Expert answer:Comprehensive Case Study on COPD, Heart Failure, H
Expert answer:For your signature assignment, compose a 3- to 4-page case analysis, written in APA format with a title page and at least 3 references, with one non-Internet reference. Organize your analysis with headings that thoroughly answer the following prompts. Support your opinions with evidence from your readings and research. Review the rubric for complete grading criteria.
comprehensive_case_study_on_copd.docx
rubric.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
1.
Comprehensive Case Study on COPD, Heart Failure, Hypertension, and Diabetes
Mellitus
M. K. is a 45-year-old female measuring 5’5″ and weighing 225 lbs. M. K. has a history of
smoking about 22 years along with a poor diet. She has a history of type II diabetes mellitus along
with primary hypertension. M. K. has recently been diagnosed with chronic bronchitis. Her current
symptoms include chronic cough, more severe in the mornings with sputum, light-headedness,
distended neck veins, excessive peripheral edema, and increased urination at night. Her current
medications include Lotensin and Lasix for the hypertension along with Glucophage for the type
II diabetes mellitus. The following are lab findings that are pertinent to this case:
Vitals
BP
158/98 mm Hg
CBC
Hematocrit
57%
Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c)
7.3 %
Arterial Blood Gas Assessment
PaCO₂
52 mm Hg
PaO₂
48 mm Hg
Lipid Panel
Cholesterol
242 mg/dL
HDL
32 mg/dL
LDL
173 mg/dL
Triglycerides
184 mg/dL
For your signature assignment, compose a 3- to 4-page case analysis, written in APA format with
a title page and at least 3 references, with one non-Internet reference. Organize your analysis with
headings that thoroughly answer the following prompts. Support your opinions with evidence from
your readings and research. Review the rubric for complete grading criteria.
1. In your introduction, summarize the case.
2. What clinical findings correlate with M. K.’s chronic bronchitis? What type of treatment and
recommendations would be appropriate for M. K.’s chronic bronchitis?
3. Which type of heart failure would you suspect with M. K.? Explain the pathogenesis of how this
type of heart failure develops.
4. According to the BP. value, what stage of hypertension is M. K. experiencing? Explain the
rationale for the current medications for her hypertension.
5. According to the lipid panel, what other condition is M. K. at risk for? According to this case
study, what other medications should be given and why? What additional findings correlate for
both hypertension and type II diabetes mellitus?
6. Interpret the lab value for HbA1c and explain the rationale for this value in relation to
normal/abnormal body function.
7. Provide a conclusion that summarizes your findings and discusses the effects of this disease in
the U.S. population.
Points possible: 100
•
Grid View
•
List View
Rubric
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Introduction
Points Range:4.3 (4.3%) 5 (5%)
Introduction summarizes
the case
comprehensively and
prepares the reader for
the remainder of the
paper.
Heart failure and
pathogenisis
Bronchitis
Approaches Expectations
Below Expectations
Points
Range:3.65 (3.65%) 4.25 (4.25%)
Points Range:3 (3%) 3.6 (3.6%)
Introduction summarizes
the case and somewhat
prepares the reader for
the remainder of the
paper.
Points
Range:11.18 (11.18%) 13 (13%)
Points
Range:9.49 (9.49%) 11.05 (11.05%)
Identifies and thoroughly
explains type of heart
failure and the
pathogenesis.
Information is
scientifically sound,
thorough, supported and
sufficient.
Mostly Identifies and
thoroughly explains type
of heart failure and the
pathogenesis.
Information is
scientifically sound,
thorough, necessary and
sufficient.
Points
Range:11.18 (11.18%) 13 (13%)
Points
Range:9.49 (9.49%) 11.05 (11.05%)
Provides clinical findings,
treatment, and
recommendations of
chronic bronchitis.
Information is
scientifically sound,
thorough, supported and
sufficient
Provides most clinical
findings, treatment, and
recommendations of
chronic bronchitis but
may be limited.
Information is mostly
scientifically sound,
thorough, necessary and
sufficient
Introduction lacks detail
to prepare the reader for
the case.
Points Range:7.8 (7.8%) 9.36 (9.36%)
Provides insufficient
explanations Information
is not entirely
scientifically sound,
necessary or supported
with evidence and a
sound rationale.
Points Range:7.8 (7.8%) 9.36 (9.36%)
Provides insufficient
explanations of rationale.
Information is not
entirely scientifically
sound, necessary and
sufficient. Does not
address the context
sufficiently or with sound
rationale.
Hypertension
Lipid Panel
Lab Values
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Approaches Expectations
Below Expectations
Points
Range:11.18 (11.18%) 13 (13%)
Points
Range:9.49 (9.49%) 11.05 (11.05%)
Points Range:7.8 (7.8%) 9.36 (9.36%)
Provides thorough and
detailed explanations for
stages of hypertension,
current medications and
the impact of the disease
in the U.S. population.
