Advance Clinical Practicum Discussion 1 – 2025 Describe your current knowledge of the facility you chose for your practicum experience and

Nursing Assignment Help

Advance Clinical Practicum Discussion 1 – 2025

 

  • Describe your current knowledge of the facility you chose for your practicum experience and your reasoning for choosing this particular facility. Also, share one vulnerable population that can be found within your facility’s community and your experience dealing with this population. If you do not have experience with this population, what research will you do before you start?

I work with the medicare population as a Case Manager at an Insurance company

Literature Review: The Use Of Clinical Systems To Improve Outcomes And Efficiencies – 2025 New technology and the application of existing technology only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research The stakes are high

Nursing Assignment Help

Literature Review: The Use Of Clinical Systems To Improve Outcomes And Efficiencies – 2025

  New technology—and the application of existing technology—only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research. The stakes are high, and new clinical systems need to offer evidence of a positive impact on outcomes or efficiencies.

Nurse informaticists and healthcare leaders formulate clinical system strategies. As these strategies are often based on technology trends, informaticists and others have then benefited from consulting existing research to inform their thinking.

In this Assignment, you will review existing research focused on the application of clinical systems. After reviewing, you will summarize your findings.

To Prepare:

  • Review the Resources and reflect on the impact of      clinical systems on outcomes and efficiencies within the context of      nursing practice and healthcare delivery.
  • Conduct a search for recent (within the last 5 years)      research focused on the application of clinical systems. The research      should provide evidence to support the use of one type of clinical system      to improve outcomes and/or efficiencies, such as “the use of personal      health records or portals to support patients newly diagnosed with      diabetes.”
  • Identify and select 4 peer-reviewed research articles from your research.
  • For information about annotated bibliographies,      visit https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/annotatedbibliographies

The Assignment: ( 5-6 pages not including the title and reference page)

In a 5-6 page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:

  • Identify the 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed, citing each in APA format.
  • Include an introduction explaining the purpose of the paper.
  • Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
  • In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4      peer-reviewed research articles.
  • Use APA format and include a title page.

1)  Identify the 4 peer-reviewed articles, citing each in APA format, 

2)  Summarize each study explaining:

a) improvements to outcomes,

b) efficiencies (to staff, patient, facility as a result of implementing the clinical system/clinical technology described in the article), and 

c) lessons learned from the application of the clinical system/clinical technology. Be specific AND provide examples., and

3) in your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles. 

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

· Chapter 14, “The Electronic Health Record and Clinical Informatics” (pp. 267–287)

· Chapter 15, “Informatics Tools to Promote Patient Safety and Quality Outcomes” (pp. 293–317)

· Chapter 16, “Patient Engagement and Connected Health” (pp. 323–338)

· Chapter 17, “Using Informatics to Promote Community/Population Health” (pp. 341–355)

· Chapter 18, “Telenursing and Remote Access Telehealth” (pp. 359–388)

Dykes, P. C., Rozenblum, R., Dalal, A., Massaro, A., Chang, F., Clements, M., Collins, S. …Bates, D. W. (2017). Prospective evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to improve outcomes in intensive care: The Promoting Respect and Ongoing Safety Through Patient Engagement Communication and Technology Study. Critical Care Medicine, 45(8), e806–e813. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002449

HealthIT.gov. (2018c). What is an electronic health record (EHR)? Retrieved from 

https://www.healthit.gov/faq/what-electronic-health-record-ehr

Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D. Leak, L. D., Tieman, L. A., & Manworren, R. C. B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to Improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221. 

Skiba, D. (2017). Evaluation tools to appraise social media and mobile applications. Informatics, 4(3), 32–40. 

