NURS-6512 Week 5: Assessment of Head, Neck, Eyes, Ears, Nose, and Throat papers

Week 5 Announcement

Posted on: Friday, September 25, 2020 8:58:18 AM EDT

Week 5 Update From Dr. O.

Welcome to Week 5! It is hard to believe that we are almost at the 1/2 way point of completing this term. Just a few updates for this week:

1. Assignments This Week:

There are two assignments this week:

Assignment 1: Case Study Assignments. This assignment you will be doing in SOAP format.

Case Study 1: Last Name Beginning A-M

is a 50-year-old male with nasal congestion, sneezing, rhinorrhea, and postnasal drainage. Richard has struggled with an itchy nose, eyes, palate, and ears for 5 days. As you check his ears and throat for redness and inflammation, you notice him touch his fingers to the bridge of his nose to press and rub there. He says he’s taken Mucinex OTC the past 2 nights to help him breathe while he sleeps. When you ask if the Mucinex has helped at all, he sneers slightly and gestures that the improvement is only minimal. Richard is alert and oriented. He has pale, boggy nasal mucosa with clear thin secretions and enlarged nasal turbinates, which obstruct airway flow but his lungs are clear. His tonsils are not enlarged but his throat is mildly erythematous.

Case Study 2: Last Name Beginning N-Z

Lily is a 20-year-old student at the local community college. When some of her friends and classmates told her about an outbreak of flu-like symptoms sweeping her campus during the past 2 weeks, Lily figured she shouldn’t take her 3-day sore throat lightly. Your clinic has treated a few cases similar to Lily’s. All the patients reported decreased appetite, headaches, and pain with swallowing. As Lily recounts these symptoms to you, you notice that she has a runny nose and a slight hoarseness in her voice but doesn’t sound congested.

Assignment #2 is DCE in Shadow Health. This week is a focused exam on “cough”. You will load the acknowledgement form and the Lab pass like last week.

Overall, I think the Shadow Health assignments are going well. Remember to work with SH support with any technical issues.

I hope all of you have a great week !!

Dr. O.

NURS-6512 Week 5: Assessment of Head, Neck, Eyes, Ears, Nose, and Throat papers

Emily, age 15, is brought to your clinic complaining of chills, aches, and a sore throat. Without any testing, consider all of the possible diagnoses. It could be a cold, the flu, bronchitis, or even something more serious, such as meningitis or mononucleosis. Assessing the actual cause will involve much more than simple visual inspection. Some conditions are so subtle that they require the use of special instruments and tests in addition to a trained eye and ear.

This week, you will explore how to assess the head, neck, eyes, ears, nose, and throat. Whether dealing with a detached retina, sinusitis, meningitis, or even cough, advanced practice nurses need to know the proper assessment techniques in order to form accurate diagnoses.

Learning Objectives

Students will:

Apply assessment skills to diagnose eye, ear, and throat conditions
Apply concepts, theories, and principles relating to health assessment techniques and diagnoses for the head, neck, eyes, ears, nose, and throat

Learning Resources For NURS-6512 Week 5: Assessment of Head, Neck, Eyes, Ears, Nose, and Throat papers

Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Chapter 11, “Head and Neck”This chapter reviews the anatomy and physiology of the head and neck. The authors also describe the procedures for conducting a physical examination of the head and neck.

Chapter 12, “Eyes”In this chapter, the authors describe the anatomy and function of the eyes. In addition, the authors explain the steps involved in conducting a physical examination of the eyes.

Chapter 13, “Ears, Nose, and Throat”The authors of this chapter detail the proper procedures for conducting a physical exam of the ears, nose, and throat. The chapter also provides pictures and descriptions of common abnormalities in the ears, nose, and throat.

Dains, J. E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. (2019). Advanced health assessment and clinical diagnosis in primary care (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Advanced Health Assessment and Clinical Diagnosis in Primary Care, 6th Edition by Dains, J.E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. Copyright 2019 by Mosby. Reprinted by permission of Mosby via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Chapter 15, “Earache”
This chapter covers the main questions that need to be asked about the patient’s condition prior to the physical examination as well as how these questions lead to a focused physical examination.

