NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
Chamberlain University NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)– Step-By-Step Guide
This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Chamberlain University NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded) assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.
How to Research and Prepare for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Chamberlain University NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded) depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.
After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.
How to Write the Introduction for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
The introduction for the Chamberlain University NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded) is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.
Need a high-quality paper urgently?
We can deliver within hours.
How to Write the Body for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
After the introduction, move into the main part of the NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded) assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.
Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.
How to Write the Conclusion for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.
How to Format the References List for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.
Stuck? Let Us Help You
Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease.
Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded) assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW.
Sample Answer for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
This simulation was very familiar to me because I used to work in a Med-Surg ICU where the nurses were required to float to the stroke unit. For me, going through Mrs. Washington’s history and pulling out the necessary information was fairly straightforward. I was looking for Mrs. Washington’s last well-known time, what symptoms she had, what had she taken, and what happened after the event. I then looked through the meds, read what the husband reported to the nurse, and what the doctor’s conclusions were to try and paint a picture (so to speak) of what was going on with Mrs. Washington. I took all this information into the history questions and the physical assessment so that I knew exactly where to focus.
So, it has been a while since I floated to a stroke floor because I left the ICU about two years ago, and apparently my skills were a little rusty. During the history questions, I was lost as to what to ask Mrs. Washington because a lot of the information was already gathered. I struggled to figure out what the simulation was wanting me to ask her. Then going into the physical assessment, I completely forgot about all the cranial nerves until I had already completed like 40 unnecessary assessments. (facepalm!) I had to quickly use the last few allotted assessments to gather what information I could. In a real situation, I would have just gone back into the room (if I had left already) and completed the assessments I’d forgotten. I would have apologized to Mrs. Washington for the inconvenience but would have explained to her the importance of completing these necessary assessments.
The learning aspects for me that have been a common theme throughout all the simulations is that even as a nurse it is okay to make mistakes, it is okay to go back and do the assessment again, and it is okay to really lean into my nursing judgment and use my license. Now, making mistakes needs to be taken with a grain of salt. I’m not talking about medication or surgical mistakes. I mean the kind like I dropped the bedpan on the floor, I forgot to order a lunch tray, etc. Repeating or redoing an assessment, yes, can be an inconvenience, but my patient’s safety comes first – over inconvenience, over pride, over a non-compliant patient. I have the ability, as a nurse, to make decisions that will not only help my patients but ensure their safety and well-being while in my care. These simulations have really reinforced that ideal for me.
ALSO READ:
NR 305 Week 6: Discussion: Reflection on Nursing Assessment for Violence (Graded)
NR 305 Week 6 Discussion: Providing Culturally Competent Nursing Care (graded)
NR 305 Week 7 Discussion: Assessment Techniques (graded)
NR 305 Mental Health Assessment Amka Oxendine (iHuman) (Graded)
NR 305 Week 7 Debriefing of Week 6 iHuman Mental Health Assessment (Graded)
NR 305 Week 8 Discussion: Case Study or Share an Experience (graded)
NR 305 Week 8: Discussion: Reflection on End of Life Care (Graded)
NR 305 Week 8 Discussion: AACN Essentials Informatics Self-Assessment (graded)
Sample Answer 2 for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
I am completing the simulations with more confidence than the previous cases. I felt knowledgeable about the appropriate questions to ask during the history assessment. This was the first case that I asked all the correct questions according to the expert. I asked a lot of questions about habits and lifestyle which put Ms. Washington at risk for more damage in the future. The scenario was very realistic to me. I have seen how quickly a suspected stroke patient is triaged and sent for imaging in practice and the scenario seemed to follow the real-life protocols. The questioning about onset of symptoms and NIH Stroke Assessment score helped to guide my questions just like I would if she were my patient.
Next time, I would familiarize myself on the cranial nerves and study which body parts are linked to the appropriate location in the brain. I thought that I had plenty of room for improvements. I realize now that I really do not have a whole lot of experience with stroke patients and need to keep up with the most up to date protocols. This simulation took me longer to complete due to my lack of experience. I read through the feedback carefully so that I could learn where my weaknesses were. The neuro assessment was not a strongpoint. I was surprised that I missed how often the NIH Assessment needed to be completed. Now I understand it is to be done every hour.
I learned how to be a more thorough nurse when completing my assessments on stroke symptomology. I need to pay close attention to detail and make sure I am ensuring that all orders are completed on the timeline for best outcomes. I need to involve a team approach for care and ensure collaborative communication between all healthcare providers. At the end of this assessment, I was wanting to call lab and imaging to complete the outstanding orders and get the ball rolling. This was a great opportunity to self-reflect on time management skills. I feel much better on my ability to care for a stroke patient.
Sample Answer 3 for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
I did pretty good in this simulation. I felt very confident doing the neuro assessment and knowing which questions to ask. I did ask about the pain level on a scale of 1-10 of her headache, and she replied “better”. I wanted a number, but I couldn’t find another way to have her answer it appropriately. I asked what does it feel like and was wanting her to describe it with aching, throbbing, shooting, stabbing pain and she just replies, “bad.” I didn’t like her response. In real life I would say give me a number on the pain scale 1- 10, and I would have her describe it with what kind of pain not just bad. The scenario was realistic as it’s a common problem we have. Strokes are common and we have to have good neurological skills, as we say, “time is brain.”
The one thing I would do differently if I was caring for a patient similar to her is have her give me a number on the pain scale and describe the pain. My improvement is to remember to listen to her lungs. I did the rest of the assessment and got focused on the neuro and accidently skipped over the lungs assessment. I asked about vision problems on assessment, she said she didn’t have any but when assessing the cranial nerve II, she had some field cuts and vision loss in left eye.
The simulation reinforced how important a full neuro assessment is. That things can change quickly with neuro patients and you have to pay close attention to detail. I don’t have any questions.
Sample Answer 4 for NR 305 Week 5: Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)
My first priority when interviewing Elizabeth, would be to provide her with a safe, comfortable space. If there is somewhere, like a lounge, or sitting area that is away from noise and bright lights, I would take her there. I would want to interview her alone, without the mother present. From the description of the greeting the mother usually gets, it sounds like she is close to her mother. It might be helpful to have the mother join us for the initial transition into the interview. I would start the interview with easy to answer questions, such as her age, grade level, and favorite color. Once I had a sense that Elizabeth was more comfortable, I would ask the mother to step out. This will prevent the daughter from answering the way she might think her mother would want, and to prevent the mother from answering for her. Once the mother left the room, I might ask Elizabeth if she knows why she is here.
Special considerations should be made regarding the alleged history of abuse, as it may have adversely affected her development. (Janet R. Weber Rn Edd & Kelley, 2018) The mother appears to have a relationship with the child, but I would ask the daughter about her friends, and what her interests are. It is important to get some baseline information to guide the interview and to establish a rapport. I would try to remain calm, regardless of my gut feelings regarding child abuse. I would ask open ended questions rather than yes or no questions, as this tends to produce more accurate information from memory. (Brubacher et al., 2018) I would let her complete her thoughts and try not to interrupt with ideas, or try to finish sentences. I would avoid using medical terminology, rather try to use language she can relate to. (Janet R. Weber Rn Edd & Kelley, 2018)
I was interested to learn more about Stockholm Syndrome after touching on it in our text. I thought about how it might relate to the relationship between Elizabeth and her father, in that, she might be reluctant to answer questions negatively about him. I wasn’t able to find a lot of concrete information about it. It appears to have been studied, but there is not a clear definition or set of criteria to formally diagnose. (Namnyak et al., 2007) I might consider Elizabeth to be at risk for PostTrauma syndrome because the alleged abuser is her father. (Janet R. Weber Rn Edd & Kelley, 2018) While this is not a romantic intimate relationship, I would consider the relationship of a father and child to be intimate.
References
Brubacher, S. P., Roberts, K., Cooper, B., Price, H., Barry, L., & Vanderloon, M. (2018). A nationwide survey of child interviewing practices in canada. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 60(1), 34–68. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.2017-0008Links to an external site.
Janet R. Weber Rn Edd & Kelley, J. H. (2018). Health assessment in nursing (6th ed.). Lww.
Namnyak, M., Tufton, N., Szekely, R., Toal, M., Worboys, S., & Sampson, E. L. (2007). ‘stockholm syndrome’: Psychiatric diagnosis or urban myth?. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 0(0), 071120024945001–??? https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2007.01112.xLinks to an external site.