Darius Davis ihuman case study
|Poorly written HPI statement with incomplete ideas and sentences, lacking basic history-taking skills.
|Well-written HPI statement but missing 1-2 key components crucial for a comprehensive history.
|Clearly articulated HPI statement with thorough information gathered from case questions, demonstrating proficiency in history-taking skills.
|Incomplete history, lacking 3 or more aspects of OLDCARDS critical to the patient’s diagnosis.
|Reasonably complete history, covering most requirements but missing 1-2 aspects of OLDCARDS crucial to the patient’s diagnosis.
|Comprehensive history, addressing all critical components of a focused exam, encompassing all aspects of OLDCARDS.
|Incomplete physical examination, omitting 3 or more key exam findings critical to the patient’s diagnosis.
|Fairly complete physical examination but lacking 1-2 key exam findings crucial to the patient’s diagnosis.
|Thorough physical examination, covering all critical components of a focused exam.
|Inclusion of 3 or more inappropriate exams or tests, possibly involving contraindicated testing.
|Generally appropriate tests ordered, with 1-2 unnecessary exams or tests.
|Ordered tests are appropriate for the patient and cost-effective.
|Differential Diagnosis Summary
|Possibly incorrect primary diagnosis, a brief and inconclusive differential diagnosis list, and missing 3 or more critical components.
|Correct primary diagnosis identified, well-written differential diagnoses, with 1-2 missing critical components and a potentially out-of-order priority list.
|Correct primary diagnosis identified, clearly written differential diagnoses, covering all essential components.
|Plan for Patient
|Poorly written plan, missing 3 or more key issues critical to the patient’s diagnosis.
|Well-written plan but lacking 1-2 key issues crucial to the patient’s diagnosis.
|Clearly articulated plan, covering all critical components for the patient’s final diagnosis.
|Correctly answered 0-69% of the clinical questions.
|Correctly answered 70-89% of the clinical questions.
|Correctly answered 90-100% of the clinical questions.
Total Points: 100
Assignment: Darius Davis i-Human Case Study – Evaluating and Managing Cardiovascular Conditions
Cardiovascular conditions, being both preventable and manageable, necessitate advanced practice nurses to leverage their understanding of the cardiovascular system and consider patient factors impacting the risk of such conditions. This knowledge is vital for promptly identifying signs, symptoms, formulating differential diagnoses, and devising appropriate treatment plans, as exemplified in the Darius Davis iHuman case study.
Photo Credit: yodiyim / Adobe Stock
Case Study Assignment Overview:
In this assignment, you will analyze an i-Human simulation case study centered around an adult patient with a cardiovascular condition. Your task involves formulating a differential diagnosis, evaluating treatment options, and creating a suitable treatment plan based on the provided patient information.
- Review the Learning Resources for the week, focusing on the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of cardiovascular conditions.
- Access i-Human from the provided Learning Resources and review the designated i-Human case study for this week. Consider the essential health history required for the patient interaction.
- Reflect on appropriate physical exams and diagnostic tests that would yield vital information about the patient’s condition. Contemplate how the results would contribute to making an accurate diagnosis.
- Identify three to five possible conditions that could be considered in the differential diagnosis for the patient.
- Evaluate the patient’s diagnosis and contemplate clinical guidelines that may support this diagnosis.
- Develop a comprehensive treatment plan for the patient, incorporating health promotion and patient education strategies tailored to individuals with cardiovascular conditions.
Interact with this week’s i-Human patient and complete the assigned case study. Utilize the i-Human Graduate Programs Help link within the i-Human platform for guidance on navigating the system effectively.
- Save your completed Assignment with the naming convention “WK4Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension).”
- Review the Grading Criteria in the provided Week 4 Assignment Rubric.
- Click the Week 4 Assignment link to submit your assignment. You can also “View Rubric” for grading criteria.
- Attach your saved document using the “Browse My Computer” button in the “Attach File” area.
- If applicable, agree to submit your paper to the Global Reference Database in the Plagiarism Tools area.
- Click “Submit” to finalize your submission.
Ensure completion and submission by Day 7 for grading.
For guidance on using i-Human, refer to the i-Human Graduate Programs Help link within the i-Human platform, specifically for the Darius Davis iHuman case study.