Information is
scientifically sound,
supported and sufficient.
Provides mostly sufficient
explanations for stage of
hypertension, current
medications and the
impact of the disease in
the U.S. population.
Information is mostly
scientifically sound,
support and sufficient.
Points
Range:11.18 (11.18%) 13 (13%)
Points
Range:9.49 (9.49%) 11.05 (11.05%)
Thoroughly details other
conditions from the lipid
panel with expert
rationale and supported
reasoning. Correlates
lipid panel to
hypertension and Type II
diabetes mellitus.
Correctly suggests other
medication that should
be given. Rationale is
thorough, supported and
sufficient.
Provides some details
regarding other
conditions from the lipid
panel with rationale and
reasoning, although may
be limited in certain
areas. Mostly correlates
lipid panel to
hypertension and Type II
diabetes mellitus.
Suggests other
medication that should
be given but may be
erroneous in some areas.
Rationale is supported
and mostly sufficient.
Points
Range:11.18 (11.18%) 13 (13%)
Points
Range:9.49 (9.49%) 11.05 (11.05%)
Provides insufficient
explanations.
Information is not
entirely scientifically
sound, necessary and
sufficient. Does not
address the context
sufficiently or with sound
rationale.
Points Range:7.8 (7.8%) 9.36 (9.36%)
Provides insufficient
explanations of lipid
panel rationale and
correlation to disease
and medication.
Information is not
entirely scientifically
sound, necessary or
sufficient.
Points Range:7.8 (7.8%) 9.36 (9.36%)
Provides insufficient
explanations for lab
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Overall Clinical findings
and case
analysis/Summary
Mechanics
Approaches Expectations
Below Expectations
Provides thorough and
insightful explanations
for lab values, specifically
HbA1c, along with the
rationale in relation to
normal/abnormal body
function. Information is
scientifically sound,
supported and sufficient
in detail.
Provides mostly thorough
explanations for lab
values, specifically
HbA1c, along with the
rationale in relation to
normal/abnormal body
function. Information is
mostly scientifically
sound, supported but
may lack detail in some
areas.
values/HbA1c and
insufficient rationale in
relation to
normal/abnormal body
function. Does not
address the context
sufficiently or with sound
rationale.
Points
Range:10.32 (10.32%) 12 (12%)
Points
Range:8.76 (8.76%) 10.2 (10.2%)
Points Range:7.2 (7.2%) 8.64 (8.64%)
Provides an overall
thorough case analysis
with clinical findings on
case. Clinical findings are
supported with evidence,
compared and
rationalized thoroughly.
The type of heart failure
is explained and
supported.
Provides an overall case
analysis with clinical
findings on case. Clinical
findings are mostly
supported with evidence,
compared and
rationalized with some
evidence of critical
thinking. The type of
heart failure is explained
and supported.
Points
Range:6.88 (6.88%) 8 (8%)
Points
Range:5.84 (5.84%) 6.8 (6.8%)
Answers are well written
throughout. Information
is well organized and
clearly
communicated.The
writing is free of spelling
and grammatical errors.
Answers are well written
throughout and the
information is reasonably
organized and
communicated. It is
mostly free of spelling
and grammatical errors.
Provides a limited overall
case analysis with limited
clinical findings on case,
there is little to no
support of clinical
findings with evidence.
The type of heart failure
is not explained and/or
not supported.
Points Range:4.8 (4.8%) 5.76 (5.76%)
Answers are somewhat
organized and lacks some
clarity. Contains some
spelling and grammatical
errors
APA format and
References
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Approaches Expectations
Below Expectations
Points Range:8.6 (8.6%) 10 (10%)
Points Range:7.3 (7.3%) 8.5 (8.5%)
Points Range:6 (6%) 7.2 (7.2%)
Meets all the
requirements related to
length. There is a
minimum of 3 scholarly
resources with at least 1
non-internet source. All
references are correctly
cited in APA format. The
student shows a solid
grasp of APA formatting,
paraphrasing and
citations.
Meets most of the
requirements related to
length. There is a
minimum of 3 resources
with at least 1 noninternet source; the
references may be
questionable or not
scholarly in nature. Most
references are correctly
cited in APA format. The
student shows a good
grasp of APA formatting,
paraphrasing and
citations but needs
refinement in some
areas.
Meets some of the
requirements related to
length but is lacking
enough to impede the
meaning of the paper.
The references do not
meet required count
and/or may be
questionable or not
scholarly in nature.
References are not
correctly cited in APA
format. The student does
not show a good grasp of
APA formatting,
paraphrasing and
citations.
Name:PATH 370 Signature Assignment Rubric NEW
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades