Case Study Assignment: Assessing Neurological Symptoms

Case Study Assignment: Assessing Neurological Symptoms

Assessing Neurological Symptoms

 

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Case Study Assignment: Assessing Neurological Symptoms
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Patient Information:

R.R., 47 years, Male, African American

S.

CC (chief complaint) ‘headache’

HPI: R.R. is a 47-year-old African-American male who came to the facility with complaints of headaches for the last ten days. The patient reports that the headaches diffuse all over his head but the greatest intensity and pressure occur above the eyes and spread through the nose, jaw, and cheekbones. The patient described the pain as dull, with intense pressure. The associated symptoms include nausea. The onset of the headache varies. He reported that taking Tylenol and avoiding strenuous activities relieve the headaches. He rates pain severity as 7/10 on the pain rating scale.

Current Medications: R.R. reported that he has been taking oral Tylenol 1gm thrice daily for the headaches. He denied any other current use of medications.

Allergies: R.R. reported seasonal allergies. He is also allergic to penicillin. He developed acute respiratory distress the last time he was administered with penicillin at the age of 11 years old. He denied food allergies.

PMHx: R.R. was admitted to the hospital at the age of 35 due to pneumonia. He underwent an appendectomy 10 years ago. His immunization record is up-to-date.

Soc Hx: R.R. is a truck driver. He is married with three children. He lives with his spouse and one child in a rented apartment. His other children are in college. R.R. reports that he stopped taking alcohol ten years ago. He denied tobacco use. R.R. engages regularly in active physical activities. He uses seat belts when driving. They live in a clean community.

Fam Hx: R.R.’s grandfather died of coronary artery disease. His grandmother, aged 90 years has dementia. His wife has controlled hypertension. His mother died of breast cancer.

ROS:

GENERAL:  Denies weight loss, fever, chills, weakness or fatigue.

HEENT:  Eyes: Denies visual loss, blurred vision, double vision, or yellow sclerae. Ears, Nose, Throat:  Denies hearing loss, sneezing, congestion, or sore throat. Reports rhinorrhea for the last five days

SKIN:  Denies rash or itching.

CARDIOVASCULAR:  Denies chest pain, chest pressure, or chest discomfort. No palpitations or edema.

RESPIRATORY:  Denies shortness of breath, cough, or sputum. GASTROINTESTINAL:  Denies anorexia, nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea. No abdominal pain or blood.

GENITOURINARY:  Denies burning on urination, urgency, and frequency

NEUROLOGICAL:  Reports dull headache. He denies dizziness, syncope, paralysis, ataxia, numbness, or tingling in the extremities. No change in bowel or bladder control.

MUSCULOSKELETAL:  Denies muscle, back pain, joint pain, or stiffness.

HEMATOLOGIC:  Denies anemia, bleeding, or bruising.

LYMPHATICS:  Denies enlarged nodes. No history of splenectomy.

PSYCHIATRIC:  Denies a history of depression or anxiety.

ENDOCRINOLOGIC:  Denies reports of sweating, cold, or heat intolerance. No polyuria or polydipsia.

ALLERGIES:  Reports seasonal allergies.

O.

Physical exam:

Vitals: BP 127/82, P 84, RR 21, T 99.9F, SPO2 96% room air,

General: R.R. is dressed appropriately for the occasion. He is alert and oriented to himself, time, others, and events. He denies chills, fever, and fatigue.

HEENT: Head: The head is atraumatic with normal hair distribution. There are no altered facial features such as drooping and tremors. Frontal sinuses tender to palpation. Ears: Ears are symmetric, with no erythema and bulging tympanic membranes. Eyes: The sclera is clear with no discharge and normal pupil reaction to light. Nose: There is mild rhinorrhea with no nasal flaring, septum deviation, or crusts. Throat: There is no tonsillitis or exudate. There is post-nasal drainage. Neck: There is no neck rigidity, masses, or webbing.

Cardiovascular: There are regular heart rate and rhythm with no adventitious heart sounds and peripheral edema.

