GET ANSWERS FOR ASSIGNMENTS
AIM:
People aged 65 years and older constitute 50% of health service users. As people age, they experience changes to their physical and mental function, social environment and overall wellbeing. For those requiring health services, these changes are further complicated by illness (Moyle et al., 2014).
The aim of this assignment is for students to demonstrate an understanding of the complex health needs of an older person through presentation of a patient profile of a selected case from a clinical/ workplace experience in a practice setting, community or residential or acute care.
Case study/ patient profile reports are an effective way to summarise an individual patient’s history, symptoms, and conditions in the context of their lives (Mellerio, 2019). This assignment relates to Learning Outcomes 1 and 2.
TASK DESCRIPTION:
In your case study/patient profile report you must:
- Identify the person (the case/patient), and summarisetheir family and social history, ensuring you preserve confidentiality (you should use pseudonyms).
- Identify the acute presenting issue (reason for hospitalisation/nursing care), risk factors and potential or actual stereotyping.
- Evaluate case’s/patient’s health history including its impact on the person’s physical and/or mental functional status.
Additional information and Submission:
- Present your work according to Academic standards:
- Use academic language and health specific terminology throughout.
- You may use headings to organise your work
- Use the third personin your writing
- Refer to the marking guidelineswhen writing your assignment. This will assist you in calculating the weightings of the sections for your assignment.
- It is important that you maintain confidentiality as per University guidelinesand include no identifying demographic information about patients, colleagues or institutions. Please use pseudonyms.
- A minimum of six (6) different sources from the scholarly literature should inform your case study report.
- Ensure that you use scholarly literature (digitised readings, research articles, relevant Government reports and textbooks) that has been predominantly published within the last 5 years.
- Include your references on a new page, correctly formatted as per APA7
- Youdo not need to submit a University Assignment Coversheet.
- Complete the Electronic cover sheetafter which the Final submission point will appear.
- You do need to include a correctly formatted title page – State your actual word count(excluding your reference list) on the Assignment Title Page
- Submit your assignment electronically via TURNITIN
- Markers will stop marking your assignment once the word limit of 750 words is reached.
References
Mellerio, J. E. (2019). Enduring support for the case report. British Journal of Dermatology, 181(3), 429-430. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.17500
Moyle, W., Parker, D., & Bramble, M. (2014). Care of older adults: A strengths-based approach. Cambridge University Press.
A1 Case Study – Patient Profile MARKING RUBRIC
| Assessable Elements |
EXEMPLARY
Exceptionally high quality of performance or standard of learning achievement.
|
ACCOMPLISHED
High quality performance or standard of learning achievement.
|
DEVELOPING
Satisfactory quality of performance or standard of learning achievement. |
BEGINNING
Unsatisfactory quality of performance or standard of learning achievement. |
TOTAL MARK |
| Criterion One
Succinct and clear identification of the older person and his/her health history. |
Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by the clear and succinct identification of an older person (the case) (person > 65 years or > 55 years if Australia’s First People), with a comprehensive summary of his/her family and social history, ensuring confidentiality. | High standard as evidenced by the clear identification of an older person (the case) (person > 65 years or > 55 years if Australia’s First People), with a reasonable summary of his/her family and social history, ensuring confidentiality. | Satisfactory standard as evidenced by the adequate identification of an older person (the case) (person > 65 years or > 55 years if Australia’s First People), with a sufficient summary of his/her family and social history, ensuring confidentiality. | Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by the underdeveloped identification of an older person (the case) (person > 65 years or > 55 years if Australia’s First People), with a flawed summary of his/her family and social history, ensuring confidentiality. | /10 |
| Mark allocation | 10-9 | 8-7 | 5-6 | <4 | |
| Criterion Two
Succinct and comprehensive discussion of the acute reason for hospitalisation, contributing risk factors and the influence of stereotyping.
|
Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by clear and succinct identification and comprehensive discussion of the acute reason for hospitalisation/ nursing care,
the contributing risk factors for the presenting condition, and the potential or actual stereotyping in relation to this older person. |
High standard as evidenced by clear identification and broad discussion of the acute reason for hospitalisation/ nursing care,
the contributing risk factors for the presenting condition, and the potential or actual stereotyping in relation to this older person.
|
Satisfactory standard as evidenced by adequate identification and sufficient discussion of the acute reason for hospitalisation/ nursing care,
the contributing risk factors for the presenting condition, and the potential or actual stereotyping in relation to this older person.
|
Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by the underdeveloped identification and an absent or unclear discussion of the acute reason for hospitalisation/ nursing care,
the contributing risk factors for the presenting condition, and the potential or actual stereotyping in relation to this older person. |
/25 |
| Mark allocation | 25-20 | 19-15 | 14-11 | <10 | |
| Criterion Three
The evaluation of 2 co-morbidities and their impact on the older person’s mental/physical functional health. |
Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by comprehensive evaluation of 2 comorbidities and their impact on the older person’s current physical and/or mental functional status. | High standard as evidenced by reasonable evaluation of 2 comorbidities and their impact on the older person’s current physical and/or mental functional status. | Satisfactory standard as evidenced by sufficient evaluation of 2 comorbidities and their impact on the older person’s current physical and/or mental functional status. | Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by an underdeveloped evaluation of 2 comorbidities and their impact on the older person’s current physical and/or mental functional status. | /35 |
| Mark allocation | 35-30 | 29-23 | 22-16 | <15 | |
| Criterion Four
Use of the literature to synthesise and integrate evidence that informs the chosen case study.
|
Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by synthesis and accurate integration of high quality, credible evidence supports ideas that are relevant to the case. | High standard as evidenced by some synthesis and integration of good quality, credible evidence to support ideas that are relevant to the case. | Satisfactory standard as evidenced by attempting synthesis and integration of reasonable quality, credible evidence to support ideas that are relevant to the case. | Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by a lack of synthesis and integration of poor-quality evidence resulting a lack of support for ideas that may not be relevant to the case. | /20 |
| Mark allocation | 20-17 | 16-13 | 12-10 | <9 | |
| Criterion Five
Evidence of exemplary use of APA 7 formatting, in-text and in the final reference list.
|
Exemplary demonstration of academic writing standards,
exemplary sentence and paragraph structure, with few, if any errors, exemplary and overall logical flow, that indicates a sophisticated ability to communicate ideas effectively.
|
High quality demonstration of academic writing standards,
appropriate sentence and paragraph structure, with some error and overall logical flow, that indicates an effective ability to communicate idea.
|
Sufficient demonstration of academic writing standards,
developing sentence and paragraph structure, and/or there are some errors that disrupt the logical flow or communication of ideas. |
Does not comply with academic writing standards,
Poor sentence and paragraph structure, and poor logical flow demonstrates an inability to communicate ideas effectively. |
/10 |
| Mark allocation | 10-9 | 8-7 | 6-5 | <4 | |
| TOTAL | /100 |
