
    date, or
    provider’s
    signature

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Writing
    Mechanics,
    Citations, and
    APA Style

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Effectively uses the
    literature and other
    resources to inform
    their work.
    Exceptional use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing. APA

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Moderately use
    the literature
    and other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Moderately use
    of citations and

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Ineffectively
    uses the
    literature and
    other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Ineffectively

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    style is correct, and
    writing is free of
    grammar and
    spelling errors.

    extended
    referencing. APA
    style and writing
    mechanics need
    more precision
    and attention to
    detail.

    use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing.
    APA style and
    writing
    mechanics
    need serious
    attention.

    Total 100

    **## SOAPNote2.docx**

    | | |
    | — | — |
    | SOAP NOTE TEMPLATE<br>Review the Rubric for more Guidance |
    | _Demographics_ | C.H. 73-year-old White, Hispanic, Male |
    | _Chief Complaint (Reason for seeking health care)_ | “I’m here because I have been suffering from pain to my lower extremities” |
    | _History of Present Illness (HPI)_ | |
    | _Allergies_ | |
    | _Review of Systems (ROS)_ | General: <br>HEENT:<br>Neck: <br>Lungs:<br>Cardio<br>Breast: <br>GI: <br>M/F genital:<br>GU: <br>Neuro<br>Musculo:<br>Activity:<br>Psychosocial: <br>Derm: <br>Nutrition:<br>Sleep/Rest:<br>LMP: <br>STI Hx: |
    | _Vital Signs_ | |
    | _Labs_ | |
    | _Medications_ | |
    | _Past Medical History_ | |
    | _Past Surgical History_ | |
    | _Family History_ | |
    | _Social History_ | |
    | _Health Maintenance/ Screenings_ | |
    | _Physical Examination_ | General: <br>HEENT:<br>Neck: <br>Lungs:<br>Cardio<br>Breast: <br>GI: <br>M/F genital:<br>GU: <br>Neuro<br>Musculo:<br>Activity:<br>Psychosocial: <br>Derm: |
    | _Diagnosis_ | |
    | _Differential Diagnosis_ | |
    | _ICD 10 Coding_ | |
    | _Pharmacologic treatment plan_ | |
    | _Diagnostic/Lab Testing_ | |
    | _Education_ | |
    | _Anticipatory Guidance_ | |
    | _Follow up plan_ | |
    | _Prescription_ | See Below (scroll down) |
    | _References_ | |
    | _Grammar_ | |

    | |
    | — |
    | EA#: 101010101 STU Clinic LIC# 10000000 |
    | Tel: (000) 555-1234 FAX: (000) 555-12222 |
    | Patient Name: (Initials)______________________________ Age ___________<br>Date: _______________<br>RX ______________________________________<br>SIG:<br>Dispense: ___________ Refill: _________________<br>No Substitution<br> <br>Signature:____________________________________________________________ |

    Signature (with appropriate credentials):_____________________________________

    References (must use current evidence-based guidelines used to guide the care [Mandatory])

    **## SOAPNoteRubric.pdf**

    SOAP Note Rubric

    Criteria Ratings Point
    s

    Demographics 1 to >0.8 pts
    Begins with patient
    initials, age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender (5
    demographics)

    0.8 to >0.25 pts
    Begins with 4 of
    the 5 patient
    demographics
    (patient initials,
    age, race,
    ethnicity and
    gender)

    0.25 to
    >0.0 pts
    Begins with 3
    or less patient
    demographics
    (patient
    initials, age,
    race, ethnicity
    and gender)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    1
    point

    Chief
    Complaint
    (Reason for
    seeking health
    care)

    4 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from patient
    about presenting
    problem

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a direct
    quote from
    patient and
    other unrelated
    information

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    information
    but
    information is
    NOT a direct
    quote

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    History of the
    Present
    Illness (HPI)

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting problem
    and the 8
    dimensions of the
    problem (OLD
    CARTS – Onset,
    Location, Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors, Relieving
    factors, Timing and
    Severity)

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 7
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset, Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors, Timing
    and Severity)

    2 to >0.0 pts
    Includes the
    presenting
    problem and 6
    of the 8
    dimensions of
    the problem
    (OLD CARTS –
    Onset,
    Location,
    Duration,
    Character,
    Aggravating
    factors,
    Relieving
    factors,
    Timing and
    Severity)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Allergies 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes NKA
    (including = Drug,
    Environmental,
    Food, Herbal,
    and/or Latex or if
    allergies are
    present (reports for
    each severity of
    allergy AND
    description of
    allergy)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    type Drug,
    environmental
    factor, herbal,
    food, latex name
    and includes
    severity of
    allergy OR
    description of
    allergy

    1 to >0.0 pts
    If allergies are
    present,
    students lists
    only the type
    of allergy
    name

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Review of
    Systems
    (ROS)

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 9 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint
    AND uses the
    words “admits” and
    “denies”

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses 5-8
    body systems
    directed to chief
    complaint AND
    uses the words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 3 or
    fewer
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses less
    than 5 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint OR
    student does
    not use the
    words
    “admits” and
    “denies”

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Vital Signs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes all 8 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient position),
    HR, RR,
    temperature (with
    Fahrenheit or
    Celsius and route
    of temperature
    collection), weight,
    height, BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 7 vital
    signs, (BP (with
    patient
    position), HR,
    RR, temperature
    (with Fahrenheit
    or Celsius and
    route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population) and
    pain.)

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 6 or
    less vital
    signs, (BP
    (with patient
    position), HR,
    RR,
    temperature
    (with F or C
    and route of
    temperature
    collection),
    weight, height,
    BMI (or
    percentiles for
    pediatric
    population)
    and pain.)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Labs 2 to >1.5 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs reviewed at
    the visit, values of
    lab results and
    highlights
    abnormal values
    OR acknowledges
    no labs/diagnostic
    tests were
    reviewed.

    1.5 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    the labs
    reviewed at the
    visit, values of
    lab results but
    does not
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of the labs
    reviewed at
    the visit but
    does not
    include the
    values of lab
    results or
    highlight
    abnormal
    values.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Medications 4 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a list of all
    of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for the
    medication
    (including name,

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a list of
    all of the patient
    reported
    medications and
    the medical
    diagnosis for
    the medication
    (including 3 of

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a list
    of all of the
    patient
    reported
    medications
    (including 2 of
    the 4: name,

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    4
    points

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    the 4: name,
    dose,
    medications
    route,
    frequency)

    dose, route,
    frequency)

    Past Medical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations),
    for each medical
    diagnosis, year of
    diagnosis and
    whether the
    diagnosis is active
    or current

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    (Major/Chronic,
    Trauma,
    Hospitalizations)
    , for each
    medical
    diagnosis, either
    year of
    diagnosis OR
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or current

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes each
    medical
    diagnosis but
    does not
    include year of
    diagnosis or
    whether the
    diagnosis is
    active or
    current

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Past Surgical
    History

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes, for each
    surgical procedure,
    the year of
    procedure and the
    indication for the
    procedure

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure, the
    year of
    procedure OR
    indication of the
    procedure

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes, for
    each surgical
    procedure but
    not the year of
    procedure or
    indication of
    the procedure

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Family History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of at
    least 4 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum, genetic
    disorders, diabetes,
    heart disease and
    cancer.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3 family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 2
    family
    members
    regarding, at a
    minimum,
    genetic
    disorders,
    diabetes, heart
    disease and
    cancer.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Social History 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes all of the
    required following:
    tobacco use, drug
    use, alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment status,
    current/previous
    occupation, sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive use,
    and living situation.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes 10 of
    the 11 required
    following:
    tobacco use,
    drug use,
    alcohol use,
    marital status,
    employment
    status,
    current/previous
    occupation,
    sexual
    orientation,
    sexually active,
    contraceptive

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 9 or
    less of the
    required
    information.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    use, and living
    situation.

    Health
    Maintenance /
    Screenings

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and other
    health maintenance
    needs such as age-
    appropriate
    screenings and
    preventive
    measures Includes
    an assessment of
    at least 5 screening
    tests

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    partial
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, missing
    some key
    components.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 4
    screening tests

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    minimal
    assessment of
    immunization
    status and
    health
    maintenance
    needs, lacking
    detail.
    Includes an
    assessment of
    at least 3
    screening
    tests

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Physical
    Examination

    15 to >8.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 4
    assessments for
    each body system
    and assesses at
    least 5 body
    systems directed to
    chief complaint

    8 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 3
    assessments for
    each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to chief
    complaint

    3 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    minimum of 2
    assessments
    for each body
    system and
    assesses at
    least 4 body
    systems
    directed to
    chief
    complaint

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    15
    points

    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate principal
    diagnosis AND lists
    the remaining
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit (in descending
    priority)

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a clear
    outline of the
    accurate
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit but does
    not list the
    diagnoses in
    descending
    order of priority

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes 1
    differential
    diagnosis for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Differential
    Diagnosis

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    differential
    diagnoses for the
    principal diagnosis

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    differential
    diagnoses for
    the principal
    diagnosis

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    ICD 10 Coding 3 to >2.0 pts
    Correctly includes
    all ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Correctly
    includes most
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at the
    visit

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes some
    ICD-10 codes
    relevant to the
    diagnoses
    addressed at
    the visit

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan

    5 to >3.0 pts
    Includes a detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan for
    each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”. The
    plan includes ALL
    of the required
    following: drug
    name, dose, route,
    frequency, duration
    and cost as well as
    education related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    3 to >1.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologic
    treatment plan
    for each of the
    diagnoses listed
    under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes 4 of the
    required
    following 7: the
    drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency,
    duration and
    cost as well as
    education
    related to
    pharmacologic
    agent. If the
    diagnosis is a
    chronic
    problem,
    student includes
    instructions on
    currently
    prescribed
    medications as
    above.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes a
    detailed
    pharmacologi
    c treatment
    plan for each
    of the
    diagnoses
    listed under
    “assessment”.
    The plan
    includes less
    than 4 of the
    information:

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    5
    points

    Diagnostic /
    Lab Testing

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 100% of the
    time OR
    acknowledges “no
    diagnostic testing
    clinically required
    at this time”

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic/lab
    testing 50% of
    the time OR
    acknowledges
    “no diagnostic
    testing clinically
    required at this
    time”

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes
    appropriate
    diagnostic
    testing less
    than 50% of
    the time.

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Education 3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills for
    managing their
    illness and at least
    3 self-management
    methods on how to
    incorporate healthy
    behaviors into their
    lives.

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness and
    at least 2 self-
    management
    methods on how
    to incorporate
    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives.

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1
    strategies to
    promote and
    develop skills
    for managing
    their illness
    and at least 1
    self-
    management
    methods on
    how to
    incorporate

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    healthy
    behaviors into
    their lives

    Anticipatory
    Guidance

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Includes at least 3
    primary prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. immunizations,
    pediatric and pre-
    natal milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance)) and at
    least 2 secondary
    prevention
    strategies (related
    to age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes at least
    2 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations,
    pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipator
    guidance)) and
    at least 2
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e. screening))

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes at
    least 1 primary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    immunizations
    , pediatric and
    pre-natal
    milestone
    anticipatory
    guidance))
    and at least 1
    secondary
    prevention
    strategies
    (related to
    age/condition
    (i.e.
    screening))

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Follow Up
    Plan

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Includes
    recommendation
    for follow up,
    including time
    frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months
    )

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Includes recommendation for
    follow up, but does not include
    time frame (i.e. x # of
    days/weeks/months)

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    2
    points

    Prescription 3 to >2.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes all
    required
    components:
    patient information,
    date, drug name,
    dose, route,
    frequency, quantity
    to be dispensed,
    refills, and
    provider’s
    signature and
    credentials

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Prescription
    includes most
    required
    components,
    but is missing 1-
    2 elements such
    as quantity to be
    dispensed or
    refills

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Prescription is
    missing 3 or
    more required
    components
    such as
    patient
    information,
    date, or
    provider’s
    signature

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    Writing
    Mechanics,
    Citations, and
    APA Style

    3 to >2.0 pts
    Effectively uses the
    literature and other
    resources to inform
    their work.
    Exceptional use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing. APA

    2 to >1.0 pts
    Moderately use
    the literature
    and other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Moderately use
    of citations and

    1 to >0.0 pts
    Ineffectively
    uses the
    literature and
    other
    resources to
    inform their
    work.
    Ineffectively

    0 pts
    Missing
    criteria
    and/or
    submission
    .

    3
    points

    style is correct, and
    writing is free of
    grammar and
    spelling errors.

    extended
    referencing. APA
    style and writing
    mechanics need
    more precision
    and attention to
    detail.

    use of
    citations and
    extended
    referencing.
    APA style and
    writing
    mechanics
    need serious
    attention.

    Total 100

  • [Solved] Caring for Chinese, Filipino, and Vietnamese Populations

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    A. Evaluate health and illness practices that may affect hypertension treatment for Chinese American clients, incorporating current data on hypertension prevalence and disparities. B. Analyze the locus-of-control variable that some Filipino Americans have that may influence health-seeking behavior i…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    A. Evaluate health and illness practices that may affect hypertension treatment for Chinese American clients, incorporating current data on hypertension prevalence and disparities.

    B. Analyze the locus-of-control variable that some Filipino Americans have that may influence health-seeking behavior in relation to SDOH such as access, education, and insurance coverage.

    C. Evaluate the importance of folk medicine and folk healers to Vietnamese Americans **and discuss how nurses can advocate for culturally inclusive care models within healthcare systems**.

  • [Solved] Diver in adv health pract

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    _**Caring for Jamaican, Haitian, and Jewish Populations**_ discuss the following: 1. Evaluate How Jamaicans typically view communication and respect in healthcare interactions (e.g., use of titles, tone, and body language) and and how misalignment with these expectations may contribute to disparitie…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    _**Caring for Jamaican, Haitian, and Jewish Populations**_

    discuss the following:

    1. Evaluate How Jamaicans typically view communication and respect in healthcare interactions (e.g., use of titles, tone, and body language) and  and how misalignment with these expectations may contribute to disparities in patient outcomes?
    2. Analyze challenges that arise when communicating with Haitian patients who speak Haitian Creole or French as their primary language, and discuss policy-based language access requirements and patient safety implications.
    3. Evaluate religious needs a Jewish client may have during hospitalization, including how nurses can advocate for institutional policies that support religious accommodation.

    **Submission Instructions:**

    – Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted, and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources

  • [Solved] Psych

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    _**Case Study: Vee**_ * * * | | | | — | — | | **Purpose:** | Analyze and apply critical thinking skills in the psychopathology of mental health patients and provide treatment and health promotion while applying evidence-based research. | | **Scenario:** | _Vee is a 26-year-old African-American w…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    _**Case Study: Vee**_

    * * *

    | | |
    | — | — |
    | **Purpose:** | Analyze and apply critical thinking skills in the psychopathology of mental health patients and provide treatment and health promotion while applying evidence-based research. |
    | **Scenario:** | _Vee is a 26-year-old African-American woman who presents with a history of non-suicidal self-injury, specifically cutting her arms and legs, since she was a teenager. She has made two suicide attempts by overdosing on prescribed medications, one as a teenager and one six months ago; she also reports chronic suicidal ideation, explaining that it gives her relief to think about suicide as a “way out.”_<br>_When she is stressed, Vee says that she often “zones out,” even in the middle of conversations or while at work. She states, “I don’t know who Vee really is,” and describes a longstanding pattern of changing her hobbies, style of clothing, and sometimes even her job based on who is in her social group. At times, she thinks that her partner is “the best thing that’s ever happened to me” and will impulsively buy him lavish gifts, send caring text messages, and the like; however, at other times she admits to thinking “I can’t stand him,” and will ignore or lash out at him, including yelling or throwing things. Immediately after doing so, she reports feeling regret and panic at the thought of him leaving her. Vee reports that, before she began dating her current partner, she sometimes engaged in sexual activity with multiple people per week, often with partners whom she did not know._ |
    | **Questions:** | Remember to answer these questions from your textbooks and NP guidelines. At all times, explain your answers. <br>1. Describe the presenting problems.<br>2. Generate a primary and differential diagnosis using the DSM5 and ICD 10 codes.<br>3. Discuss which cluster the primary diagnosis belongs to.<br>4. Formulate and prioritize a treatment plan. |

    **Submission Instructions:**

    – Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources

  • [Solved] Controversy Associated with Personality and Paraphilic Disorders

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    – National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: NICE Guidelines. (2010). [_Antisocial personality disorder: Prevention and management_Links to an external site.](https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg77). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg77 – Boland, R. Verdiun, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022). _Kaplan …

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    – National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: NICE Guidelines. (2010). [_Antisocial personality disorder: Prevention and management_Links to an external site.](https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg77).

    https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg77

    – Boland, R. Verdiun, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022).  _Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry_  (12th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

    – Chapter 19 “Personality Disorders”
    – Thapar, A., Pine, D. S., Leckman, J. F., Scott, S., Snowling, M. J., & Taylor, E. A. (Eds.). (2015). _Rutter’s child and adolescent psychiatry_  (6th ed.). Wiley Blackwell.