Required Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Public Health Informatics [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author. –Downloads– Download Video w/CC Download Audio Download Transcript 

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Electronic Records and Managing IT Change [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

· Chapter 5, “Critically Appraising Quantitative Evidence for Clinical Decision Making” (pp. 124–188)

· Chapter 6, “Critically Appraising Qualitative Evidence for Clinical Decision Making” (pp. 189–218)

Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010a). Evidence-based practice step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part I. American Journal of Nursing, 110(7), 47–52. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000383935.22721.9c

Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010b). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part II: Digging deeper—examining the “keeper” studies. American Journal of Nursing, 110(9), 41–48. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000388264.49427.f9

Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010c). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part III: The process of synthesis: Seeing similarities and differences across the body of evidence. American Journal of Nursing, 110(11), 43–51. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000390523.99066.b5

Williamson, K. M. (2009). Evidence-based practice: Critical appraisal of qualitative evidence. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 15(3), 202–207. doi:10.1177/1078390309338733

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Appraising the Research [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Case #2 Anxiety Disorder, OCD, Or Something Else? – 2025 The Assignment Examine Case 2 You will be asked to make three decisions concerning

Nursing Assignment Help

Case #2 Anxiety Disorder, OCD, Or Something Else? – 2025

 

The Assignment:

Examine Case 2: You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the diagnosis and treatment for this client. Be sure to consider co-morbid physical as well as mental factors that might impact the client’s diagnosis and treatment.

At each Decision Point, stop to complete the following:

  • Decision #1: Differential Diagnosis
    • Which Decision did you select?
    • Why did you select this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #1 and the results of the Decision. Why were they different?
  • Decision #2: Treatment Plan for Psychotherapy
    • Why did you select this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #2 and the results of the Decision. Why were they different?
  • Decision #3: Treatment Plan for Psychopharmacology
    • Why did you select this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #3 and the results of the decision. Why were they different?
  • Also include how ethical considerations might impact your treatment plan and communication with clients and their families.

Note: Support your rationale with a minimum of three academic resources. While you may use the course text to support your rationale, it will not count toward the resource requirement.

Rubric:

 

Quality of Work Submitted: The extent of which work meets the assigned criteria and work reflects graduate-level critical and analytic thinking.–

Excellent 27 (27%) – 30 (30%)Good 24 (24%) – 26 (26%)Fair 21 (21%) – 23 (23%)Poor 0 (0%) – 20 (20%)

Quality of Work Submitted: The purpose of the paper is clear.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extent to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Understand and interpret the assignment’s key concepts.–

Excellent 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)Good 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)Fair 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)Poor 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extent to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Apply and integrate material in course resources (i.e., video, required readings, and textbook) and credible outside resources.–

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extent to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Synthesize (combines various components or different ideas into a new whole) material in course resources (i.e., video, required readings, textbook) and outside, credible resources by comparing different points of view and highlighting similarities, differences, and connections.–

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Written Expression and Formatting
Paragraph and Sentence Structure: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Written Expression and Formatting
English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Written Expression and Formatting
The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) 

Case #2 Anxiety Disorder, OCD, Or Something Else? – 2025 The Assignment Examine Case 2 You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the diagnosis and treatment for

Nursing Assignment Help

Case #2 Anxiety Disorder, OCD, Or Something Else? – 2025

 

The Assignment:

Examine Case 2: You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the diagnosis and treatment for this client. Be sure to consider co-morbid physical as well as mental factors that might impact the client’s diagnosis and treatment.

At each Decision Point, stop to complete the following:

  • Decision #1: Differential Diagnosis
    • Which Decision did you select?
    • Why did you select this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #1 and the results of the Decision. Why were they different?
  • Decision #2: Treatment Plan for Psychotherapy
    • Why did you select this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #2 and the results of the Decision. Why were they different?
  • Decision #3: Treatment Plan for Psychopharmacology
    • Why did you select this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
    • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #3 and the results of the decision. Why were they different?
  • Also include how ethical considerations might impact your treatment plan and communication with clients and their families.

Note: Support your rationale with a minimum of three academic resources. While you may use the course text to support your rationale, it will not count toward the resource requirement.

