NRNP 6550 Week 1 Medicolegal Impacts on Health Promotion Discussion Example
NRNP 6550 Week 1 Discussion Including Response; Medicolegal Impacts on Health Promotion Assignment
NRNP 6550 Week 1: Medicolegal and Health Promotion Discussion Assignment Brief
Course: NRNP 6550 – Advanced Practice Care of Adults in Acute Care Settings II
Assignment Title: NRNP 6550 Week 1; Medicolegal Impacts on Health Promotion Discussion Assignment
Assignment Instructions Overview
This assignment focuses on analyzing the medicolegal impacts on health promotion, particularly through the lens of immunization recommendations across different age groups and for immunocompromised patients. Students will compare immunization recommendations, analyze their effects on immunocompromised or immunosuppressed patients, and examine how patient factors influence immunization recommendations.
Understanding Assignment Objectives
The primary objectives are to compare immunization recommendations for patients across various age groups, analyze the impact of these recommendations on immunocompromised patients, and understand how patient factors such as age and gender influence these recommendations. This understanding is crucial for ensuring that nurse practitioners provide tailored and effective health promotion strategies.
The Student’s Role
Students are expected to review the provided learning resources on medicolegal and health promotion considerations, reflect on the impact of these recommendations on health promotion strategies, and actively participate in discussions by posting their analysis and responding to their peers’ posts. This engagement will deepen their understanding of the complexities involved in immunization recommendations and their application in diverse patient populations.
Competencies Measured
The competencies measured include the ability to analyze immunization recommendations, understand their impact on different patient populations, and apply this knowledge in clinical practice. Students will also demonstrate critical thinking skills by comparing and contrasting immunization strategies and their implications for health promotion and disease prevention.
You Can Also Check Other Related Assessments for the NRNP 6550 – Advanced Practice Care of Adults in Acute Care Settings II Course:
NRNP 6550 Week 1 Medicolegal Impacts on Health Promotion Discussion Example
NRNP 6550 Week 1: Medicolegal and Health Promotion
Elements Included in Identifying a Billing Code
When identifying a billing code, several critical elements must be considered to ensure accurate and appropriate billing. These elements include patient information, which entails accurate details about the patient, including demographics and medical history (American Academy of Professional Coders, 2020). Diagnosis is another vital component, involving the specific medical condition or disease diagnosed, often identified using ICD-10 codes (National Center for Health Statistics, 2020). The services provided must be detailed, with descriptions of the medical services or procedures performed, identified using CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) codes (American Academy of Professional Coders, 2020). Additionally, the date of service must be accurately recorded, indicating the exact date when the service was provided. Provider information is also essential, including details about the healthcare provider and their National Provider Identifier (NPI). Finally, the location of service, which refers to the setting in which the service was provided, such as a hospital, clinic, or outpatient facility, must be included.
Levels of Prevention
Prevention in healthcare is categorized into three levels: primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention. Primary prevention focuses on preventing the onset of diseases or injuries before they occur. This level includes activities such as immunizations, lifestyle modifications (such as a healthy diet and regular exercise), and health education programs (Barkley & Myers, 2020). Secondary prevention aims at early detection and intervention to prevent the progression of disease. Examples include screening tests such as mammograms for breast cancer, colonoscopies for colorectal cancer, and LDL cholesterol screening to detect early signs of cardiovascular disease (Barkley & Myers, 2020). Tertiary prevention involves managing and reducing the impact of an ongoing illness or injury that has lasting effects. This includes rehabilitation programs for stroke patients, chronic disease management programs for diabetes, and support groups for mental health conditions (Barkley & Myers, 2020).
