Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

NRNP_6552 Week 3: Gynecologic Health

Western movies often portray dusty old towns with limited available resources that include a single general store, a single saloon, and a single sheriff. Within these settings, healthcare is revealed to be the responsibility of the single town doctor.

Don’t use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health
Just from $13/Page

Order Essay

Unlike these theatrical towns of old, most modern developed communities enjoy the luxury of diverse choices in shopping, entertainment, and more. Thankfully, this includes healthcare options that extend the concept of the “old west” town doctor to diverse specialty areas of practice, including those focused on women’s health care and wellness, such as gynecology.

For this week, you will use a case study to analyze information obtained from well-woman examinations. You also will consider and propose treatment plans for diagnoses.

Learning Objectives

Students will:Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

  • Analyze pertinent patient information obtained from a comprehensive well-woman exam
  • Formulate differential diagnoses
  • Recommend diagnostics to support differential diagnoses
  • Develop treatment and management plans
  • Develop additional questions to support patient assessments
Learning Resources 

 

NRNP_6552 Week 3: Gynecologic Health

Western movies often portray dusty old towns with limited available resources that include a single general store, a single saloon, and a single sheriff. Within these settings, healthcare is revealed to be the responsibility of the single town doctor.

Unlike these theatrical towns of old, most modern developed communities enjoy the luxury of diverse choices in shopping, entertainment, and more. Thankfully, this includes healthcare options that extend the concept of the “old west” town doctor to diverse specialty areas of practice, including those focused on women’s health care and wellness, such as gynecology.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

For this week, you will use a case study to analyze information obtained from well-woman examinations. You also will consider and propose treatment plans for diagnoses.

Learning Objectives

Students will:Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

  • Analyze pertinent patient information obtained from a comprehensive well-woman exam
  • Formulate differential diagnoses
  • Recommend diagnostics to support differential diagnoses
  • Develop treatment and management plans
  • Develop additional questions to support patient assessmen
Required Reak to expand/reduce)
Required Media (click to expand/reduce)
Optional Resources (click to expand/reduce)
Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health 

Case studies provide the opportunity to simulate realistic scenarios involving patients presenting with various health problems or symptoms. Such case studies enable nurse learners to apply concepts, lessons, and critical thinking to interviewing, screening, diagnostic approaches, as well as the development of treatment plans.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Photo Credit: Teodor Lazarev / Adobe Stock

For this Case Study Discussion, you will review a case study scenario to obtain information related to a comprehensive well-woman exam and determine differential diagnoses, diagnostics, and develop treatment and management plans.

To prepare:

  • By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to a specific case study scenario for this Discussion. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your case study assignment from your Instructor.
  • Review the Learning Resources for this week and pay close attention to the media program related to the basic microscope skills. Also, consider re-reviewing the media programs found in Week 1 Learning Resources.
  • Carefully review the clinical guideline resources specific to your assigned case study.
  • Use the Focused SOAP Note Template found in the Learning Resources to support Discussion. Complete a SOAP note and critically analyze this and focus your attention on the diagnostic tests. You are NOT to post your SOAP note. This is for your information only to help you develop your differential diagnosis and additional questions.

By Day 3

DO NOT POST A SOAP NOTE. Post your differential diagnosis. Include the additional questions you would ask the patient. Be sure to include an explanation of the tests you might recommend, ruling out any other issues or concerns and include your rationale. Be specific and provide examples. Use your Learning Resources and/or evidence from the literature to support your explanations.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6

Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts on two different days and explain how you might think differently about the types of tests you might recommend and explain why. Use your Learning Resources and/or evidence from the literature to support your position.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!