    – Chapter 67, “Disorders of Personality”
    – Chapter 68, “Developmental Risk for Psychopathy”
    – Chapter 69, “Gender Dysphoria and Paraphilic Sexual Disorders” (pp. 988–993 only)
    – Zakhari, R. (2021). _The psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner certification review manual_ . Springer Publishing Company.

    – Chapter 14, “Personality Disorders”

    – [\
    \
    ControversyAssociatedwithPersonalityandParaphilicDisorders.docx](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/controversyassociatedwithpersonalityandparaphilicdisorders-docx-10528815 "ControversyAssociatedwithPersonalityandParaphilicDisorders.docx")

  • [Solved] PICOT Question

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    How to best answer the clinical question?

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    How to best answer the clinical question?

  • [Solved] Nursing module 5 assignment

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    **files (2)** – ## MODULE1ASSIGNMENT-MINDMAP.pdf – ## module5assignmentinstructions.docx **## MODULE1ASSIGNMENT-MINDMAP.pdf** SPACE Personal distance individuals prefer during interaction or care. Example: Some patients prefer more physical distance during conversations CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE CARE (…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    **files (2)**

    – ## MODULE1ASSIGNMENT-MINDMAP.pdf

    – ## module5assignmentinstructions.docx

    **## MODULE1ASSIGNMENT-MINDMAP.pdf**

    SPACE
    Personal distance individuals

    prefer during interaction or care.
    Example:

    Some patients prefer more
    physical distance during

    conversations

    CULTURALLY
    APPROPRIATE

    CARE
    (GIGER & DAVIDHIZAR MODEL)TIME

    How individuals view schedules,
    punctuality, and planning.

    Example:
    Family responsibilities may take
    priority over appointment times.

    ENVIroNMENTAL
    CONTROL

    Beliefs about how health and
    illness occur or are managed.

    Example:
    A patient may use traditional

    healing methods along with medical
    treatment.

    BIOLOGICAL
    VARIATIONS

    Physical or genetic differences
    that influence disease risk and

    treatment response.
    Example:

    Certain populations may have
    higher risk of hypertension or

    diabetes.

    SOCIAL
    ORGANIZATION

    Family roles, traditions, and social
    support that influence health

    decisions.
    Example:

    Family members may help decide
    about treatments.

    COMMUNICATION
    How people express needs and

    feelings through language and body
    gestures.
    Example:

    Patient may need an interpreter
    to understand treatment

    instructions.

    – COMMUNICATION

    – ENVIroNMENTAL CONTROL
    – SPACE
    – BIOLOGICAL VARIATIONS

    – CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE CARE (GIGER & DAVIDHIZAR MODEL)
    – TIME
    – SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

    **## module5assignmentinstructions.docx**

    **_Cultural Assessment_**

    Choose one new cultural group reviewed within this course. Using Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model, perform a comprehensive assessment of how your new selected cultural group’s beliefs and practices might impact healthcare decision-making, treatment adherence, your communication, your interventions, and your education to align with the patient's cultural values and preferences.

    Utilize your mind map from module 1 and the textbook’s FIG. 1.1 in chapter 1 to thoroughly outline your assessment and expand upon each of the six cultural phenomena for your selected group.

    **Submission Instructions:**

    · The paper is to be clear and concise, and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation and misspelling.

    · The paper is to be no shorter than 4 nor longer than 5 pages in length, excluding the title and reference page.

    · Incorporate a minimum of
    5 current (published within last four years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions) within your work.

    · Journal articles and books should be cited and referenced according to APA style.

    ·
    **This assignment will be assessed through Turnitin. Similarity report must be less than 5%.**

    ·
    **No AI detectable, no plagiarism allowed.**

    **Grading Rubric**

    Your assignment will be graded according to the grading rubric.

    **Cultural Assessment Rubric**

    | | | |
    | — | — | — |
    | Cultural Assessment Rubric |
    | **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Points** |
    | **Identification of Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model components** | **Distinguished**<br>Identify and demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the six cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an accomplished understanding of at least five of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an acceptable understanding of at least four of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an unacceptable understanding of three or fewer of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Analysis and Evaluation of Issues/Problems** | **Distinguished**<br>Presents an insightful, thorough analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Presents a mostly thorough analysis and evaluation of most of the issues/problems.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Presents unacceptable analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Demonstrates a Conceptual Understanding** | **Distinguished**<br>Provides a thorough, competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a high level of conceptual understanding.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Provides a competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Provides a competent response to all components of the model, but lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Provides an unacceptable response to the components of the model, and lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Use of Citations to Course Readings and Additional Research/Literature** | **Distinguished**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Exceptional use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Unacceptable use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Writing Mechanics and APA Formatting Guidelines** | **Distinguished**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity, precision, and attention to detail. APA style is correct and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Demonstrate a moderate level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Demonstrates issues in writing and communicating clearly. APA style and writing mechanics need serious attention.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |

    **Choose a submission type**

    **## module5assignmentinstructions.docx**

    **_Cultural Assessment_**

    Choose one new cultural group reviewed within this course. Using Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model, perform a comprehensive assessment of how your new selected cultural group’s beliefs and practices might impact healthcare decision-making, treatment adherence, your communication, your interventions, and your education to align with the patient's cultural values and preferences.

    Utilize your mind map from module 1 and the textbook’s FIG. 1.1 in chapter 1 to thoroughly outline your assessment and expand upon each of the six cultural phenomena for your selected group.

    **Submission Instructions:**

    · The paper is to be clear and concise, and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation and misspelling.

    · The paper is to be no shorter than 4 nor longer than 5 pages in length, excluding the title and reference page.

    · Incorporate a minimum of
    5 current (published within last four years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions) within your work.

    · Journal articles and books should be cited and referenced according to APA style.

    ·
    **This assignment will be assessed through Turnitin. Similarity report must be less than 5%.**

    ·
    **No AI detectable, no plagiarism allowed.**

    **Grading Rubric**

    Your assignment will be graded according to the grading rubric.

    **Cultural Assessment Rubric**

    | | | |
    | — | — | — |
    | Cultural Assessment Rubric |
    | **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Points** |
    | **Identification of Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model components** | **Distinguished**<br>Identify and demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the six cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an accomplished understanding of at least five of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an acceptable understanding of at least four of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an unacceptable understanding of three or fewer of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Analysis and Evaluation of Issues/Problems** | **Distinguished**<br>Presents an insightful, thorough analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Presents a mostly thorough analysis and evaluation of most of the issues/problems.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Presents unacceptable analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Demonstrates a Conceptual Understanding** | **Distinguished**<br>Provides a thorough, competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a high level of conceptual understanding.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Provides a competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Provides a competent response to all components of the model, but lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Provides an unacceptable response to the components of the model, and lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Use of Citations to Course Readings and Additional Research/Literature** | **Distinguished**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Exceptional use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Unacceptable use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Writing Mechanics and APA Formatting Guidelines** | **Distinguished**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity, precision, and attention to detail. APA style is correct and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Demonstrate a moderate level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Demonstrates issues in writing and communicating clearly. APA style and writing mechanics need serious attention.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |

    **Choose a submission type**

    **## MODULE1ASSIGNMENT-MINDMAP.pdf**

    SPACE
    Personal distance individuals

    prefer during interaction or care.
    Example:

    Some patients prefer more
    physical distance during

    conversations

    CULTURALLY
    APPROPRIATE

    CARE
    (GIGER & DAVIDHIZAR MODEL)TIME

    How individuals view schedules,
    punctuality, and planning.

    Example:
    Family responsibilities may take
    priority over appointment times.

    ENVIroNMENTAL
    CONTROL

    Beliefs about how health and
    illness occur or are managed.

    Example:
    A patient may use traditional

    healing methods along with medical
    treatment.

    BIOLOGICAL
    VARIATIONS

    Physical or genetic differences
    that influence disease risk and

    treatment response.
    Example:

    Certain populations may have
    higher risk of hypertension or

    diabetes.

    SOCIAL
    ORGANIZATION

    Family roles, traditions, and social
    support that influence health

    decisions.
    Example:

    Family members may help decide
    about treatments.

    COMMUNICATION
    How people express needs and

    feelings through language and body
    gestures.
    Example:

    Patient may need an interpreter
    to understand treatment

    instructions.