Recommended Health Screenings by Age
Health screenings are essential tools for early detection and prevention of diseases. For cancers such as prostate and breast cancer, specific screenings are recommended by age. Prostate cancer screenings, such as the PSA (Prostate-Specific Antigen) test, are recommended for men starting at age 50, or earlier for those at higher risk (Barkley & Myers, 2020). Breast cancer screenings, including mammograms, are recommended every 1-2 years for women aged 50-74. Regular cholesterol screenings (LDL) are recommended for adults starting at age 20 and should be repeated every 4-6 years (Barkley & Myers, 2020). For osteoporosis, bone density testing is recommended for women aged 65 and older, and for men aged 70 and older, or younger for those at high risk (Barkley & Myers, 2020).
Vaccine Recommendations
Vaccination recommendations are crucial for preventing various infectious diseases. For pertussis (Tdap), it is recommended that one dose be administered during each pregnancy, preferably during the early part of gestational weeks 27-36 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2020). Adults who have never received Tdap should get it once, followed by Td (tetanus, diphtheria) boosters every 10 years. Tetanus booster shots are recommended every 10 years. For pneumococcal vaccines, the PCV13 is recommended for all children under 5 years, adults 65 years or older, and people with certain medical conditions (CDC, 2020). The PPSV23 is recommended for all adults 65 years or older and for people aged 2 through 64 years with certain medical conditions (CDC, 2020).
Types of Vaccines
Vaccines are classified into several types based on their composition. Live, attenuated vaccines contain a version of the living microbe that has been weakened. Examples include the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and the varicella (chickenpox) vaccine (CDC, 2020). Inactivated vaccines contain the killed version of the germ that causes a disease. Examples include the polio vaccine and the hepatitis A vaccine (CDC, 2020). Subunit, recombinant, polysaccharide, and conjugate vaccines use specific pieces of the germ—like its protein, sugar, or capsid. Examples include the HPV vaccine and the meningococcal vaccine (CDC, 2020).
Discussion: Medicolegal Impacts on Health Promotion
Immunization Recommendations Across the Lifespan
When examining immunization schedules, it is evident that childhood vaccines are heavily emphasized. However, vaccinations are vital in preventing diseases across all age groups. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend annual influenza vaccinations for all age groups (CDC, 2020). For patients aged 11-24, it is recommended that the tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (Tdap) vaccination be administered once between the ages of 11 and 12 years, with boosters every ten years thereafter (CDC, 2020). The meningococcal 2-dose series should be administered between 11-12 years of age and again at 16 years of age, with a catch-up vaccination between 13-15 years of age and a booster at 16-18 years of age (CDC, 2020). The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is recommended between 11 and 12 years of age, with catch-up vaccinations for all teens through the age of 18 if not adequately vaccinated (CDC, 2020).
For adults aged 25-64, the influenza vaccine remains a yearly recommendation. Tdap should be administered once if not previously received, followed by Td boosters every ten years (CDC, 2020). Adults with no evidence of immunity to measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) should receive one dose of the MMR vaccine. The varicella vaccination is recommended for adults without evidence of immunity to varicella and who have not received a varicella-containing vaccine (CDC, 2020).
For older adults aged 65 and above, the influenza vaccine continues to be recommended annually. Additionally, the pneumococcal vaccination (PPSV23) is recommended for all adults aged 65 years and older, with the PCV13 and PPSV23 considered for those with chronic medical or immunocompromising conditions (CDC, 2020). The shingles vaccination should be administered to those aged 50 years or older (CDC, 2020).
Impact on Immunocompromised Patients
Immunocompromised patients, including those with conditions such as HIV, require special consideration regarding vaccination. For children and adolescents aged 11-24 years, the HPV vaccine is safe and recommended for those with HIV (CDC, 2020). The meningococcal vaccine is crucial for individuals with complement deficiencies or asplenia (CDC, 2020). In the adult population aged 25-64 years, the inactivated influenza vaccine is recommended for immunocompromised patients to avoid the risk associated with live vaccines (CDC, 2020). Pneumococcal vaccines (both PCV13 and PPSV23) are essential for preventing pneumonia in those with chronic medical conditions or immunosuppression (CDC, 2020).