Rubric:

 

Quality of Work Submitted: The extent of which work meets the assigned criteria and work reflects graduate-level critical and analytic thinking.–

Excellent 27 (27%) – 30 (30%)Good 24 (24%) – 26 (26%)Fair 21 (21%) – 23 (23%)Poor 0 (0%) – 20 (20%)

Quality of Work Submitted: The purpose of the paper is clear.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extent to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Understand and interpret the assignment’s key concepts.–

Excellent 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)Good 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)Fair 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)Poor 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extent to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Apply and integrate material in course resources (i.e., video, required readings, and textbook) and credible outside resources.–

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extent to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Synthesize (combines various components or different ideas into a new whole) material in course resources (i.e., video, required readings, textbook) and outside, credible resources by comparing different points of view and highlighting similarities, differences, and connections.–

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Written Expression and Formatting
Paragraph and Sentence Structure: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Written Expression and Formatting
English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Written Expression and Formatting
The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) 

Nursing Role & Scope – Week 3 – Philosophy Of Nursing – 2025 Please answer the question below Chapter 3 Philosophy of Nursing 2 How would you

Nursing Assignment Help

Nursing Role & Scope – Week 3 – Philosophy Of Nursing – 2025

Please answer the question below:

Chapter 3: Philosophy of Nursing

2.  How would you define person? Look at the following attributes given to a person: (1) the ability to think and conceptualize, (2) the capacity to interact with others, (3) the need for boundaries, and (4) the use of language (Doheny, Cook, & Stopper, 1997). Would you agree? What about Maslow’s description of humanness in terms of a hierarchy of needs with self-actualization at the top? Another possibility is that persons are the major focus of nursing. Do you see humans as good or evil?

  Follow the discussion questions participation and submission guidelines.

·      Follow the 3 x 3 rule: minimum three paragraphs per DQ, with a minimum of three sentences each paragraph.

·      All answers or discussions comments submitted must be in APA format according to Publication Manual American Psychological Association (APA) (6th ed.) 2009 ISBN: 978-1-4338-0561-5

·      Minimum of two references, not older than 2015.

Please provide Plagiarism Report

NURSING ROLE AND SCOPE – DISCUSSION WEEK 3 – 2025 REQUIREMENTS APA FORMAT LESS THAN 20 PLAGIARISM 400 WORDS AT LEAST 2 CITATIONS 2 REFERENCES DQ 1

Nursing Assignment Help

NURSING ROLE AND SCOPE – DISCUSSION WEEK 3 – 2025

 REQUIREMENTS:

APA FORMAT

LESS THAN 20% PLAGIARISM

400 WORDS

AT LEAST 2 CITATIONS & 2 REFERENCES

DQ 1:

·      Select one question as your DQ 1

·      Follow the discussion questions participation and submission guidelines.

·      Follow the 3 x 3 rule: minimum three paragraphs per DQ, with a minimum of three sentences each paragraph.

·      All answers or discussions comments submitted must be in APA format according to Publication Manual American Psychological Association (APA) (6th ed.) 2009 ISBN: 978-1-4338-0561-5

·      Minimum of two references, not older than 2015.

Chapter 3: Philosophy of Nursing

1.  Where do you see yourself and your understanding of truth on the continuum of realism and idealism?

2.  How would you define person? Look at the following attributes given to a person: (1) the ability to think and conceptualize, (2) the capacity to interact with others, (3) the need for boundaries, and (4) the use of language (Doheny, Cook, & Stopper, 1997). Would you agree? What about Maslow’s description of humanness in terms of a hierarchy of needs with self-actualization at the top? Another possibility is that persons are the major focus of nursing. Do you see humans as good or evil?

3.  Where do you see yourself and your understanding of truth on the continuum of realism and idealism?

4.  What are your beliefs about the major concepts in nursing—person, environment, health, nursing?

5.  Do you believe there is more than one right answer to situations? How do you value the whole individual? What barriers prevent us from responding to the contextual needs of our patients?

6.  Do I believe in health care for everyone? Does health care for everyone have value to me as a person? Does it have value to me as a nurse? What value does universal health care have to my patients?

7.  How does my personal philosophy fit with the context of nursing? Does it fit? What areas, if any, need assessing?

Community Assessment And Analysis Presentation – 2025 The RN to BSN program at Grand Canyon University meets the requirements for clinical

Nursing Assignment Help

Community Assessment And Analysis Presentation – 2025

The RN to BSN program at Grand Canyon University meets the requirements for clinical competencies as defined by the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE) and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN), using nontraditional experiences for practicing nurses. These experiences come in the form of direct and indirect care experiences in which licensed nursing students engage in learning within the context of their hospital organization, specific care discipline, and local communities.