Chapter 21, “Hoarseness”
This chapter focuses on the most common causes of hoarseness. It provides strategies for evaluating the patient, both through questions and through physical exams.

Chapter 25, “Nasal Symptoms and Sinus Congestion”

In this chapter, the authors highlight the key questions to ask about the patients symptoms, the key parts of the physical examination, and potential laboratory work that might be needed to provide an accurate diagnosis of nasal and sinus conditions.

Chapter 30, “Red Eye”

The focus of this chapter is on how to determine the cause of red eyes in a patient, including key symptoms to consider and possible diagnoses.

Chapter 32, “Sore Throat”

A sore throat is one most common concerns patients describe. This chapter includes questions to ask when taking the patient’s history, things to look for while conducting the physical exam, and possible causes for the sore throat.

Chapter 38, “Vision Loss”
This chapter highlights the causes of vision loss and how the causes of the condition can be diagnosed.

Note: Download the six documents (Student Checklists and Key Points) below, and use them as you practice conducting assessments of the head, neck, eyes, ears, nose, and throat.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Head and neck: Student checklist. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., & Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Head and neck: Key points. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Eyes: Student checklist. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Eyes: Key points. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Ears, nose, and throat: Student checklist. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Ears, nose, and throat: Key points. In Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.

Credit Line: Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination, 9th Edition by Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. Copyright 2019 by Elsevier Health Sciences. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Health Sciences via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Colyar, M. R. (2015). Advanced practice nursing procedures. Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.

Credit Line: Advanced practice nursing procedures, 1st Edition by Colyar, M. R. Copyright 2015 by F. A. Davis Company. Reprinted by permission of F. A. Davis Company via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Chapter 71, “Visual Function Evaluation: Snellen, Illiterate E, PictorialThis section explains the procedural knowledge needed to perform eyes, ears, nose, and mouth procedures.

Sullivan, D. D. (2019). Guide to clinical documentation (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.

Chapter 2, “The Comprehensive History and Physical Exam” (Previously read in Weeks 1, 3, 4, and 5)

Bedell, H. E., & Stevenson, S. B. (2013). Eye movement testing in clinical examination. Vision Research 90, 32–37. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2013.02.001. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698913000217

Rubin, G. S. (2013). Measuring reading performance. Vision Research, 90, 43–51. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2013.02.015. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698913000436

Harmes, K. M., Blackwood, R. A., Burrows, H. L., Cooke, J. M., Harrison, R. V., & Passamani, P. P. (2013). Otitis media: Diagnosis and treatment. American Family Physicians, 88(7), 435–440.

Otolaryngology Houston. (2014). Imaging of maxillary sinusitis (X-ray, CT, and MRI). Retrieved from http://www.ghorayeb.com/ImagingMaxillarySinusitis.html

This website provides medical images of sinusitis, including X-rays, CT scans, and MRIs (magnetic resonance imaging).

Document: Episodic/Focused SOAP Note Exemplar (Word document)

Document: Episodic/Focused SOAP Note Template (Word document)

Document: Midterm Exam Review (Word document)

Shadow Health Support and Orientation Resources

Frey, C. [Chris Frey]. (2015, September 4). Student orientation [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfd_8pTJBkY

Shadow Health. (n.d.). Shadow Health help desk. Retrieved from https://support.shadowhealth.com/hc/en-us

Document: Shadow Health. (2014). Useful tips and tricks (Version 2) (PDF)

Document: Student Acknowledgement Form (Word document)

Note: You will sign and date this form each time you complete your DCE Assignment in Shadow Health to acknowledge your commitment to Walden University’s Code of Conduct.

Document: DCE (Shadow Health) Documentation Template for Focused Exam: Cough (Word document)

Use this template to complete your Assignment 2 for this week.

Optional Resource for NURS-6512 Week 5: Assessment of Head, Neck, Eyes, Ears, Nose, and Throat papers

Use the following resources to guide you through your Shadow Health orientation as well as other support resources:

LeBlond, R. F., Brown, D. D., & DeGowin, R. L. (2014). DeGowin’s diagnostic examination (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical.