The additional questions I would ask are stated here. What method is she using right now?
What has she used in the past?  Why did she stop a method?  How many partners in past 12 months?  What are her current cycles like?  When was her last gyn exam and what were the results of the tests?What method has she considered? Has she ever had a STI? At what age did her periods beging? Any family history of female problems like breast, ovarian, vaginal or uterine cancer?Any family history of bleeding disorders or blood clots? Any HPV vaccine shot?Any intimate violence issues or risks assessments or questions.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

The additional tests I would do are pelvic ultrasound to rule out any structral problems or masses. A repeat pap smear, repeat GC/CT cultures, Wet prep and HPV screening tests to check her STI status right now. A CBC, CMP, PT-INR, PTT, Von Willebrand factor and possible bleeding time test to check her baseline results and screen for anemia, bleeding disorders (Von Willebrand or hemophilia) or underlying imbalances. A TSH and free T3/T4 to check thyroid function to rule out any problems in case she has not had this done already by her PCP.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

The differential diagnosis list will be as follows:
1.) Well woman exam (ICD 10-CM) Z01.419
2.) Anemia (ICD-10-CM) Z13.0
3.) STI (ICD-10-CM) Z11.3
4.) Von Willebrand’s disease (ICD-10-CM) D68.0
5.) Hemophila (ICD-10-CM) D66
6.) Initmate partner Voilence screening (ICD-10-CM) Z91.410

Refferences:

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). (2020). https://www.acog.org/
American Cancer Society, Inc. (ACS). (2020). Information and Resources about for Cancer: Breast, Colon, Lung, Prostate, Skin. https://www.cancer.org/
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Intimate partner violence screening: Fact sheet and resources. https://www.ahrq.gov/ncepcr/tools/healthier-pregnancy/fact-sheets/partner-violence.html
American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). https://www.nursingworld.org/
Hatcher, R. A., Nelson, A. L., Trussell, J., Cwaik, C., Cason, P., Policar, M. S., Kowal, D. (2018). Contraceptive technology (21st ed.). PDR Network, LLC.
HealthyPeople 2030. (2020). Healthy People 2030 Framework. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/About-Healthy-People/Development-Healthy-People-2030/Framework
Fanslow, J., Wise, M. R., & Marriott, J. (2019). Intimate partner violence and women’s reproductive health. Obstetrics, Gynaecology & Reproductive Medicine, 29(12), 342–350. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1016/j.ogrm.2019.09.003
Lockwood, C. J. (2019). Key points for today’s ‘well-woman’ exam: A guide for ob/gyns. Contemporary OB/GYN, 64(1), 23–29. https://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&AN=134229869&site=eds-live&scope=site
Kelly K. G. (1990). Chapter 179: Tests on vaginal discharge. In: Walker H. K., Hall W.D., & Hurst J.W., (eds.). Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations (3rd ed.). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK288/Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Week 3 Gyneocology Case Study 2nd peer response
Collapse

          Intimate partner violence (IPV) is an interest diagnosis to included. I never took her encounter as a patient that could be a victim of IPV, but she

definitely could be. Perhaps asking some intimate partner questions would help rule to diagnosis in. The patient could respond and say she has been or is

in an abusive physical, mental, and verbal relationship. Women in violent situations are less able to use contraception or negotiate safer sex, and

therefore, run a high risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS (Patra et al., 2018). Hence, it is a desirable practice to screen all

patients for partner violence, especially ones, with history and physical findings suggestive of abuse such as frequent visits to the emergency

room, inconsistent explanationof injuries or delay in seeking treatment, head and neck injuries, and vague somatic complaints (Parta et al., 2018). The

patient presents with symptoms consistent with venereal infection. Based on the article, IPV could be rule in but, not enough information has been

reported on her intimate relationships.

Resources

Patra, P., Prakash, J., Patra, B., & Khanna, P. (2018). Intimate partner violence: Wounds are deeper. Indian journal of psychiatry60(4), 494–498.

https://doi.org/10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_74_17

Rubric Detail

 

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

Content

Excellent
Point range: 90–100
Good
Point range: 80–89
Fair
Point range: 70–79
Poor
Point range: 0–69
Main Posting: 

Response to the case study discussion questions includes appropriate diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options as directed, is based on evidence-based research where appropriate, and is incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s). Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health 

Post includes approprite diagnoses including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options.

Incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of post the post having exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the discussion question(s) 

Post includes approprite diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the post having exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least 3 credible references.

Points Range: 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s). 

Post contains incomplete or vague diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options.

Is somewhat lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s). 

Post contains incomplete diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options, or diagnoses and/or explanations are missing.

Lacks synthesis gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Contains only 1 or no credible references.

Main Posting: 

Writing

Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely. 

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely. 

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely. 

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely. 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting: 

Timely and full participation

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. 

Posts main discussion by due date.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Posts main discussion by due date. 

Meets requirements for full participation.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main discussion by due date.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. 

Does not post main discussion by due date.

First Response: 

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. 

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health
Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
First Response:
Writing
Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. 

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. 

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:
Timely and full participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. 

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. 

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
Second Response:
Writing
Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. 

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. 

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. 

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

Required Media (click to expand/reduce)
Optional Resources (click to expand/reduce)
Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health 

Case studies provide the opportunity to simulate realistic scenarios involving patients presenting with various health problems or symptoms. Such case studies enable nurse learners to apply concepts, lessons, and critical thinking to interviewing, screening, diagnostic approaches, as well as the development of treatment plans.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Photo Credit: Teodor Lazarev / Adobe Stock

For this Case Study Discussion, you will review a case study scenario to obtain information related to a comprehensive well-woman exam and determine differential diagnoses, diagnostics, and develop treatment and management plans.

To prepare:

  • By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to a specific case study scenario for this Discussion. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your case study assignment from your Instructor.
  • Review the Learning Resources for this week and pay close attention to the media program related to the basic microscope skills. Also, consider re-reviewing the media programs found in Week 1 Learning Resources.
  • Carefully review the clinical guideline resources specific to your assigned case study.
  • Use the Focused SOAP Note Template found in the Learning Resources to support Discussion. Complete a SOAP note and critically analyze this and focus your attention on the diagnostic tests. You are NOT to post your SOAP note. This is for your information only to help you develop your differential diagnosis and additional questions.

By Day 3

DO NOT POST A SOAP NOTE. Post your differential diagnosis. Include the additional questions you would ask the patient. Be sure to include an explanation of the tests you might recommend, ruling out any other issues or concerns and include your rationale. Be specific and provide examples. Use your Learning Resources and/or evidence from the literature to support your explanations.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6

Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts on two different days and explain how you might think differently about the types of tests you might recommend and explain why. Use your Learning Resources and/or evidence from the literature to support your position.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!

The additional questions I would ask are stated here. What method is she using right now?
What has she used in the past?  Why did she stop a method?  How many partners in past 12 months?  What are her current cycles like?  When was her last gyn exam and what were the results of the tests?What method has she considered? Has she ever had a STI? At what age did her periods beging? Any family history of female problems like breast, ovarian, vaginal or uterine cancer?Any family history of bleeding disorders or blood clots? Any HPV vaccine shot?Any intimate violence issues or risks assessments or questions.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

The additional tests I would do are pelvic ultrasound to rule out any structral problems or masses. A repeat pap smear, repeat GC/CT cultures, Wet prep and HPV screening tests to check her STI status right now. A CBC, CMP, PT-INR, PTT, Von Willebrand factor and possible bleeding time test to check her baseline results and screen for anemia, bleeding disorders (Von Willebrand or hemophilia) or underlying imbalances. A TSH and free T3/T4 to check thyroid function to rule out any problems in case she has not had this done already by her PCP.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

The differential diagnosis list will be as follows:
1.) Well woman exam (ICD 10-CM) Z01.419
2.) Anemia (ICD-10-CM) Z13.0
3.) STI (ICD-10-CM) Z11.3
4.) Von Willebrand’s disease (ICD-10-CM) D68.0
5.) Hemophila (ICD-10-CM) D66
6.) Initmate partner Voilence screening (ICD-10-CM) Z91.410