    – COMMUNICATION

    – ENVIroNMENTAL CONTROL
    – SPACE
    – BIOLOGICAL VARIATIONS

    – CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE CARE (GIGER & DAVIDHIZAR MODEL)
    – TIME
    – SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

    **## module5assignmentinstructions.docx**

    **_Cultural Assessment_**

    Choose one new cultural group reviewed within this course. Using Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model, perform a comprehensive assessment of how your new selected cultural group’s beliefs and practices might impact healthcare decision-making, treatment adherence, your communication, your interventions, and your education to align with the patient's cultural values and preferences.

    Utilize your mind map from module 1 and the textbook’s FIG. 1.1 in chapter 1 to thoroughly outline your assessment and expand upon each of the six cultural phenomena for your selected group.

    **Submission Instructions:**

    · The paper is to be clear and concise, and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation and misspelling.

    · The paper is to be no shorter than 4 nor longer than 5 pages in length, excluding the title and reference page.

    · Incorporate a minimum of
    5 current (published within last four years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions) within your work.

    · Journal articles and books should be cited and referenced according to APA style.

    ·
    **This assignment will be assessed through Turnitin. Similarity report must be less than 5%.**

    ·
    **No AI detectable, no plagiarism allowed.**

    **Grading Rubric**

    Your assignment will be graded according to the grading rubric.

    **Cultural Assessment Rubric**

    | | | |
    | — | — | — |
    | Cultural Assessment Rubric |
    | **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Points** |
    | **Identification of Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model components** | **Distinguished**<br>Identify and demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the six cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an accomplished understanding of at least five of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an acceptable understanding of at least four of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an unacceptable understanding of three or fewer of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Analysis and Evaluation of Issues/Problems** | **Distinguished**<br>Presents an insightful, thorough analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Presents a mostly thorough analysis and evaluation of most of the issues/problems.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Presents unacceptable analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Demonstrates a Conceptual Understanding** | **Distinguished**<br>Provides a thorough, competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a high level of conceptual understanding.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Provides a competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Provides a competent response to all components of the model, but lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Provides an unacceptable response to the components of the model, and lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Use of Citations to Course Readings and Additional Research/Literature** | **Distinguished**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Exceptional use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Unacceptable use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Writing Mechanics and APA Formatting Guidelines** | **Distinguished**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity, precision, and attention to detail. APA style is correct and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Demonstrate a moderate level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Demonstrates issues in writing and communicating clearly. APA style and writing mechanics need serious attention.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |

    **Choose a submission type**

    **## MODULE1ASSIGNMENT-MINDMAP.pdf**

    SPACE
    Personal distance individuals

    prefer during interaction or care.
    Example:

    Some patients prefer more
    physical distance during

    conversations

    CULTURALLY
    APPROPRIATE

    CARE
    (GIGER & DAVIDHIZAR MODEL)TIME

    How individuals view schedules,
    punctuality, and planning.

    Example:
    Family responsibilities may take
    priority over appointment times.

    ENVIroNMENTAL
    CONTROL

    Beliefs about how health and
    illness occur or are managed.

    Example:
    A patient may use traditional

    healing methods along with medical
    treatment.

    BIOLOGICAL
    VARIATIONS

    Physical or genetic differences
    that influence disease risk and

    treatment response.
    Example:

    Certain populations may have
    higher risk of hypertension or

    diabetes.

    SOCIAL
    ORGANIZATION

    Family roles, traditions, and social
    support that influence health

    decisions.
    Example:

    Family members may help decide
    about treatments.

    COMMUNICATION
    How people express needs and

    feelings through language and body
    gestures.
    Example:

    Patient may need an interpreter
    to understand treatment

    instructions.

    – COMMUNICATION

    – ENVIroNMENTAL CONTROL
    – SPACE
    – BIOLOGICAL VARIATIONS

    – CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE CARE (GIGER & DAVIDHIZAR MODEL)
    – TIME
    – SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

    **## module5assignmentinstructions.docx**

    **_Cultural Assessment_**

    Choose one new cultural group reviewed within this course. Using Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model, perform a comprehensive assessment of how your new selected cultural group’s beliefs and practices might impact healthcare decision-making, treatment adherence, your communication, your interventions, and your education to align with the patient's cultural values and preferences.

    Utilize your mind map from module 1 and the textbook’s FIG. 1.1 in chapter 1 to thoroughly outline your assessment and expand upon each of the six cultural phenomena for your selected group.

    **Submission Instructions:**

    · The paper is to be clear and concise, and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation and misspelling.

    · The paper is to be no shorter than 4 nor longer than 5 pages in length, excluding the title and reference page.

    · Incorporate a minimum of
    5 current (published within last four years) scholarly journal articles or primary legal sources (statutes, court opinions) within your work.

    · Journal articles and books should be cited and referenced according to APA style.

    ·
    **This assignment will be assessed through Turnitin. Similarity report must be less than 5%.**

    ·
    **No AI detectable, no plagiarism allowed.**

    **Grading Rubric**

    Your assignment will be graded according to the grading rubric.

    **Cultural Assessment Rubric**

    | | | |
    | — | — | — |
    | Cultural Assessment Rubric |
    | **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Points** |
    | **Identification of Giger and Davidhizar's Transcultural Assessment Model components** | **Distinguished**<br>Identify and demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the six cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an accomplished understanding of at least five of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an acceptable understanding of at least four of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Identifies and demonstrate an unacceptable understanding of three or fewer of the cultural phenomena within the model.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Analysis and Evaluation of Issues/Problems** | **Distinguished**<br>Presents an insightful, thorough analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Presents a mostly thorough analysis and evaluation of most of the issues/problems.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Presents unacceptable analysis and evaluation of the group’s cultural assessment.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Demonstrates a Conceptual Understanding** | **Distinguished**<br>Provides a thorough, competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a high level of conceptual understanding.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Provides a competent and interpretive responses to all components of the model, and shows a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Provides a competent response to all components of the model, but lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Provides an unacceptable response to the components of the model, and lacks interpretation and a moderate level of conceptual understanding.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Use of Citations to Course Readings and Additional Research/Literature** | **Distinguished**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Exceptional use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Unacceptable use of citations and extended referencing.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |
    | **Writing Mechanics and APA Formatting Guidelines** | **Distinguished**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity, precision, and attention to detail. APA style is correct and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors.<br>**4 pts**<br>**Excellent**<br>Demonstrate a high level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**3 pts**<br>**Fair**<br>Demonstrate a moderate level of clarity. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail.<br>**2 pts**<br>**Poor**<br>Demonstrates issues in writing and communicating clearly. APA style and writing mechanics need serious attention.<br>**1 pts** | /4 pts |

    **Choose a submission type**

  • [Solved] nursing outcome

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    **files (2)** – ## AdvocatingforChangeAssignment1.docx – ## AdvocatingforChangeRubrics4.docx **## AdvocatingforChangeAssignment1.docx** **Project #3 Advocating for Change (50 points)** PPT **Needs Assessment:** Think about a problem you have observed in practice or in clinical rotations. Are the pat…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    **files (2)**

    – ## AdvocatingforChangeAssignment1.docx

    – ## AdvocatingforChangeRubrics4.docx

    **## AdvocatingforChangeAssignment1.docx**

    **Project #3 Advocating for Change (50 points)**

    PPT

    **Needs Assessment:** Think about a problem you have observed in practice or in clinical rotations. Are the patient or staff satisfaction scores in a certain area low? Does a certain unit have a higher-than-average infection rate? What are some of the possible solutions? Why is it important to evaluate the need for change and not just stick with the “it’s the way we always have done it” mentality?

    With this mindset, work with your group of four to select a topic from your pool of previous research to expand upon for this assignment. You may use your evidence-based practice research from Clinical II or your staff presentation project from Clinical III. If you want you can do something very different.

    **PICO:** Form a PICO question that you will use for your change project. Include each element of the PICO question. This format provides guidance as you work. It is an anchor to check that your work/presentation/proposal is remaining on topic.

    | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — |
    | **P** | **I** | **C** | **O** |
    | **Population or Problem** | **Intervention or Exposure** | **Comparison** | **Outcome** |
    | What are the characteristics of the<br>**P** opulation or patient?<br> <br>What is the <br>**P** roblem, condition or disease you are interested in? | How do you wish to<br>**I** ntervene – what do you want to do with this patient – management strategy, treatment, diagnostic test, observation, etc.? | What is the<br>**C** omparison or alternative to the intervention – placebo, different drug or therapy, surgery, no intervention, etc.? | What are the possible <br>**O** utcomes – positive and negative potential consequences: success, morbidity, death, complications, etc.? |

    Because this is based on previous research, you should already have an answer to your PICO question. This is merely an exercise is professionally structuring a question that is clearly relevant to your research and presentation. Here is an image I took from the internet:
    [https://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/systematic/PICO](https://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/systematic/PICO). Please note how simple yet specific you can be when creating a PICO question for nursing research. Also, feel free to do a google search of “PICO questions.” You may very well find an example that works better for you and your given topic. I like the one below because it is clean and easy to follow.

    ![](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/nursing-outcome-20968321)

    **Evidence**: Based on work you have already done, what does the literature say about the potential to improve outcomes? This can largely be a copy-paste from your earlier work. Show me the research. Please edit the unnecessary components, i.e., do NOT copy/paste the entire EBP paper. Keep it relevant to the needs assessment and PICO. Consider adding to the previous research by adding some additional statistics here. When you advocate for change in your presentation, you need the evidence to back up your position. Note: remember that your references will also need to be copy-pasted at the end.

    **Intervention(s):** Specifically, what do you propose should be done about the issue? What is the best intervention? Of course, this is based on your evidence in the previous section. In this section, add the cost (money, time, other resources) and the benefits (money, time, or other resources saved). Maintain awareness of cultural variations here if it pertains to your intervention.

    **Strategic Plan:** Assess the readiness of the health care facility, organization, staff, etc. to support, learn about, and implement your plan. Use a SMART goals format as a basis for your plan. Remember to include a “who” component in the SMART goals. This is the number one forgotten item in my opinion. Nothing will happen if it’s nobody’s job to make it happen. Here’s a great graphic that explains the SMART structure. Again, there are many great examples to google. In this case, be aware that there is one formula that has “attainable” and “realistic” listed as the A and the R. These seem redundant to me. I like “relevant” because it brings you full circle to your purpose and your PICO. Use the SMART plan you make to flesh out a plan to propose to your audience. Who, what, when, where, and (most importantly) why?

    ![Planning for new objectives? Here is how to create SMART goals](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/nursing-outcome-20968321)

    **Evaluation:** How will you and the person or people funding or otherwise providing for your venture know that it has been successful? What outcome measures will you use? Make a specific and measurable evaluation plan with timelines.

    **Next Steps:** What do you recommend for the facility, department, etc. after the initial evaluation? You may project your assumptions here.

    **Advocating for Change Presentation**

    In Person or a Zoom meeting, your group will present your program, quality improvement initiative, or other project for approval. Choose your most appropriate audience and address them in your opening. “Ladies and gentlemen of the board” for example. Choose the person or group most relevant to your project. If you don’t know who that is, look it up. Example: It is inappropriate to ask a CEO or hospital board about enforcing 15-minute breaks on the unit. That audience would be a shift supervisor or floor manager. Find out whose role it would most likely be to hear your initiative.

    Then, use the elements of your paper to convince the audience to support your proposed change. Speak extemporaneously, do not read from the paper except perhaps in the case of verifying a specific statistic. Each member of the group should speak for an approximately equal amount of time. Include some visual aids (pie chart, photo of tunneling bedsores, whatever makes an impact) but sprinkle those in rather than relying on them. For the most part, I want to see your faces, not a slideshow. This is about engaging and convincing an audience. Start from the top and work your way down. Keep in mind that your audience has no idea who you are or what you are talking about so lay it all out clearly.

    1. Introduce yourselves

    2. Illustrate problem and why it’s a problem (needs assessment)

    3. State your question (PICO)

    4. Discuss your findings (evidence)

    5. Propose your idea (intervention)

    6. Detail with specifics how it will be implemented (strategic plan/SMART goals)

    7. Outline your measurable evaluation criteria with timelines (evaluation)

    8. Project future plans (next steps)

    9. Thank the audience and wrap it up.

    **Schedule In-Person Meeting Directions:**

    **You will need to schedule an in-person or zoom meeting with me. You may use my “schedule a meeting”. If you need to schedule a meeting outside of the available timeslots, please send an email and I will work with you if I am able to, give me a couple of times to work for your group, and I will see what I can do. I am not opposed to doing this when you are here on campus with your Clinical group. Do not wait till the last minute to set up a meeting time. You want to get this done in the scheduled time frame.**

    **Hot tips:**

    People respond to these three things: Facts and figures, higher powers, and personal connections.

    Align the values of the organization with your project if possible.

    Tell them how it will make or save money.

    ## image1.jpeg

    ## image2.jpeg

    **## AdvocatingforChangeRubrics4.docx**

    Advocating for Change Power Point Rubric (35 points)

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Organization and mechanics are impeccable. Well-organized and easily understood. Shows reflective insight based on evidence and clear plans for implementation. No improvement needed.**<br>7 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>5 points | **Basic/Needs Improvement: MOSTLY professional and accurate. PARTIAL demonstration of professional understanding, sometimes unclear. Displays lack of confidence or inefficiencies in writing. SEVERAL areas of correction are required.**<br>3 points | **Below basic: SOMEWHAT professional and accurate. MINIMAL demonstration of professional understanding, frequently unclear. MULTIPLE areas of correction are required. Mid-term Personal Improvement Plan required**<br>1 point | **Marginal/Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | **Crucial Conversations Reflection Power Point Presentation with notes** |
    | Needs Assessment and PICO | The observation/needs assessment that prompted the research and proposal is clear, and a PICO question is posed to the reader: “based on these observations, we wanted to know if… [insert PICO question]” | Needs assessment is unclear. The reader cannot tell why the group decided this topic needed to be explored OR the PICO question is unclear/incorrectly formatted | BOTH the needs assessment and PICO question are unclear | Either the needs assessment or the PICO is missing | Both the needs assessment and PICO are missing |
    | Evidence and Interventions | Evidence is presented that supports the intervention. The two sections are distinct yet clearly related. “based on this evidence, we propose to…” Why is this the best intervention, based on your evidence? | Evidence is unclear or reads more like opinion than fact, or lacks resources OR intervention is unclear and the reader cannot tell exactly what the proposed intervention is | BOTH the evidence and intervention(s) are unclear | Either the evidence or interventions are missing | Both the evidence and interventions are missing |
    | Strategic Plan | Plan for implementation of the intervention is <br>**robust** and clearly includes all five elements of a SMART goal, including the responsible parties and a specific timeline. Every element of the SMART acronym is clear and distinct. The reader does not have to guess at any aspect of the plan. This may be the longest section of your ppt | One element of the SMART goal is missing | Two elements of the SMART goal are missing | Three elements of the SMART goal are missing | Four elements of the SMART goal are missing |
    | Evaluation and Next Steps | Paper clearly states the <br>**measurable** plan for evaluating the proposal’s success at the end of the evaluation period. Next Steps makes a clear recommendation. This section may be projected, “if the outcome is…then we recommend…” | Plans for evaluation are unclear; may lack timeline or measurement tools OR next steps are not clearly proposed | BOTH the evaluation and next steps are unclear | Either the evaluation or next steps are missing | Both the evaluation and next steps are missing |
    | Grammar & Mechanics | Follows all guidelines for spelling, usage, mechanics, grammar, etc. Sentences are strong and have a varied structure. There are no mechanical errors. You have as many slides as needed. I want your notes in the note section or on paper that you turn in. Site references, have a reference slide. | Follows most guidelines, but some sentences are unclear, uneven, or contain errors. There are two or fewer mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA format is inconsistently followed. Length is less than five or more than ten pages | Follows some guidelines, but sentences contain multiple errors and are difficult to understand. There are three or more mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA formatting is inconsistent or not used | Difficulty following guidelines; mechanical errors are numerous. APA formatting not apparent | Guidelines are not followed; most sentences contain numerous errors and cannot be understood. APA formatting is nonexistent |

    Advocating for Change Video Presentation (15 points)

    | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Delivery is impeccable and the conversation is easily understood. No improvement needed.**<br>5 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>3 points | **Acceptable: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL fumbles in poise, presentation, and content.**<br>1 point | **Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks confidence and professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | Beginning | Starts with an introduction of selves to the audience and the general purpose of the presentation. Identifies the role of the audience member (CEO, charge nurse, etc.). The concept (problem to be addressed) is clear from the beginning and is well-rehearsed (well-enunciated, good grammar, no “ums”, not reading from a script) | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | Middle | Evidence is well-presented and easy to follow. Visual aides such as charts, graphics, etc. are used. All three methods to convince the audience are used: facts and figures, higher power, and personal story. Interventions are easy to understand and follow a strategic plan. The audience readily understands the timeline, measuring tools, and cost(s) in terms of dollars, human resources, and time. Presenters are confident in their assertions. Section is well-rehearsed (not reading from a script). Evidence cited is clearly evidence-based and references are available | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | End | Presentation concludes with plans for measuring effectiveness and proposed next steps. Presentation leaves the audience with the impression that the team worked as a collaborative, respectful group and that all team members played an equal role in presenting. The group thanks the audience before exiting the recording | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |

    **## AdvocatingforChangeRubrics4.docx**

    Advocating for Change Power Point Rubric (35 points)

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Organization and mechanics are impeccable. Well-organized and easily understood. Shows reflective insight based on evidence and clear plans for implementation. No improvement needed.**<br>7 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>5 points | **Basic/Needs Improvement: MOSTLY professional and accurate. PARTIAL demonstration of professional understanding, sometimes unclear. Displays lack of confidence or inefficiencies in writing. SEVERAL areas of correction are required.**<br>3 points | **Below basic: SOMEWHAT professional and accurate. MINIMAL demonstration of professional understanding, frequently unclear. MULTIPLE areas of correction are required. Mid-term Personal Improvement Plan required**<br>1 point | **Marginal/Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | **Crucial Conversations Reflection Power Point Presentation with notes** |
    | Needs Assessment and PICO | The observation/needs assessment that prompted the research and proposal is clear, and a PICO question is posed to the reader: “based on these observations, we wanted to know if… [insert PICO question]” | Needs assessment is unclear. The reader cannot tell why the group decided this topic needed to be explored OR the PICO question is unclear/incorrectly formatted | BOTH the needs assessment and PICO question are unclear | Either the needs assessment or the PICO is missing | Both the needs assessment and PICO are missing |
    | Evidence and Interventions | Evidence is presented that supports the intervention. The two sections are distinct yet clearly related. “based on this evidence, we propose to…” Why is this the best intervention, based on your evidence? | Evidence is unclear or reads more like opinion than fact, or lacks resources OR intervention is unclear and the reader cannot tell exactly what the proposed intervention is | BOTH the evidence and intervention(s) are unclear | Either the evidence or interventions are missing | Both the evidence and interventions are missing |
    | Strategic Plan | Plan for implementation of the intervention is <br>**robust** and clearly includes all five elements of a SMART goal, including the responsible parties and a specific timeline. Every element of the SMART acronym is clear and distinct. The reader does not have to guess at any aspect of the plan. This may be the longest section of your ppt | One element of the SMART goal is missing | Two elements of the SMART goal are missing | Three elements of the SMART goal are missing | Four elements of the SMART goal are missing |
    | Evaluation and Next Steps | Paper clearly states the <br>**measurable** plan for evaluating the proposal’s success at the end of the evaluation period. Next Steps makes a clear recommendation. This section may be projected, “if the outcome is…then we recommend…” | Plans for evaluation are unclear; may lack timeline or measurement tools OR next steps are not clearly proposed | BOTH the evaluation and next steps are unclear | Either the evaluation or next steps are missing | Both the evaluation and next steps are missing |
    | Grammar & Mechanics | Follows all guidelines for spelling, usage, mechanics, grammar, etc. Sentences are strong and have a varied structure. There are no mechanical errors. You have as many slides as needed. I want your notes in the note section or on paper that you turn in. Site references, have a reference slide. | Follows most guidelines, but some sentences are unclear, uneven, or contain errors. There are two or fewer mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA format is inconsistently followed. Length is less than five or more than ten pages | Follows some guidelines, but sentences contain multiple errors and are difficult to understand. There are three or more mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA formatting is inconsistent or not used | Difficulty following guidelines; mechanical errors are numerous. APA formatting not apparent | Guidelines are not followed; most sentences contain numerous errors and cannot be understood. APA formatting is nonexistent |

    Advocating for Change Video Presentation (15 points)

    | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Delivery is impeccable and the conversation is easily understood. No improvement needed.**<br>5 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>3 points | **Acceptable: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL fumbles in poise, presentation, and content.**<br>1 point | **Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks confidence and professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | Beginning | Starts with an introduction of selves to the audience and the general purpose of the presentation. Identifies the role of the audience member (CEO, charge nurse, etc.). The concept (problem to be addressed) is clear from the beginning and is well-rehearsed (well-enunciated, good grammar, no “ums”, not reading from a script) | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | Middle | Evidence is well-presented and easy to follow. Visual aides such as charts, graphics, etc. are used. All three methods to convince the audience are used: facts and figures, higher power, and personal story. Interventions are easy to understand and follow a strategic plan. The audience readily understands the timeline, measuring tools, and cost(s) in terms of dollars, human resources, and time. Presenters are confident in their assertions. Section is well-rehearsed (not reading from a script). Evidence cited is clearly evidence-based and references are available | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | End | Presentation concludes with plans for measuring effectiveness and proposed next steps. Presentation leaves the audience with the impression that the team worked as a collaborative, respectful group and that all team members played an equal role in presenting. The group thanks the audience before exiting the recording | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |

    **## AdvocatingforChangeAssignment1.docx**

    **Project #3 Advocating for Change (50 points)**

    PPT

    **Needs Assessment:** Think about a problem you have observed in practice or in clinical rotations. Are the patient or staff satisfaction scores in a certain area low? Does a certain unit have a higher-than-average infection rate? What are some of the possible solutions? Why is it important to evaluate the need for change and not just stick with the “it’s the way we always have done it” mentality?

    With this mindset, work with your group of four to select a topic from your pool of previous research to expand upon for this assignment. You may use your evidence-based practice research from Clinical II or your staff presentation project from Clinical III. If you want you can do something very different.

    **PICO:** Form a PICO question that you will use for your change project. Include each element of the PICO question. This format provides guidance as you work. It is an anchor to check that your work/presentation/proposal is remaining on topic.

    | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — |
    | **P** | **I** | **C** | **O** |
    | **Population or Problem** | **Intervention or Exposure** | **Comparison** | **Outcome** |
    | What are the characteristics of the<br>**P** opulation or patient?<br> <br>What is the <br>**P** roblem, condition or disease you are interested in? | How do you wish to<br>**I** ntervene – what do you want to do with this patient – management strategy, treatment, diagnostic test, observation, etc.? | What is the<br>**C** omparison or alternative to the intervention – placebo, different drug or therapy, surgery, no intervention, etc.? | What are the possible <br>**O** utcomes – positive and negative potential consequences: success, morbidity, death, complications, etc.? |

    Because this is based on previous research, you should already have an answer to your PICO question. This is merely an exercise is professionally structuring a question that is clearly relevant to your research and presentation. Here is an image I took from the internet:
    [https://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/systematic/PICO](https://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/systematic/PICO). Please note how simple yet specific you can be when creating a PICO question for nursing research. Also, feel free to do a google search of “PICO questions.” You may very well find an example that works better for you and your given topic. I like the one below because it is clean and easy to follow.

    ![](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/nursing-outcome-20968321)

    **Evidence**: Based on work you have already done, what does the literature say about the potential to improve outcomes? This can largely be a copy-paste from your earlier work. Show me the research. Please edit the unnecessary components, i.e., do NOT copy/paste the entire EBP paper. Keep it relevant to the needs assessment and PICO. Consider adding to the previous research by adding some additional statistics here. When you advocate for change in your presentation, you need the evidence to back up your position. Note: remember that your references will also need to be copy-pasted at the end.

    **Intervention(s):** Specifically, what do you propose should be done about the issue? What is the best intervention? Of course, this is based on your evidence in the previous section. In this section, add the cost (money, time, other resources) and the benefits (money, time, or other resources saved). Maintain awareness of cultural variations here if it pertains to your intervention.

    **Strategic Plan:** Assess the readiness of the health care facility, organization, staff, etc. to support, learn about, and implement your plan. Use a SMART goals format as a basis for your plan. Remember to include a “who” component in the SMART goals. This is the number one forgotten item in my opinion. Nothing will happen if it’s nobody’s job to make it happen. Here’s a great graphic that explains the SMART structure. Again, there are many great examples to google. In this case, be aware that there is one formula that has “attainable” and “realistic” listed as the A and the R. These seem redundant to me. I like “relevant” because it brings you full circle to your purpose and your PICO. Use the SMART plan you make to flesh out a plan to propose to your audience. Who, what, when, where, and (most importantly) why?

    ![Planning for new objectives? Here is how to create SMART goals](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/nursing-outcome-20968321)

    **Evaluation:** How will you and the person or people funding or otherwise providing for your venture know that it has been successful? What outcome measures will you use? Make a specific and measurable evaluation plan with timelines.

    **Next Steps:** What do you recommend for the facility, department, etc. after the initial evaluation? You may project your assumptions here.

    **Advocating for Change Presentation**

    In Person or a Zoom meeting, your group will present your program, quality improvement initiative, or other project for approval. Choose your most appropriate audience and address them in your opening. “Ladies and gentlemen of the board” for example. Choose the person or group most relevant to your project. If you don’t know who that is, look it up. Example: It is inappropriate to ask a CEO or hospital board about enforcing 15-minute breaks on the unit. That audience would be a shift supervisor or floor manager. Find out whose role it would most likely be to hear your initiative.

