Module 5 | Discuss

Determine the Goal

Scenario

Mr. Johnson is a 70-year-old male complaining of shortness of breath for the past three weeks. Mr. Johnson is complaining that he has chest pain, and this pain increases when he coughs. He also reports thick green/yellow sputum for the past week. His current weight was stable at 100 kg from his previous visit six months ago. He admits to occasionally smoking cigarettes.

Mr. Johnson’s assessment is as follows:

• Inspection upper respiratory system: Nasal and mouth mucosa is pink; no bleeding, masses, or deformities are noted in the upper respiratory system.
• Inspection lower respiratory system: The client has a respiratory rate of 20 with even and unlabored respirations.
• During the history, the client is speaking freely and does not report any shortness of breath while talking.
• The client has skin appropriate for his ethnic background, with no skin integrity issues noted during the inspection.
• Palpation: No masses, deformities, or crepitus are noted. Trachea is midline and nontender.
• The client has equal lung expansion anterior and posterior; the client reports pain that increases with inspiration.
• Percussion: Dullness over right lower lobe, otherwise hyper resonance.
• Auscultation: Fine crackles in the right lower lobe with inspiration and expiratory wheezes and diminished breath sounds noted throughout.
• Vital signs: Temperature: 100°F (38°C); Respiratory rate: 22; Pulse oximetry on room air: 91% to 93%; Heart rate: 90 bpm; and Blood pressure: 130/80 mm Hg

As the nurse, you have determined the priority problem is impaired gas exchange related to the mucus collection in the airways, as evidenced by fine crackles in the right lower lobe.

Instructions

Using the assessment and nursing diagnosis provided in the scenario, write 200–250 words identifying goals for Mr. Johnson in your initial post. Then, respond to at least two of your peers’ posts.

Discussion Prompts

• Identify two measurable short-term goals for Mr. Johnson. Explain why you chose these goals.
• Consider what possible outcomes would change the priority problem.
• Define one of these possible outcomes and explain how (and why) it would change the priority problem. Then, identify at least one new measurable goal related to the newly identified problem.

 

2023 Discussion Board Rubric

2023 Discussion Board Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDemonstration of Knowledge, Understanding and Application of Content in Initial Post

10 ptsOutstandingAnswers all discussion questions and prompts with pertinent information demonstrating critical thinking and thorough understanding of course content. Post exceeds 200 words in length.

8 ptsGoodAnswers all discussion questions. Missing detailed information on 1 prompts or required elements. Post exceeds 200 words in length.

6 ptsProficientAnswers all discussion questions. Some answers are superficial without clear evidence of critical thinking and understanding of content. Lacks detailed information and missing 2 prompts or required elements. Initial post below 200 words but exceeds 150 words.

4 ptsNeeds ImprovementBriefly answers all questions but some responses are not correct and/or do not demonstrate understanding of course content. Missing 3+ prompts or majority of required elements. Post does not exceed 150 words.

0 ptsUnacceptableNo discussion board post/no submission.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Thinking and Substance of Peer Responses

10 ptsOutstandingProvides 2 response posts to peers that demonstrate critical thinking and directly address the original post. The post demonstrates extension of the original post, an alternative point of view to foster further discussion or reference/resources to support their response.

8 ptsGoodProvides 2 response posts to peers that directly address the original post. One post is not substantive (not extending knowledge of the original post, an alternative point of view or resources to support response)

6 ptsProficient1 or 2 response posts are submitted but they could be more substantive or offer little insight to further discussion or a repeat of information already posted without adding further information showing critical thinking. May include responses like “I agree” or “good point” with some supporting evidence but not thoroughly written.

4 ptsNeeds ImprovementResponse posts “I agree” or “good point,” or a repeat of information already posted without adding further information showing critical thinking. Student responds to a maximum of 1 peer.

0 ptsUnacceptableNo response posts. Student does not respond to any peers.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAcademic Language/Grammar/Composition

5 ptsOutstandingExcellent use and control of language. Posts and Responses are clearly written and understandable. No misspelled words or typographical errors Citation provided if reference/author cited in posts. APA formatting of reference is used expertly with no errors. Includes (as required for specific courses) minimum of 1 peer-reviewed reference and minimum of 1 reference published within the last 5 years.

4 ptsGoodGood use and control of language. Minor errors (< 2) such as misspelled words, typographical errors or sentence structure issues. APA formatting of references is used with 1-2 errors. Includes (as required for specific courses) maximum of 1 peer-reviewed reference and maximum of 1 reference published within the last 5 years.

3 ptsProficientAverage use and control of language. Some (3-5) errors in post. APA formatting of references is used with 3-4 errors. Includes (as required for specific courses) maximum of 1 peer-reviewed reference. References are published >5 years ago.

2 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds improvement. Below average use and control of language. Significant errors (>5) such as misspelled words, typographical errors or sentence structure issues. APA formatting of references is used with 5+ errors. Does not include (as required for specific courses) 1 peer-reviewed reference. References are published >5 years ago.

0 ptsUnacceptableSentences are incoherent and/or improperly structured. Post has multiple typographical errors, misspelled words, which do not reflect appropriate level of writing. APA formatting of references are not used and/or references not included.

5 pts

Total Points: 25

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.