Refferences:

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). (2020). https://www.acog.org/
American Cancer Society, Inc. (ACS). (2020). Information and Resources about for Cancer: Breast, Colon, Lung, Prostate, Skin. https://www.cancer.org/
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Intimate partner violence screening: Fact sheet and resources. https://www.ahrq.gov/ncepcr/tools/healthier-pregnancy/fact-sheets/partner-violence.html
American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). https://www.nursingworld.org/
Hatcher, R. A., Nelson, A. L., Trussell, J., Cwaik, C., Cason, P., Policar, M. S., Kowal, D. (2018). Contraceptive technology (21st ed.). PDR Network, LLC.
HealthyPeople 2030. (2020). Healthy People 2030 Framework. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/About-Healthy-People/Development-Healthy-People-2030/Framework
Fanslow, J., Wise, M. R., & Marriott, J. (2019). Intimate partner violence and women’s reproductive health. Obstetrics, Gynaecology & Reproductive Medicine, 29(12), 342–350. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1016/j.ogrm.2019.09.003
Lockwood, C. J. (2019). Key points for today’s ‘well-woman’ exam: A guide for ob/gyns. Contemporary OB/GYN, 64(1), 23–29. https://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&AN=134229869&site=eds-live&scope=site
Kelly K. G. (1990). Chapter 179: Tests on vaginal discharge. In: Walker H. K., Hall W.D., & Hurst J.W., (eds.). Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations (3rd ed.). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK288/Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Week 3 Gyneocology Case Study 2nd peer response
Collapse

          Intimate partner violence (IPV) is an interest diagnosis to included. I never took her encounter as a patient that could be a victim of IPV, but she

definitely could be. Perhaps asking some intimate partner questions would help rule to diagnosis in. The patient could respond and say she has been or is

in an abusive physical, mental, and verbal relationship. Women in violent situations are less able to use contraception or negotiate safer sex, and

therefore, run a high risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS (Patra et al., 2018). Hence, it is a desirable practice to screen all

patients for partner violence, especially ones, with history and physical findings suggestive of abuse such as frequent visits to the emergency

room, inconsistent explanationof injuries or delay in seeking treatment, head and neck injuries, and vague somatic complaints (Parta et al., 2018). The

patient presents with symptoms consistent with venereal infection. Based on the article, IPV could be rule in but, not enough information has been

reported on her intimate relationships.

Resources

Patra, P., Prakash, J., Patra, B., & Khanna, P. (2018). Intimate partner violence: Wounds are deeper. Indian journal of psychiatry60(4), 494–498.

https://doi.org/10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_74_17

Rubric Detail

 

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

Content

Excellent
Point range: 90–100
Good
Point range: 80–89
Fair
Point range: 70–79
Poor
Point range: 0–69
Main Posting: 

Response to the case study discussion questions includes appropriate diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options as directed, is based on evidence-based research where appropriate, and is incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s). Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health 

Post includes approprite diagnoses including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options.

Incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of post the post having exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the discussion question(s) 

Post includes approprite diagnoses with explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the post having exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least 3 credible references.

Points Range: 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s). 

Post contains incomplete or vague diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options.

Is somewhat lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s). 

Post contains incomplete diagnoses or explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options, or diagnoses and/or explanations are missing.

Lacks synthesis gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Contains only 1 or no credible references.

Main Posting: 

Writing

Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely. 

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely. 

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely. 

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely. 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting: 

Timely and full participation

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. 

Posts main discussion by due date.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Posts main discussion by due date. 

Meets requirements for full participation.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main discussion by due date.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. 

Does not post main discussion by due date.

First Response: 

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. 

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health
Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
First Response:
Writing
Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. 

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. 

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:
Timely and full participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. 

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. 

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
Second Response:
Writing
Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. 

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English.Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. 

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. 

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. 

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. 

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Case Study Discussion: Gynecologic Health

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more