    Then, use the elements of your paper to convince the audience to support your proposed change. Speak extemporaneously, do not read from the paper except perhaps in the case of verifying a specific statistic. Each member of the group should speak for an approximately equal amount of time. Include some visual aids (pie chart, photo of tunneling bedsores, whatever makes an impact) but sprinkle those in rather than relying on them. For the most part, I want to see your faces, not a slideshow. This is about engaging and convincing an audience. Start from the top and work your way down. Keep in mind that your audience has no idea who you are or what you are talking about so lay it all out clearly.

    1. Introduce yourselves

    2. Illustrate problem and why it’s a problem (needs assessment)

    3. State your question (PICO)

    4. Discuss your findings (evidence)

    5. Propose your idea (intervention)

    6. Detail with specifics how it will be implemented (strategic plan/SMART goals)

    7. Outline your measurable evaluation criteria with timelines (evaluation)

    8. Project future plans (next steps)

    9. Thank the audience and wrap it up.

    **Schedule In-Person Meeting Directions:**

    **You will need to schedule an in-person or zoom meeting with me. You may use my “schedule a meeting”. If you need to schedule a meeting outside of the available timeslots, please send an email and I will work with you if I am able to, give me a couple of times to work for your group, and I will see what I can do. I am not opposed to doing this when you are here on campus with your Clinical group. Do not wait till the last minute to set up a meeting time. You want to get this done in the scheduled time frame.**

    **Hot tips:**

    People respond to these three things: Facts and figures, higher powers, and personal connections.

    Align the values of the organization with your project if possible.

    Tell them how it will make or save money.

    ## image1.jpeg

    ## image2.jpeg

    **## AdvocatingforChangeRubrics4.docx**

    Advocating for Change Power Point Rubric (35 points)

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Organization and mechanics are impeccable. Well-organized and easily understood. Shows reflective insight based on evidence and clear plans for implementation. No improvement needed.**<br>7 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>5 points | **Basic/Needs Improvement: MOSTLY professional and accurate. PARTIAL demonstration of professional understanding, sometimes unclear. Displays lack of confidence or inefficiencies in writing. SEVERAL areas of correction are required.**<br>3 points | **Below basic: SOMEWHAT professional and accurate. MINIMAL demonstration of professional understanding, frequently unclear. MULTIPLE areas of correction are required. Mid-term Personal Improvement Plan required**<br>1 point | **Marginal/Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | **Crucial Conversations Reflection Power Point Presentation with notes** |
    | Needs Assessment and PICO | The observation/needs assessment that prompted the research and proposal is clear, and a PICO question is posed to the reader: “based on these observations, we wanted to know if… [insert PICO question]” | Needs assessment is unclear. The reader cannot tell why the group decided this topic needed to be explored OR the PICO question is unclear/incorrectly formatted | BOTH the needs assessment and PICO question are unclear | Either the needs assessment or the PICO is missing | Both the needs assessment and PICO are missing |
    | Evidence and Interventions | Evidence is presented that supports the intervention. The two sections are distinct yet clearly related. “based on this evidence, we propose to…” Why is this the best intervention, based on your evidence? | Evidence is unclear or reads more like opinion than fact, or lacks resources OR intervention is unclear and the reader cannot tell exactly what the proposed intervention is | BOTH the evidence and intervention(s) are unclear | Either the evidence or interventions are missing | Both the evidence and interventions are missing |
    | Strategic Plan | Plan for implementation of the intervention is <br>**robust** and clearly includes all five elements of a SMART goal, including the responsible parties and a specific timeline. Every element of the SMART acronym is clear and distinct. The reader does not have to guess at any aspect of the plan. This may be the longest section of your ppt | One element of the SMART goal is missing | Two elements of the SMART goal are missing | Three elements of the SMART goal are missing | Four elements of the SMART goal are missing |
    | Evaluation and Next Steps | Paper clearly states the <br>**measurable** plan for evaluating the proposal’s success at the end of the evaluation period. Next Steps makes a clear recommendation. This section may be projected, “if the outcome is…then we recommend…” | Plans for evaluation are unclear; may lack timeline or measurement tools OR next steps are not clearly proposed | BOTH the evaluation and next steps are unclear | Either the evaluation or next steps are missing | Both the evaluation and next steps are missing |
    | Grammar & Mechanics | Follows all guidelines for spelling, usage, mechanics, grammar, etc. Sentences are strong and have a varied structure. There are no mechanical errors. You have as many slides as needed. I want your notes in the note section or on paper that you turn in. Site references, have a reference slide. | Follows most guidelines, but some sentences are unclear, uneven, or contain errors. There are two or fewer mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA format is inconsistently followed. Length is less than five or more than ten pages | Follows some guidelines, but sentences contain multiple errors and are difficult to understand. There are three or more mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA formatting is inconsistent or not used | Difficulty following guidelines; mechanical errors are numerous. APA formatting not apparent | Guidelines are not followed; most sentences contain numerous errors and cannot be understood. APA formatting is nonexistent |

    Advocating for Change Video Presentation (15 points)

    | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Delivery is impeccable and the conversation is easily understood. No improvement needed.**<br>5 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>3 points | **Acceptable: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL fumbles in poise, presentation, and content.**<br>1 point | **Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks confidence and professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | Beginning | Starts with an introduction of selves to the audience and the general purpose of the presentation. Identifies the role of the audience member (CEO, charge nurse, etc.). The concept (problem to be addressed) is clear from the beginning and is well-rehearsed (well-enunciated, good grammar, no “ums”, not reading from a script) | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | Middle | Evidence is well-presented and easy to follow. Visual aides such as charts, graphics, etc. are used. All three methods to convince the audience are used: facts and figures, higher power, and personal story. Interventions are easy to understand and follow a strategic plan. The audience readily understands the timeline, measuring tools, and cost(s) in terms of dollars, human resources, and time. Presenters are confident in their assertions. Section is well-rehearsed (not reading from a script). Evidence cited is clearly evidence-based and references are available | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | End | Presentation concludes with plans for measuring effectiveness and proposed next steps. Presentation leaves the audience with the impression that the team worked as a collaborative, respectful group and that all team members played an equal role in presenting. The group thanks the audience before exiting the recording | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |

    **## AdvocatingforChangeAssignment1.docx**

    **Project #3 Advocating for Change (50 points)**

    PPT

    **Needs Assessment:** Think about a problem you have observed in practice or in clinical rotations. Are the patient or staff satisfaction scores in a certain area low? Does a certain unit have a higher-than-average infection rate? What are some of the possible solutions? Why is it important to evaluate the need for change and not just stick with the “it’s the way we always have done it” mentality?

    With this mindset, work with your group of four to select a topic from your pool of previous research to expand upon for this assignment. You may use your evidence-based practice research from Clinical II or your staff presentation project from Clinical III. If you want you can do something very different.

    **PICO:** Form a PICO question that you will use for your change project. Include each element of the PICO question. This format provides guidance as you work. It is an anchor to check that your work/presentation/proposal is remaining on topic.

    | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — |
    | **P** | **I** | **C** | **O** |
    | **Population or Problem** | **Intervention or Exposure** | **Comparison** | **Outcome** |
    | What are the characteristics of the<br>**P** opulation or patient?<br> <br>What is the <br>**P** roblem, condition or disease you are interested in? | How do you wish to<br>**I** ntervene – what do you want to do with this patient – management strategy, treatment, diagnostic test, observation, etc.? | What is the<br>**C** omparison or alternative to the intervention – placebo, different drug or therapy, surgery, no intervention, etc.? | What are the possible <br>**O** utcomes – positive and negative potential consequences: success, morbidity, death, complications, etc.? |

    Because this is based on previous research, you should already have an answer to your PICO question. This is merely an exercise is professionally structuring a question that is clearly relevant to your research and presentation. Here is an image I took from the internet:
    [https://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/systematic/PICO](https://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/systematic/PICO). Please note how simple yet specific you can be when creating a PICO question for nursing research. Also, feel free to do a google search of “PICO questions.” You may very well find an example that works better for you and your given topic. I like the one below because it is clean and easy to follow.

    ![](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/nursing-outcome-20968321)

    **Evidence**: Based on work you have already done, what does the literature say about the potential to improve outcomes? This can largely be a copy-paste from your earlier work. Show me the research. Please edit the unnecessary components, i.e., do NOT copy/paste the entire EBP paper. Keep it relevant to the needs assessment and PICO. Consider adding to the previous research by adding some additional statistics here. When you advocate for change in your presentation, you need the evidence to back up your position. Note: remember that your references will also need to be copy-pasted at the end.

    **Intervention(s):** Specifically, what do you propose should be done about the issue? What is the best intervention? Of course, this is based on your evidence in the previous section. In this section, add the cost (money, time, other resources) and the benefits (money, time, or other resources saved). Maintain awareness of cultural variations here if it pertains to your intervention.

    **Strategic Plan:** Assess the readiness of the health care facility, organization, staff, etc. to support, learn about, and implement your plan. Use a SMART goals format as a basis for your plan. Remember to include a “who” component in the SMART goals. This is the number one forgotten item in my opinion. Nothing will happen if it’s nobody’s job to make it happen. Here’s a great graphic that explains the SMART structure. Again, there are many great examples to google. In this case, be aware that there is one formula that has “attainable” and “realistic” listed as the A and the R. These seem redundant to me. I like “relevant” because it brings you full circle to your purpose and your PICO. Use the SMART plan you make to flesh out a plan to propose to your audience. Who, what, when, where, and (most importantly) why?

    ![Planning for new objectives? Here is how to create SMART goals](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/nursing-outcome-20968321)

    **Evaluation:** How will you and the person or people funding or otherwise providing for your venture know that it has been successful? What outcome measures will you use? Make a specific and measurable evaluation plan with timelines.

    **Next Steps:** What do you recommend for the facility, department, etc. after the initial evaluation? You may project your assumptions here.

    **Advocating for Change Presentation**

    In Person or a Zoom meeting, your group will present your program, quality improvement initiative, or other project for approval. Choose your most appropriate audience and address them in your opening. “Ladies and gentlemen of the board” for example. Choose the person or group most relevant to your project. If you don’t know who that is, look it up. Example: It is inappropriate to ask a CEO or hospital board about enforcing 15-minute breaks on the unit. That audience would be a shift supervisor or floor manager. Find out whose role it would most likely be to hear your initiative.

    Then, use the elements of your paper to convince the audience to support your proposed change. Speak extemporaneously, do not read from the paper except perhaps in the case of verifying a specific statistic. Each member of the group should speak for an approximately equal amount of time. Include some visual aids (pie chart, photo of tunneling bedsores, whatever makes an impact) but sprinkle those in rather than relying on them. For the most part, I want to see your faces, not a slideshow. This is about engaging and convincing an audience. Start from the top and work your way down. Keep in mind that your audience has no idea who you are or what you are talking about so lay it all out clearly.

    1. Introduce yourselves

    2. Illustrate problem and why it’s a problem (needs assessment)

    3. State your question (PICO)

    4. Discuss your findings (evidence)

    5. Propose your idea (intervention)

    6. Detail with specifics how it will be implemented (strategic plan/SMART goals)

    7. Outline your measurable evaluation criteria with timelines (evaluation)

    8. Project future plans (next steps)

    9. Thank the audience and wrap it up.

    **Schedule In-Person Meeting Directions:**

    **You will need to schedule an in-person or zoom meeting with me. You may use my “schedule a meeting”. If you need to schedule a meeting outside of the available timeslots, please send an email and I will work with you if I am able to, give me a couple of times to work for your group, and I will see what I can do. I am not opposed to doing this when you are here on campus with your Clinical group. Do not wait till the last minute to set up a meeting time. You want to get this done in the scheduled time frame.**

    **Hot tips:**

    People respond to these three things: Facts and figures, higher powers, and personal connections.

    Align the values of the organization with your project if possible.

    Tell them how it will make or save money.

    ## image1.jpeg

    ## image2.jpeg

    **## AdvocatingforChangeRubrics4.docx**

    Advocating for Change Power Point Rubric (35 points)

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Organization and mechanics are impeccable. Well-organized and easily understood. Shows reflective insight based on evidence and clear plans for implementation. No improvement needed.**<br>7 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>5 points | **Basic/Needs Improvement: MOSTLY professional and accurate. PARTIAL demonstration of professional understanding, sometimes unclear. Displays lack of confidence or inefficiencies in writing. SEVERAL areas of correction are required.**<br>3 points | **Below basic: SOMEWHAT professional and accurate. MINIMAL demonstration of professional understanding, frequently unclear. MULTIPLE areas of correction are required. Mid-term Personal Improvement Plan required**<br>1 point | **Marginal/Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | **Crucial Conversations Reflection Power Point Presentation with notes** |
    | Needs Assessment and PICO | The observation/needs assessment that prompted the research and proposal is clear, and a PICO question is posed to the reader: “based on these observations, we wanted to know if… [insert PICO question]” | Needs assessment is unclear. The reader cannot tell why the group decided this topic needed to be explored OR the PICO question is unclear/incorrectly formatted | BOTH the needs assessment and PICO question are unclear | Either the needs assessment or the PICO is missing | Both the needs assessment and PICO are missing |
    | Evidence and Interventions | Evidence is presented that supports the intervention. The two sections are distinct yet clearly related. “based on this evidence, we propose to…” Why is this the best intervention, based on your evidence? | Evidence is unclear or reads more like opinion than fact, or lacks resources OR intervention is unclear and the reader cannot tell exactly what the proposed intervention is | BOTH the evidence and intervention(s) are unclear | Either the evidence or interventions are missing | Both the evidence and interventions are missing |
    | Strategic Plan | Plan for implementation of the intervention is <br>**robust** and clearly includes all five elements of a SMART goal, including the responsible parties and a specific timeline. Every element of the SMART acronym is clear and distinct. The reader does not have to guess at any aspect of the plan. This may be the longest section of your ppt | One element of the SMART goal is missing | Two elements of the SMART goal are missing | Three elements of the SMART goal are missing | Four elements of the SMART goal are missing |
    | Evaluation and Next Steps | Paper clearly states the <br>**measurable** plan for evaluating the proposal’s success at the end of the evaluation period. Next Steps makes a clear recommendation. This section may be projected, “if the outcome is…then we recommend…” | Plans for evaluation are unclear; may lack timeline or measurement tools OR next steps are not clearly proposed | BOTH the evaluation and next steps are unclear | Either the evaluation or next steps are missing | Both the evaluation and next steps are missing |
    | Grammar & Mechanics | Follows all guidelines for spelling, usage, mechanics, grammar, etc. Sentences are strong and have a varied structure. There are no mechanical errors. You have as many slides as needed. I want your notes in the note section or on paper that you turn in. Site references, have a reference slide. | Follows most guidelines, but some sentences are unclear, uneven, or contain errors. There are two or fewer mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA format is inconsistently followed. Length is less than five or more than ten pages | Follows some guidelines, but sentences contain multiple errors and are difficult to understand. There are three or more mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar). APA formatting is inconsistent or not used | Difficulty following guidelines; mechanical errors are numerous. APA formatting not apparent | Guidelines are not followed; most sentences contain numerous errors and cannot be understood. APA formatting is nonexistent |

    Advocating for Change Video Presentation (15 points)

    | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — |
    | **Criteria** | **Exceptional: Professional, clear, accurate, confident. Delivery is impeccable and the conversation is easily understood. No improvement needed.**<br>5 points | **Proficient: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL errors that are easily corrected. Is somewhat insightful.**<br>3 points | **Acceptable: Professional, clear, accurate, confident with OCCASIONAL fumbles in poise, presentation, and content.**<br>1 point | **Unacceptable: Unprofessional, inaccurate, unclear. Does not demonstrate understanding of concept. Lacks confidence and professionalism. NUMEROUS areas of correction that require resubmission. Any portion of the assignment that receives a 0 does not meet minimum requirements and must be resubmitted to earn a grade for the assignment.**<br>0 points |
    | Beginning | Starts with an introduction of selves to the audience and the general purpose of the presentation. Identifies the role of the audience member (CEO, charge nurse, etc.). The concept (problem to be addressed) is clear from the beginning and is well-rehearsed (well-enunciated, good grammar, no “ums”, not reading from a script) | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | Middle | Evidence is well-presented and easy to follow. Visual aides such as charts, graphics, etc. are used. All three methods to convince the audience are used: facts and figures, higher power, and personal story. Interventions are easy to understand and follow a strategic plan. The audience readily understands the timeline, measuring tools, and cost(s) in terms of dollars, human resources, and time. Presenters are confident in their assertions. Section is well-rehearsed (not reading from a script). Evidence cited is clearly evidence-based and references are available | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |
    | End | Presentation concludes with plans for measuring effectiveness and proposed next steps. Presentation leaves the audience with the impression that the team worked as a collaborative, respectful group and that all team members played an equal role in presenting. The group thanks the audience before exiting the recording | Two elements are missing | Four elements are missing | More than four elements are missing |