Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain

Discussion: Assessing Musculoskeletal Pain

To prepare:

1). By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to one of the following specific case studies for this Discussion. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your assignment from your Instructor.
2). Your Discussion post should be in the Episodic/Focused SOAP Note format rather than the traditional narrative style Discussion posting 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.
3). Review the following case studies:

Case #3 Knee pain

A 15-year-old male reports dull pain in both knees. Sometimes one or both knees click, and the patient describes a catching sensation under the patella. In determining the causes of the knee pain, what additional history do you need? What categories can you use to differentiate knee pain? What are your specific differential diagnoses for knee pain? What physical examination will you perform? What anatomic structures are you assessing as part of the physical examination? What special maneuvers will you perform?

With regard to the case study you were assigned:

1). Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study.
2). Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient in the case study you were assigned.
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 at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.

Assignment

1). Post 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.
2). Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for each case.
3). List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis, and justify why you selected each.

Rubric Detail

Show Descriptions
Main Posting–

Excellent 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
“Answers all parts of the Discussion question(s) with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Good 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
“Responds to the Discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Fair 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
“Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One or 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 two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.
Poor 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
“Does not respond to the Discussion question(s) adequately. 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 one or no credible sources. 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 Post: Timeliness–

Excellent 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by Day 3.
Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
N/A
Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
N/A
Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post main post by Day 3.
First Response–

Excellent 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
“Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Good 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
“Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are 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.
Fair 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
“Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Poor 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
“Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response–

Excellent 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
“Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Good 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
“Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are 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.
Fair 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
“Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Poor 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
“Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Participation–

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
N/A
Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
N/A
Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posticixng on three different days.

Last Completed Projects