Chapter 7, “The Head and Neck” (pp. 178–301)

This chapter describes head and neck examinations that can be made with general clinical resources. Also, the authors detail syndromes of common head and neck conditions.

Required Media (click to expand/reduce)

Online media for Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination

It is highly recommended that you access and view the resources included with the course text, Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination. Focus on the videos and animations in Chapters 10, 11, and 12 that relate to the assessment of the head, neck, eyes, ears, nose, and throat. Refer to the Week 4 Learning Resources area for access instructions on https://evolve.elsevier.com/.

University of Iowa Ophthalmology. (2016, December 19). Fluorescein staining of the cornea. Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/198695974

Credit Line: University of Iowa Ophthalmology. (n.d.). Fluorescein staining of the cornea [Video file]. Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/198695974. The author(s) and publishers acknowledge the University of Iowa and EyeRounds.org for permission to reproduce this copyrighted material.

Note: Approximate length of this media program is 25 seconds.

Assignment 1: Case Study Assignment: Assessing the Head, Eyes, Ears, Nose, and Throat

Most ear, nose, and throat conditions that arise in non-critical care settings are minor in nature. However, subtle symptoms can sometimes escalate into life-threatening conditions that require prompt assessment and treatment.

Nurses conducting assessments of the ears, nose, and throat must be able to identify the small differences between life-threatening conditions and benign ones. For instance, if a patient with a sore throat and a runny nose also has inflamed lymph nodes, the inflammation is probably due to the pathogen causing the sore throat rather than a case of throat cancer. With this knowledge and a sufficient patient health history, a nurse would not need to escalate the assessment to a biopsy or an MRI of the lymph nodes but would probably perform a simple strep test.

In this Case Study Assignment, you consider case studies of abnormal findings from patients in a clinical setting. You determine what history should be collected from the patients, what physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted, and formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible conditions.

To Prepare

By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to a specific case study for this Case Study Assignment. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your assignment from your Instructor.
Also, your Case Study Assignment should be in the Episodic/Focused SOAP Note format rather than the traditional narrative style format. Refer to Chapter 2 of the Sullivan text and the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template in the Week 5 Learning Resources for guidance. Remember that all Episodic/Focused SOAP Notes have specific data included in every patient case.

With regard to the case study you were assigned:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide.
Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient.
Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
Identify at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.

The Assignment

Use the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template and create an episodic/focused note about the patient in the case study to which you were assigned using the episodic/focused note template provided in the Week 5 resources. Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for each case. List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis and justify why you selected each.

By Day 6 of Week 5

Submit your Assignment.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK5Assgn1+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
Click the Week 5 Assignment 1 Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
Click the Week 5 Assignment 1 link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK5Assgn1+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 5 Assignment 1 Rubric

Rubric Detail

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Using the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template: · Create documentation or an episodic/focused note in SOAP format about the patient in the case study to which you were assigned.· Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for your case.	45 (45%) – 50 (50%) The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response thoroughly and accurately provides detailed evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.	39 (39%) – 44 (44%) The response accurately follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response accurately provides detailed evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.	33 (33%) – 38 (38%) The response follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness and inaccuracy. The response provides evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness or inaccuracy in the evidence selected.	0 (0%) – 32 (32%) The response incompletely and inaccurately follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response provides incomplete, inaccurate, and/or missing evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.
· List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis, and justify why you selected each.	30 (30%) – 35 (35%) The response lists five distinctly different and detailed possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the five conditions selected.	24 (24%) – 29 (29%) The response lists four or five different possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study and provides an accurate justification for each of the five conditions selected.	18 (18%) – 23 (23%) The response lists three to five possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness and/or inaccuracy in the conditions and/or justification for each.	0 (0%) – 17 (17%) The response lists two or fewer, or is missing, possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, with inaccurate or missing justification for each condition selected.
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.	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.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

Total Points: 100

Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity

To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:

Submit your Week 5 Assignment 1 draft and review the originality report.

Submit Your Assignment by Day 6 of Week 5

To participate in this Assignment:

Week 5 Assignment 1

Assignment 2: Digital Clinical Experience: Focused Exam: Cough

In this DCE Assignment, you will conduct a focused exam related to cough in your DCE using the simulation tool, Shadow Health. You will determine what history should be collected from the patient, what physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted, and formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible conditions.

