Version: Moderated Assessment Task 1 – Case Study Description: Please refer to the NRSG257 “Assessment” and “Additional Unit Resources” on the National LEO page for more comprehensive information on this assessment task. Due date: Sunday 8th April at 2359 hours. Weighting: 40% Length and/or format: 1600-word academic essay Purpose: This assessment task will allow students to demonstrate their critical thinking and reasoning, as well as their research skills. Students will also demonstrate how evidence based information can be implemented into contemporary Australian Nursing practice. Learning outcomes assessed: 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, & 9 How to submit: Submit the essay through Turnitin in LEO Assessment Task One in your campus tile. Please review the upload box to ensure that you have submitted the correct assignment. Allow at least one day to review Turnitin submissions for similarity and consider re-submitting. Please note: Email is not an appropriate submission mode for this assessment item. Return of assignment: Grades and feedback will be made available through the method indicated by the lecturer in charge, according to ACU policy three (3) weeks after submission. Assessment criteria: The rubric for this assessment is outlined in full below. The essay is aimed at critically evaluating the research explored related to a chosen case study presented. This essay requires use and evaluation of evidence-based sources when caring for children, adolescents and their families in relation to current Australian nursing practice. Version: Moderated INSTRUCTIONS: Choose one (1) of the case studies below. Your Assessment will be written in academic essay format with an introduction, body and conclusion according to APA Guidelines. Using evidence specific to your chosen case study, address the following two (2) points: 1. Describe the pathophysiology of the presenting complaint in the case study XXXXXXXXXXwords) 2. Evaluation of the nurse’s role to deliver developmentally appropriate nursing care in relation to your chosen case study. Address: • growth and developmental theories, • family centred care and, • the effects of hospitalisation of the child, on the child and family XXXXXXXXXXwords) Case Study 1 Anne is a 10 year old girl who has presented to the emergency department in the local hospital with right iliac fossa pain. On further assessment by the emergency registrar, appendicitis is suspected. The surgical team agree that the signs and symptoms are associated with appendicitis and take Anne to theatre for an appendectomy. The handover on return to the ward is that the surgical team found a gangrenous perforated appendix with peritonitis. Anne has returned to the ward with a nasogastric tube in situ on free drainage, morphine PCA, IV therapy and triple IV antibiotics. Due to the severity of the infection and the potential complications, Anne will need to remain in hospital for 10 days of IV antibiotics and pain management. Anne is the oldest of five children and her parents own and run an Indian restaurant in the city. Case Study 2 Jay is a four-month old boy admitted to the paediatric unit via emergency with vomiting, decreased feeds, no bowel actions and intermittent spasmodic abdominal pains. During the spasmodic pain episodes, Jay draws his legs up and has a high pitched cry. After a diagnostic ultrasound, intussusception was thought to be the cause of the presenting symptoms and Jay was admitted to the ward. His treatment plan included observation, electrolyte monitoring and IV therapy until a contrast enema could be implemented to correct the intussusception. The approximate length of stay for Jay will be 2 days, during which time, Jay’s mother is informed that the rotavirus vaccine that Jay had at 4 months has increased the incidence of this condition amongst infants. Jay’s mother is now having serious doubts regarding future vaccines for Jay. Case Study 3 Sue is a 14-year-old indigenous girl who lives in a remote community in rural Australia. Sue has been treated for repeated episodes of streptococcal pharyngitis and impetigo over the last 2 years. The local health clinic have registered Sue and her siblings for a secondary prophylaxis program where she receives Benzathine Penicillin G IM routinely to aid in reducing risk of developing ARF/ RHD. However, Sue has failed to attend the clinic on multiple occasions to receive her IM antibiotics. Sue has presented to the remote area health clinic complaining of a 4 day history of acute joint pain in her knees, ankles, elbows and shoulders. A health history taken by the remote area nurse on arrival reveals that Sue reports having a sore throat 2- 3 weeks ago, migratory joint pain starting with her knees and ankles and which now includes other joints. Her temperature is 38o C. When Sue is assessed by the remote clinic medical officer, a diagnosis of Acute Rheumatic Fever is suspected. The doctor at the clinic attending to Sue informs her mother that she needs to be transferred to a hospital for cardiology review and echocardiogram. The closest hospital that provides these services is 800km away. Sue lives with her mother and 6 younger brothers and sisters. Version: Moderated Criterion referenced rubric for ASSESSMENT TASK 1: CASE STUDY ESSAY Marking Criteria & Allocated marks 0 (No attempt made) NN < 49% PA (50-64%) CR (65-74%) DI (75-84%) HD XXXXXXXXXX%) Pathophysiology Content LO 3 GA 8 15% 0 marks No pathophysiology of presenting complaint discussed XXXXXXXXXXmarks Understanding of the pathophysiology of the presenting complaint in the scenario is poorly demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks Has demonstrated satisfactory understanding and descriptors of the pathophysiology of the presenting complaint in the chosen scenario XXXXXXXXXXmarks Has demonstrated clear scientific principles and pathophysiology of the presenting complaint in the scenario XXXXXXXXXXmarks Has demonstrated a high level descriptor of the scientific principles and pathophysiology of the presenting complaint in the scenario XXXXXXXXXXmarks Has demonstrated an advanced, clear and concise cellular level descriptor of the scientific principles and pathophysiology of the presenting complaint in the scenario. Growth and development Content LO2 GA6 15% 0 marks Growth and development not discussed XXXXXXXXXXmarks Understanding of the relevant growth and development principles related to the scenario is poorly demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A satisfactory understanding of the relevant growth and development principles related to the scenario is demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A clear descriptor of the relevant growth and development principles related to the scenario is critically discussed and demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A high level descriptor and applicability of the relevant growth and development principles related to the scenario is critically discussed and demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks Exceptionally clear and concise descriptor and applicability of the relevant growth and development principles related to the scenario is critically discussed and demonstrated. Family-centred care Content LO1 GA6 15% 0 marks No evidence of familycentred care discussed XXXXXXXXXXmarks Understanding of the relevance of familycentred care in a paediatric setting is poorly demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A satisfactory understanding of the principles of familycentred care and its importance in a paediatric setting is demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A clear and defined understanding of the principles of family-centred care and its importance in a paediatric setting is demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A clear, defined and critical descriptor of the principles of family-centred care and its importance and applicability in a paediatric setting is demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks An advanced, clear, defined and critical descriptor of the principles of family-centred care and its importance and applicability in a paediatric setting is demonstrated. Hospitalised child and family Content LO1 LO7 GA6 15% 0 marks No reference made to hospitalised child and family XXXXXXXXXXmarks Understanding of the effects of hospitalisation on the child and family unit is poorly demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A satisfactory understanding of the effects of hospitalisation on the child and family unit is demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A clear and defined understanding of the effects of hospitalisation on the child and family unit is demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks A clear, defined and critical descriptor of the effects of hospitalisation on the child and family unit and applicability in a paediatric setting is demonstrated XXXXXXXXXXmarks An advanced, clear, defined and critical descriptor of the effects of hospitalisation on the child and family unit and applicability in a paediatric setting is demonstrated. Critical thinking, analysis and synthesis of evidence LO1 LO2 LO3 GA 8 GA9 30% 0 marks No evidence of critical thinking, analysis or synthesis 0- 14 marks The essay summarises the research and does not evaluate the information. The discussion presented is heavily biased and no clear argument presented or arguments made are not supported by any evidence XXXXXXXXXXmarks The essay summarises the research with some evaluation of the information noted. The discussion presented is somewhat biased. Some arguments presented but few are supported by any evidence XXXXXXXXXXmarks The essay demonstrates a sound critical thinking and evaluation of some of the research. The discussion is somewhat biased. Clear arguments are presented and supported by appropriate evidence XXXXXXXXXXmarks The essay demonstrates breadth of reading and important critical thinking and evaluation of the research. Important discussion points are evident. Arguments are supported by evidence based articles and sources XXXXXXXXXXmarks The essay demonstrates breadth of reading and considerable depth of critical thinking and evaluation of the research. All arguments are supported by higher order evidence based articles and sources. Version: Moderated Presentation GA8 10% 0 marks There is no evidence of APA referencing style. 0 – 4.5 marks Mostly appropriate professional nondiscriminatory language; Absent/inaccurate and inconsistent citing of sources within text and reference list; referencing style inconsistently applied and inaccurate; poor communication of ideas with frequent spelling and grammatical errors; overuse of direct quotes; not within required word limit. 5 – 6.4 marks Used appropriate professional nondiscriminatory language; correctly cited most sources both within the text and reference list; used either APA or Harvard referencing style with occasional errors; expressed most ideas clearly with occasional spelling and grammatical error; used inappropriate or frequent direct quotes; kept to / struggled with word limit. 6.5 – 7.5 marks Used appropriate professional nondiscriminatory language; correctly cited most sources both within the text and reference list; used either APA or Harvard referencing style with minimal errors; expressed most ideas clearly with minimal spelling and grammatical error; rarely/not used direct quotes; kept to word limit 6.5 – 7.4 marks Used appropriate professional nondiscriminatory language; correctly cited all sources both within the text and reference list; consistently and correctly used either APA or Harvard referencing style; expressed ideas reasonably clearly, concisely and fluently with minimal spelling and grammatical error; rarely/not used direct quotes; kept to word limit. . 7.5 – 10 marks Used appropriate professional non-discriminatory language; correctly cited all sources both within the text and reference list; consistently and correctly used either APA or Harvard referencing style; expressed ideas clearly, concisely and fluently with correct spelling and grammar; rarely/not used direct quotes; kept to word limit. TOTAL /100 40% of TOTAL GRADE Comments: - Assessor: - **If more detailed feedback on this assessment item is required, students should book an appointment with the relevant marker or the Lecturer in Charge.