Patients are frequently uncomfortable discussing with healthcare professional’s issues that involve the genitalia and rectum; however, gathering an adequate history and properly conducting a physical exam are vital. Examining case studies of genital and rectal abnormalities can help prepare advanced practice nurses to accurately assess patients with problems in these areas. In this Lab Assignment, you will analyze an Episodic note case study that describes abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting. You will consider what history should be collected from the patients, as well as which physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted. You will also formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible conditions. Using evidence-based resources from your search, answer the following questions and support your answers using current evidence from the literature. In this Lab Assignment, you will analyze an Episodic note case study that describes abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting. You will consider what history should be collected from the patients, as well as which physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted. You will also formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible conditions. 1- Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study. Refer to Chapter 3 of the Sullivan resource to guide you as you complete your Lab Assignment. 2- Search the Walden library or the Internet for evidence-based resources to support your answers to the questions provided. 3- 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? 4-Identify possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient. Using evidence-based resources from your search, answer the following questions and support your answers using current evidence from the literature. Post the assignment By Day 7 of Week 10. Follow the rubric! We grade by the rubric! Online media for It is highly recommended that you access and view the resources included with the course text, . Focus on the videos and animations in Chapters 16 and 18–20 that relate to special examinations, including breast, genital, prostate, and rectal. Refer to the Week 4 Learning Resources area for access instructions on 10 (10%) – 12 (12%)The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation.7 (7%) – 9 (9%)The response accurately analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation.4 (4%) – 6 (6%)The response vaguely analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or inaccurately lists additional information to be included in the documentation.0 (0%) – 3 (3%)The response inaccurately analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation. 10 (10%) – 12 (12%)The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation.7 (7%) – 9 (9%)The response accurately analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation.4 (4%) – 6 (6%)The response vaguely analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or inaccurately lists additional information to be included in the documentation.0 (0%) – 3 (3%)The response inaccurately analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation. 14 (14%) – 16 (16%)The response clearly and accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a thorough and detailed explanation.11 (11%) – 13 (13%)The response accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is s
upported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a clear explanation.8 (8%) – 10 (10%)The response vaguely identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a vague explanation.0 (0%) – 7 (7%)The response inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an inaccurate or missing explanation. 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)The response thoroughly and accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly, thoroughly, and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.15 (15%) – 17 (17%)The response accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.12 (12%) – 14 (14%)The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.0 (0%) – 11 (11%)The response inaccurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case, with an inaccurate or missing explanation of how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)The response states clearly whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a thorough, accurate, and detailed explanation of sound reasoning. The response clearly, thoroughly, and accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained clearly, accurately, and thoroughly using three or more different references from current evidence-based literature.20 (20%) – 22 (22%)The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an accurate explanation of sound reasoning. The response accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained using three different references from current evidence-based literature.17 (17%) – 19 (19%)The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a vague explanation of the reasoning. The response identifies two to three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained vaguely and/or inaccurately using three or fewer references from current evidence-based literature.0 (0%) – 16 (16%)The response inaccurately states or is missing a statement of whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an explanation that is inaccurate and/or missing. The response identifies three or fewer conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is missing or explained inaccurately using two or fewer references from current evidence-based literature. 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. 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. 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.