NR 503 Week 2 Epidemiological Methods

NR 503 Week 2 Epidemiological Methods

The selected diagnostic tool is the dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). The screening tool is rapid and accurate, non-invasive, and is used to measure bone mineral density (BMD) and screen and diagnose osteoporosis. It is recommended for the following adult population: Females age ≥65 years without previous known fractures or secondary causes of osteoporosis; Females age <65 years whose 10-year fracture risk is equal to or greater than that of a 65-year-old white woman with no additional risk factors; Males with no previous known fractures or secondary causes of osteoporosis (Sawicki et al., 2021). The World Health Organization (WHO) considers DEXA the most reliable tool for determining BMD in this population. DEXA is commonly used to examine the hip and lower spine (Nisar et al., 2023). This is because fractures in these areas often have severe consequences, with a high mortality of 20-30% for hip fractures in this adult population.

In measuring BMD, the DXA is the preferred screening tool due to its good reproducibility, validity, and minimal error. Stuursma et al. (2024) found that the reliability of calculating muscle mass with DXA was comparable to the reliability of CT and MRI for measuring spinal muscle mass. The study established that the inter-observer variability of DXA in analyzing muscle mass of the lower extremities in middle-aged women was low. However, the intra-observer variability was somewhat higher than the inter-observer variability but still excellent. DEXA has a sensitivity of 88.2% of possible cases of osteoporosis and a specificity of 62.5% at a t-score of ≤ −2. Thus, it is sensitive but less specific to osteoporosis. I would integrate the DXA in my advanced practice to measure patients’ BMD and identify those with low BMD and at risk of developing osteoporosis. The results can guide the treatment plan and health education on lifestyle interventions necessary for such patients. 

References

Nisar, A., Hamza, H. M., Awan, A. A., Malik, M. M., Gondal, A., Riaz, M., & Bhatti, H. Z. (2023). Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Scanning for Osteoporosis Detection: Analysis of Patients at a Tertiary Care Hospital. Cureus, 15(9), e44546. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.44546

Sawicki, P., Tałałaj, M., Życińska, K., Zgliczyński, W. S., & Wierzba, W. (2021). Current applications and selected technical details of dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry. Medical Science Monitor, 27. https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.930839

Stuursma, A., Stroot, I. A. S., Vermeulen, K. M., Slart, R. H. J. A., Greuter, M. J. W., Mourits, M. J. E., & de Bock, G. H. (2024). Reliability, costs, and radiation dose of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in diagnosis of radiologic sarcopenia in surgically menopausal women. Insights into Imaging, 15(1), 104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-024-01677-w

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Epidemiological Methods

Discussion

Purpose

This discussion board content is intended to facilitate learning for students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice.

The use of discussions provides students with opportunities to contribute graduate level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a safe, caring, and fluid environment that models professional and social interaction. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.

Participation in the discussion generates opportunities for students to actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty. Discussions foster the development of members into a community of learners as they share ideas and inquiries, consider perspectives that may be different from their own, and integrate knowledge from other disciplines

Course Outcomes

This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

CO 4: Discriminate among various screening tools that may be used in the provision of care as an Advanced Practice Nurse.

Due Date

• Initial prompt due by Wednesday, 11:59 PM MT of week 2
• One peer and one faculty or two peer posts due by Sunday 11:59 PM MT of week 2

A 10% late penalty will be imposed for initial discussions posted after the weekly deadline regardless of the number of days late. No postings will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Sunday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0). Week 8 discussion closes on Saturday at 11:59pm MT.

Total Points Possible: 60 points

Preparing the Assignment

Assignment Requirements

1. Your course faculty will provide you with topics for the Week 2 Discussion Board. You will need to check the NR503 course Announcements for the topics for the Week 2 Discussion Board regarding screening. The week’s topics were choosen from the following website:  Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityLinks to an external site.
2. Reply to the following prompt:

• • Describe the diagnostic or screening tool selected, its purpose, and what age group it targets.
  • Has it been specifically tested in this age group?
  • Next, discuss the predictive ability of the test. For instance, how do you know the test is reliable and valid? What are the reliability and validity values? What are the predictive values? Is it sensitive to measure what it has been developed to measure, for instance, HIV, or depression in older adults, or Lyme disease? Would you integrate this tool into your advanced practice based on the information you have read about the test, why or why not?

1. You should include a minimum of two (2) scholarly articles from the last five (5) years (3 is recommended).
2. Respond to a minimum of two (2) individuals, peer and/or faculty, with a scholarly and reflective post of a minimum of two (2) paragraphs of 4-5 sentences. A minimum of one (1) scholarly article should be utilized to support the post in addition to your textbook.
3. Your work should have in-text citations integrating at a minimum one scholarly article and the course textbook. APA format should be utilized to include a reference list. Correct grammar, spelling, and APA should be adhered to when writing, work should be scholarly without personalization or first – person use.

Need assistance? Click here for the Week 2 FAQ documentLinks to an external site.? that discusses these terms.

Posting Directions

1. Posts should be made on a minimum of 3 separate days/dates.
2. All faculty replies to students must be responded to directly in the discussion board.
3. Minimum posting is:

• • Initial discussion board post to the weekly prompt, two peer posts (if there are no faculty postings), or one peer post and a faculty post.

**To see view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric.