NURS 6512 Diversity and Health Assessments
NURS 6512 Diversity and Health Assessments
Diversity and Health Assessments
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
NURS 6512 Diversity and Health Assessments
Just from $13/Page
May 2012, Alice Randall wrote an article for The New York Times on the cultural factors that encouraged black women to maintain a weight above what is considered healthy. Randall explained—from her observations and her personal experience as a black woman—that many African-American communities and cultures consider women who are overweight to be more beautiful and desirable than women at a healthier weight. As she put it, “Many black women are fat because we want to be” (Randall, 2012).
Randall’s statements sparked a great deal of controversy and debate; however, they emphasize an underlying reality in the healthcare field: different populations, cultures, and groups have diverse beliefs and practices that impact their health. Nurses and healthcare professionals should be aware of this reality and adapt their health assessment techniques and recommendations to accommodate diversity.
In this Discussion, you will consider different socioeconomic, spiritual, lifestyle, and other cultural factors that should be taken into considerations when building a health history for patients with diverse backgrounds. Your Instructor will assign a case study to you for this Discussion.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To prepare:
Reflect on your experiences as a nurse and on the information provided in this week’s Learning Resources on diversity issues in health assessments.
By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned a case study by your Instructor. Note: Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your case study assignment.
Reflect on the specific socioeconomic, spiritual, lifestyle, and other cultural factors related to the health of the patient assigned to you.
Consider how you would build a health history for the patient. What questions would you ask, and how would you frame them to be sensitive to the patient’s background, lifestyle, and culture? Develop five targeted questions you would ask the patient to build his or her health history and to assess his or her health risks.
Think about the challenges associated with communicating with patients from a variety of specific populations. What strategies can you as a nurse employ to be sensitive to different cultural factors while gathering the pertinent information?
By Day 3 of Week 2
Post an explanation of the specific socioeconomic, spiritual, lifestyle, and other cultural factors associated with the patient you were assigned. Explain the issues that you would need to be sensitive to when interacting with the patient, and why. Provide at least five targeted questions you would ask the patient to build his or her health history and to assess his or her health risks.
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the Reply button to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Post Reply, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Post Reply!
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
By Day 6 of Week 2
Respond on or before Day 6 on 2 different days to at least two of your colleagues who were assigned a different patient than you. Critique your colleague’s targeted questions, and explain how the patient might interpret these questions. Explain whether any of the questions would apply to your patient, and why.
NURS_6512_Week_2_Discussion_Rubric
NURS_6512_Week_2_Discussion_Rubric
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting |
| 50 to >44.0 ptsExcellent
“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. |
44 to >39.0 ptsGood
“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. |
39 to >34.0 ptsFair
“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. |
34 to >0 ptsPoor
“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. |
|
50 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Post: Timeliness |
| 10 to >0.0 ptsExcellent
Posts main post by Day 3. |
0 ptsPoor
Does not post main post by Day 3. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response |
| 18 to >16.0 ptsExcellent
“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. |
16 to >14.0 ptsGood
“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. |
14 to >12.0 ptsFair
“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. |
12 to >0 ptsPoor
“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. |
|
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response |
| 17 to >15.0 ptsExcellent
“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. |
15 to >13.0 ptsGood
“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. |
13 to >11.0 ptsFair
“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. |
11 to >0 ptsPoor
“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. |
|
17 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Participation |
| 5 to >0.0 ptsExcellent
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 ptsPoor
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
|
5 pts |
| Total Points: 100 |