To Prepare

Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide related to ears, nose, and throat.
Review the Shadow Health Resources provided in this week’s Learning Resources specifically the tutorial to guide you through the documentation and interpretation within the Shadow Health platform. Review the examples also provided.
Review the DCE (Shadow Health) Documentation Template for Focused Exam: Cough found in this week’s Learning Resources and use this template to complete your Documentation Notes for this DCE Assignment.
Access and login to Shadow Health using the link in the left-hand navigation of the Blackboard classroom.
Review the Week 5 Focused Exam: Cough Rubric provided in the Assignment submission area for details on completing the Assignment in Shadow Health.
Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?

Focused Exam: Cough Assignment:

Complete the following in Shadow Health:

Respiratory Concept Lab (Recommended but not required)
Episodic/Focused Note for Focused Exam: Cough

Note: Each Shadow Health Assessment may be attempted and reopened as many times as necessary prior to the due date to achieve a total of 80% or better (this includes your DCE and your Documentation Notes), but you must take all attempts by the Week 5 Day 7 deadline.

Submission and Grading Information

By Day 7 of Week 5

Complete your Focused Exam: Cough DCE Assignment in Shadow Health via the Shadow Health link in Blackboard.
Once you complete your Assignment in Shadow Health, you will need to download your lab pass and upload it to the corresponding assignment in Blackboard for your faculty review.
(Note: Please save your lab pass as “LastName_FirstName_AssignmentName”.) You can find instructions for downloading your lab pass here: https://link.shadowhealth.com/download-lab-pass
Once you submit your Documentation Notes to Shadow Health, make sure to copy and paste the same Documentation Notes into your Assignment submission link below.
Download, sign, date, and submit your Student Acknowledgement Form found in the Learning Resources for this week.

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 5 Assignment 2 DCE Rubric

Rubric Detail

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

Rubric

Description: To complete the Shadow Health assignments, it is helpful to use the text and follow along with each chapter correlating to the area of assessment to assist in covering all the subjective questions and the physical assessment areas. Review the Advanced Health Assessment Nursing Documentation Tutorial located in the Weeks 1 and 4 Resources, the model documentation in Shadow Health, as well as sample documentation in the text to assist with narrative documentation of the assessments. Shadow Health exams may be added to or repeated as many times as necessary prior to the due date to assist in achieving the desired score.

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Student DCE score (DCE percentages will be calculated automatically by Shadow Health after the assignment is completed.) Note: DCE Score – Do not round up on the DCE score.	56 (56%) – 60 (60%) DCE score>93	51 (51%) – 55 (55%) DCE Score 86-92	46 (46%) – 50 (50%) DCE Score 80-85	0 (0%) – 45 (45%) DCE Score <79 No DCE completed.
Subjective Documentation in Provider Notes Subjective narrative documentation in Provider Notes is detailed and organized and includes: Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS) ROS: covers all body systems that may help you formulate a list of differential diagnoses. You should list each system as follows: General: Head: EENT: etc. You should list these in bullet format and document the systems in order from head to toe.	16 (16%) – 20 (20%) Documentation is detailed and organized with all pertinent information noted in professional language. Documentation includes all pertinent documentation to include Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).	11 (11%) – 15 (15%) Documentation with sufficient details, some organization and some pertinent information noted in professional language. NURS-6512 Week 5: Assessment of Head, Neck, Eyes, Ears, Nose, and Throat papers Documentation provides some of the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).	6 (6%) – 10 (10%) Documentation with inadequate details and/or organization; and inadequate pertinent information noted in professional language. Limited or/minimum documentation provided to analyze students critical thinking abilities for the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).	0 (0%) – 5 (5%) Documentation lacks any details and/or organization; and does not provide pertinent information noted in professional language. No information is provided for the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS). or No documentation provided.
Objective Documentation in Provider Notes – this is to be completed in Shadow Health Physical exam: Document in a systematic order starting from head-to-toe, include what you see, hear, and feel when doing your physical exam using medical terminology/jargon. Document all normal and abnormal exam findings. Do not use “WNL” or “normal”. You only need to examine the systems that are pertinent to the CC, HPI, and History. Diagnostic result – Include any pertinent labs, x-rays, or diagnostic test that would be appropriate to support the differential diagnoses mentioned Differential Diagnoses (list a minimum of 3 differential diagnoses). Your primary or presumptive diagnosis should be at the top of the list (#1).	16 (16%) – 20 (20%) Documentation detailed and organized with all abnormal and pertinent normal assessment information described in professional language. Each system assessed is clearly documented with measurable details of the exam.	11 (11%) – 15 (15%) Documentation with sufficient details and some organization; some abnormal and some normal assessment information described in mostly professional language. Each system assessed is somewhat clearly documented with measurable details of the exam.	6 (6%) – 10 (10%) Documentation with inadequate details and/or organization; inadequate identification of abnormal and pertinent normal assessment information described; inadequate use of professional language. Each system assessed is minimally or is not clearly documented with measurable details of the exam.	0 (0%) – 5 (5%) Documentation with no details and/or organization; no identification of abnormal and pertinent normal assessment information described; no use of professional language. None of the systems are assessed, no documentation of details of the exam. or No documentation provided.

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Student DCE score

(DCE percentages will be calculated automatically by Shadow Health after the assignment is completed.)

Note: DCE Score – Do not round up on the DCE score.

56 (56%) – 60 (60%)

DCE score>93

51 (51%) – 55 (55%)

DCE Score 86-92

46 (46%) – 50 (50%)

DCE Score 80-85

0 (0%) – 45 (45%)

DCE Score <79

No DCE completed.

Subjective Documentation in Provider Notes

Subjective narrative documentation in Provider Notes is detailed and organized and includes:

Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS)

ROS: covers all body systems that may help you formulate a list of differential diagnoses. You should list each system as follows:
General: Head: EENT: etc.

You should list these in bullet format and document the systems in order from head to toe.

16 (16%) – 20 (20%)

Documentation is detailed and organized with all pertinent information noted in professional language.

Documentation includes all pertinent documentation to include Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).

11 (11%) – 15 (15%)

Documentation with sufficient details, some organization and some pertinent information noted in professional language. NURS-6512 Week 5: Assessment of Head, Neck, Eyes, Ears, Nose, and Throat papers

Documentation provides some of the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).

6 (6%) – 10 (10%)

Documentation with inadequate details and/or organization; and inadequate pertinent information noted in professional language.

Limited or/minimum documentation provided to analyze students critical thinking abilities for the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).

0 (0%) – 5 (5%)

Documentation lacks any details and/or organization; and does not provide pertinent information noted in professional language.

No information is provided for the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).

No documentation provided.

Objective Documentation in Provider Notes – this is to be completed in Shadow Health

Physical exam: Document in a systematic order starting from head-to-toe, include what you see, hear, and feel when doing your physical exam using medical terminology/jargon. Document all normal and abnormal exam findings. Do not use “WNL” or “normal”.

You only need to examine the systems that are pertinent to the CC, HPI, and History.

Diagnostic result – Include any pertinent labs, x-rays, or diagnostic test that would be appropriate to support the differential diagnoses mentioned

Differential Diagnoses (list a minimum of 3 differential diagnoses). Your primary or presumptive diagnosis should be at the top of the list (#1).

16 (16%) – 20 (20%)

Documentation detailed and organized with all abnormal and pertinent normal assessment information described in professional language.

Each system assessed is clearly documented with measurable details of the exam.

11 (11%) – 15 (15%)

Documentation with sufficient details and some organization; some abnormal and some normal assessment information described in mostly professional language.

Each system assessed is somewhat clearly documented with measurable details of the exam.

6 (6%) – 10 (10%)

Documentation with inadequate details and/or organization; inadequate identification of abnormal and pertinent normal assessment information described; inadequate use of professional language.

Each system assessed is minimally or is not clearly documented with measurable details of the exam.

0 (0%) – 5 (5%)

Documentation with no details and/or organization; no identification of abnormal and pertinent normal assessment information described; no use of professional language.

None of the systems are assessed, no documentation of details of the exam.

No documentation provided.

Total Points: 100