Case Study Analysis Essay Paper

An understanding of the neurological and musculoskeletal systems is a critically important component of disease and disorder diagnosis and treatment. This importance is magnified by the impact that that these two systems can have on each other. A variety of factors and circumstances affecting the emergence and severity of issues in one system can also have a role in the performance of the other.

ORDER NOW FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

Effective analysis often requires an understanding that goes beyond these systems and their mutual impact. For example, patient characteristics such as, racial and ethnic variables can play a role.

Photo Credit: jijomathai – stock.adobe.com

An understanding of the symptoms of alterations in neurological and musculoskeletal systems is a critical step in diagnosis and treatment. For APRNs this understanding can also help educate patients and guide them through their treatment plans. Case Study Analysis Essay Paper

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

To prepare:

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

Assignment (1- to 2-page case study analysis)

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

Both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes that would account for the patient presenting these symptoms.
Any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning.
How these processes interact to affect the patient.

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

Scenario2.docx

Scenario 2: Patient is a 24-year-old female administrative assistant who comes to the emergency department with a chief complaint of severe right-sided headache. She states that this is the sixth time in the last 2 months she has had this headache. She says the headaches last 2–3 days and have impacted her ability to concentrate at work. She complains of nausea and has vomited three times in the last 3 hours. She states, “the light hurts my eyes.” She rates her pain as a 10/10 at this time. Ibuprofen and acetaminophen ease her symptoms somewhat but do not totally relieve them. No other current complaints. Case Study Analysis Essay Paper

Scenario 2:

Patient is a 24 year old female administrative assistant who comes to the emergency department with

a chief complaint of severe right sided headache.

She states that this is the sixth time in the last 2 months she has had this headache.

She says the headaches last 2–3 days and have impacted her ability to concentrate at work.

She complains of nausea and has vomited three times in the last 3 hours.

She states, “the light hurts my eyes.”

She rates her pain as a 10/10 at this time.

Ibuprofen and acetaminophen ease her symptoms somewhat but do not totally relieve them.

No other current complaints

RubricDetailBlackboardLearn.html

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name: NURS_6501_Module5_Case Study_Assignment_Rubric

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Develop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following: Explain both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of why the patient presents these symptoms.	Points: Points Range: 28 (28%) – 30 (30%) The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) The response describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) – 24 (24%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. The response includes explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 22 (22%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. The response does not include explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:
Explain how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient.	Points: Points Range: 28 (28%) – 30 (30%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) – 24 (24%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 22 (22%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. Feedback:
Explain any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning.	Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Develop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following: Explain both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of why the patient presents these symptoms.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 28 (28%) – 30 (30%) The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Good 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) The response describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Fair 23 (23%) – 24 (24%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. The response includes explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms and is supported by explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Poor 0 (0%) – 22 (22%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. The response does not include explanations of both the neurological and musculoskeletal pathophysiologic processes of patients who present these symptoms, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback: Case Study Analysis Essay Paper

Explain how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 28 (28%) – 30 (30%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Good 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Fair 23 (23%) – 24 (24%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Poor 0 (0%) – 22 (22%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. Feedback:

Explain any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Good 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Fair 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Poor 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback: Case Study Analysis Essay Paper

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

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. Fair 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Total Points: 100