For older adults aged 65 years and older, pneumococcal vaccinations (PCV13 and PPSV23) are particularly important to protect against pneumococcal diseases, which can be severe in this population (CDC, 2020). The recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) is preferred for shingles prevention in immunocompromised patients due to its non-live formulation, which is safer compared to live vaccines (CDC, 2020).
References
American Academy of Professional Coders. (2020). What is CPT? https://www.aapc.com/resources/medical-coding/cpt.aspx
Barkley, T. W., Jr., & Myers, C. M. (2020). Practice considerations for the adult-gerontology acute care nurse practitioner (3rd ed.). Barkley & Associates.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2020). Recommended Vaccinations.
National Center for Health Statistics. (2020). International classification of diseases, tenth revision, clinical modification (ICD-10-CM). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd10cm.htm
Detailed Assessment Instructions for the NRNP 6550 Week 1 Medicolegal Impacts on Health Promotion Discussion Assignment
NRNP 6550 Week 1- Medicological and Health Promotion
Describe what elements are included when identifying a billing code.
- Identify and describe the three levels of prevention. Be able to provide examples
- Identify health screenings that are recommended by age
- Cancers such as prostate and breast, LDL screening, osteoporosis
- Identify recommendations for administration of pertussis, tetanus, and pneumococcal vaccines
- Distinguish between live, attenuated, and inactivated vaccines
Week 1: Medicolegal and Health Promotion
The story of humankind contains many impressive accomplishments. Yet, in order to turn the page on any advancement, it is often necessary to address its impact, including any ethical or legal considerations that must be addressed.
This is certainly true of health accomplishments. Medical professionals continue to learn new ways to address both existing and emerging health concerns. With each achievement comes the need to address the extent to which regulation and/or ethics impacts behavior, informs decision-making, and guides health promotion activities.
This week, you examine this impact. You analyze medicolegal impacts on health promotion by comparing differences in immunizations for differing age populations and consider the impact on immunocompromised patients. You also identify concepts related to medicolegal recommendations and health promotion initiatives.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
- Compare immunization recommendations for patients across the lifespan
- Analyze the effects of immunizations on immunocompromised or immunosuppressed patients
- Analyze the effects of patient factors on immunization recommendations
Discussion: Medicolegal Impacts on Health Promotion
Vaccination can prevent the emergence and spread of disease. It is no surprise that it is a supported public health promotion issue. Many of the diseases targeted by vaccines are childhood diseases that impact the young; hence vaccination can prevent infants, children, and teens from potentially harmful diseases that can even be deadly.
But immunizations are not just for children. Protection from some childhood vaccines can wear off over time. Adults may also be at risk for vaccine-preventable disease due to age, job, lifestyle, travel, or other health conditions.
For this Discussion, review the immunization recommendations for patients across the lifespan. Reflect on how these recommendations might differ for patients who are immunocompromised or on immunosuppressive therapy. Consider how patient factors, such as age group and gender, might affect which immunizations are recommended by nurse practitioners for their patients.
To Prepare:
- Review the Learning Resources on medicolegal and health promotion considerations.
- Reflect on how medicolegal recommendations may impact health promotion strategies for the advanced practice nurse.
By Day 3
Post a comparison of the differences in immunizations that are recommended for patients ages 11–24, 25–64, and 65 years of age and older. Then, explain how these immunizations might impact patients who are immunocompromised or on immunosuppressive therapy. Be specific and provide examples by age group and gender.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days and expand upon your colleagues’ posts by recommending which immunizations should be recommended to address immunocompromised or immune suppressed patients and explain why.
You can also read another study guide on nursing assignments for students from another post on NUR-502 Theoretical Foundations for Nursing Roles And Practice Course Assignments & Examples.
Learning Resources
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)
Barkley, T. W., Jr., & Myers, C. M. (2020). Practice considerations for the adult-gerontology acute care nurse practitioner (3rd ed.). Barkley & Associates.
- Chapter 87, “Guidelines for Health Promotion and Screening”
- Chapter 88, “Major Causes of Mortality in the United States”
- Chapter 89, Immunization Recommendations”
American Academy of Professional Coders. (2020). What is CPT?
https://www.aapc.com/resources/medical-coding/cpt.aspx
American Academy of Professional Coders. (2018). 2018 procedure desk reference.
American Association of Nurse Practitioners. (2020a). Multistate reimbursement alliance (MSRA): Enhancing NP support for insurance credentialing, contracting and reimbursement.
https://www.aanp.org/practice/business-practice-management/reimbursement
American Association of Nurse Practitioners. (2020b). Practice information by state: What you need to know about NP practice in your state. http://www.aanp.org/legislation-regulation/state-legislation-regulation/state-practice-environment
American Nurses Credentialing Center. (n.d.). Adult-gerontology acute care nurse practitioner certification (AGACNP-BC).
https://www.nursingworld.org/our-certifications/adult-gerontology-acute-care-nurse-practitioner/
Kleinsinger, F. (2018). The unmet challenge of medication nonadherence. The Permanente Journal. https://doi.org/10.7812/tpp/18-033
National Center for Health Statistics. (2020). International classification of diseases, tenth revision, clinical modification (ICD-10-CM). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd10cm.htm
Document: iHuman Directions and Required Management Template (Word document)
Throughout this course, you will be required to complete case study Assignments with i-Human Patients. This manual provides guidance on accessing and using these simulations. It is HIGHLY recommended that you explore the manual’s various training resources in preparation for the upcoming Assignments.
Required Media (click to expand/reduce)
Rubric Detail see for grading details
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NRNP_6550_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
| Excellent Point range: 90–100 |
Fair Point range: 70–79 |
Poor Point range: 0–69 |
||||
| Main Posting:
Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current credible sources. |
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references. |
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only 1 or no credible references. |
|||
| Main Posting:
Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|||
| Main Posting:
Timely and full participation |
9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main discussion by due date. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main discussion by due date. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main discussion by due date. |
|||
| First Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. |
|||
| First Response:
Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
|||
| First Response:
Timely and full participation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
|||
| Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. |
|||
| Second Response:
Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
|||
| Second Response: Timely and full participation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
|||
| Total Points: 100 | ||||||
Name: NRNP_6550_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
Get The Best Nursing Paper Writing Service and Unlock Your Academic Success
Are you overwhelmed with complex nursing assignments, tight deadlines, or specific instructions that seem challenging to meet? Look no further – ReliablePapers.com is your go-to destination for all your nursing paper writing needs! Our expert nursing essay writers are dedicated to providing you with high-quality, original, and customized nursing papers that guarantee the best grades possible.
Why choose ReliablePapers.com?
- Professional Nursing Writers: Our team of professional writers specializes in nursing essay papers, ensuring your assignment is in the hands of experts who understand the writing of nursing topics.
- Affordable Prices: We understand the financial constraints of college students. Our online nursing papers are available at very cheap prices, making our services accessible to all. Whether you need assistance with nursing coursework writing, want to buy a nursing essay online, or are in search of reliable nursing assignment help, we’ve got you covered.
- Customized Nursing Paper Solutions: Whether you need assistance with a complex topic, have a tight deadline, or are seeking a guide on how to write your nursing assignment, we’ve got you covered. Our writers will tailor their approach to meet your specific needs.
- Originality Guaranteed: Say goodbye to plagiarized papers! Our writers will provide you with an outstanding nursing essay paper written from scratch, ensuring it adheres to any topic, deadline, and instructions you provide.
Save your time for what matters most and let ReliablePapers.com take care of your essay. Don’t settle for subpar papers or risk submitting plagiarized content. Choose the best nursing paper writing service today!
Unlock your academic success by trusting ReliablePapers.com – Your Partner in Excellence.
Hire an Expert Paper Writer on Any Subject, Any Topic, Any Deadline! Submit your paper instructions by placing your order here to get started!