This assignment consists of both an interview and a PowerPoint (PPT) presentation.

Assessment/Interview

Select a community of interest in your region. Perform a physical assessment of the community.

  1. Perform a direct assessment of a community of interest using the “Functional Health Patterns Community Assessment Guide.”
  2. Interview a community health and public health provider regarding that person’s role and experiences within the community.

Interview Guidelines

Interviews can take place in-person, by phone, or by Skype.

Develop interview questions to gather information about the role of the provider in the community and the health issues faced by the chosen community.

Complete the “Provider Interview Acknowledgement Form” prior to conducting the interview. Submit this document separately in its respective drop box.

Compile key findings from the interview, including the interview questions used, and submit these with the presentation.

PowerPoint Presentation

Create a PowerPoint presentation of 15-20 slides (slide count does not include title and references slide) describing the chosen community interest.

Include the following in your presentation:

  1. Description of community and community boundaries: the people and the geographic, geopolitical, financial, educational level; ethnic and phenomenological features of the community, as well as types of social interactions; common goals and interests; and barriers, and challenges, including any identified social determinates of health.
  2. Summary of community assessment: (a) funding sources and (b) partnerships.
  3. Summary of interview with community health/public health provider.
  4. Identification of an issue that is lacking or an opportunity for health promotion.
  5. A conclusion summarizing your key findings and a discussion of your impressions of the general health of the community.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Database Search – 2025 Choose a topic related to health that has meaning to your personal health

Nursing Assignment Help

Database Search – 2025

Choose a topic related to health that has meaning to your personal health, interests, and well-being. This may be a disease, such as diabetes, or healthy fitness activity.

Conduct a database search comparing one of the following database directories with Google Scholar.

  • CINAHL and Google Scholar
  • PubMed and Google Scholar

Explain how you were able to narrow down the number of articles hits you had initially, and present within your post a summary of the credible article you chose as your resource. How do you know your article choice is credible? Which database do you prefer and why?

How will using a database search facilitate your:

  • scholarly work;
  • nursing work (evidence-based practice); and
  • personal self-development?

Medicine And Surgery 1 – 2025 The assessment portion of the nursing process is where the nurse will collect data about the patient

Nursing Assignment Help

Medicine And Surgery 1 – 2025

 

The assessment portion of the nursing process is where the nurse will collect data about the patient. This information will encompass physical findings, psychological, cultural, social, family, and nursing histories as well as accessing the medical record and obtaining diagnostic test results. A nurse should not implement interventions until a complete assessment has been done. Discuss.

Students will post to initial discussion before Wednesday January 13, 2021 @ 11:59 pm

Note: APA 7th edition is required.

Not less than 250 words

Analyze The Evidence Summary Of The Selected Quantitative Research Study To Address The Following. – 2025 Download the Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool and the Johns Hopkins Individual

Nursing Assignment Help

Analyze The Evidence Summary Of The Selected Quantitative Research Study To Address The Following. – 2025

Download the Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool and the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool located in Student Resource Center located in “Project & Practicum Resources.”

Select one of the eight practice problems that burden the overall health of the United States. Conduct a library search for one quantitative research study addressing this problem. Appraise the quantitative research study using the Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool. My practice problem is Diabetes Mellitus

After appraising and determining the Level of Evidence and Grade of Quality for your selected quantitative study, summarize your findings. Transfer your findings to the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool. Complete each column including specific details about the quantitative study.

Include your completed Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool and your quantitative research study as an attachment with your initial post. Also, include a permalink for your selected quantitative research study with your initial discussion post. Confirm the link allows access to the full-text study article. Our faculty team will review both your research study and Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool and provide guidance.

Analyze the evidence summary of the selected quantitative research study to address the following.

1-Does the research design answer the research question? Explain your rationale.

2-Were the study sample participants representative? Why or why not?

3-Compare and contrast the study limitations in this study.

4-Based on this evidence summary, would you consider this quantitative research study as support for your selected practice problem? Explain your rationale.

Please review the Graduate Discussion Grading Guidelines and Rubric (Links to an external site.) for complete discussion requirements.