Respiratory: There are clear lung sounds over all fields with no adventitious sounds

Neurological: R.R. responds appropriately to the questions asked. He is alert and oriented to himself, others, time, place, and event. His pupils reach equally to light. He has equal grip strength. His balance and posture are normal. He reports a headache rated at 7/10 on a pain rating scale. He denies photophobia, nausea, and vomiting.

 

Diagnostic results: A nasal smear is needed to determine if the patient has allergic rhinitis based on the presence or absence of eosinophils. A radiograph such as a head CT scan may be needed if the symptoms do not respond to the prescribed treatment. Sinus aspiration may be needed to determine if the patient has bacterial sinusitis.

A.

Differential Diagnoses

Sinusitis: Sinusitis is R.R.’s primary diagnosis. Sinusitis refers to an inflammation of the nasal cavities. Sinusitis develops from causes such as bacterial and viral infections and exposure to allergens. Patients often complain of frontal headaches, feelings of fullness, ear pain, fever, cough, bad breath, stuffy nose, runny nose, and tiredness. Physical examination findings include the presence of a postnasal drip and sinus tenderness (Craig et al., 2021; Psillas et al., 2021; Wyler & Mallon, 2019). R.R.’s symptoms align with those seen in sinusitis, hence, the primary diagnosis.

Migraine headache: Migraine headache is the other differential that should be considered for R.R. Patients with migraine headaches complain of severe throbbing headaches accompanied by symptoms such as vomiting, nausea, and light sensitivity. The pain is so severe that it interferes with the patient’s daily functioning. The additional symptoms seen among patients with migraine headaches include frequent yawning, increased urination, mood changes, aura, and confusion during the post-drome period (Ghorbani et al., 2019; Ghoreishy et al., 2022; Ha & Gonzalez, 2019). Despite R.R. reporting headaches, there are no other symptoms such as photophobia, which rules out migraine headaches as his problem.

Allergic rhinitis: Allergic rhinitis is the other differential that should be considered for R.R. Allergic rhinitis is a condition characterized by the inflammation of the nasal cavities. It develops following exposure to allergens such as dust and pollen. Patients often experience flu-like symptoms such as itchiness, sneezing, runny and blocked nose. The symptoms are always mild and resolve on their own (Bousquet et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2021). Despite R.R. having symptoms such as a runny nose, allergic rhinitis is the least likely cause of his problems.

Tension headache: Tension headache is the other differential diagnosis to be considered for the patient. Tension headaches have a characteristic of pain described as a tight band all over the head (Burch, 2019). Patients also have scalp, neck, and shoulder muscle tenderness.

Brain abscess: Brain abscess is the other diagnosis to be considered for the patient. It develops from bacterial or fungal infection of the brain tissue (Corsini Campioli et al., 2021). The symptoms that patients experience include a fever, headache, neck rigidity, and seizures, which are not evident in the patient’s case.

This section is not required for the assignments in this course (NURS 6512) but will be required for future courses.

 

References

Bousquet, J., Anto, J. M., Bachert, C., Baiardini, I., Bosnic-Anticevich, S., Walter Canonica, G., Melén, E., Palomares, O., Scadding, G. K., Togias, A., & Toppila-Salmi, S. (2020). Allergic rhinitis. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 6(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-020-00227-0

Burch, R. (2019). Migraine and Tension-Type Headache: Diagnosis and Treatment. Medical Clinics, 103(2), 215–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcna.2018.10.003

Corsini Campioli, C., Castillo Almeida, N. E., O’Horo, J. C., Esquer Garrigos, Z., Wilson, W. R., Cano, E., DeSimone, D. C., Baddour, L. M., Van Gompel, J. J., & Sohail, M. R. (2021). Bacterial Brain Abscess: An Outline for Diagnosis and Management. The American Journal of Medicine, 134(10), 1210-1217.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2021.05.027

Craig, J. R., Poetker, D. M., Aksoy, U., Allevi, F., Biglioli, F., Cha, B. Y., Chiapasco, M., Lechien, J. R., Safadi, A., Simuntis, R., Tataryn, R., Testori, T., Troeltzsch, M., Vaitkus, S., Yokoi, H., Felisati, G., & Saibene, A. M. (2021). Diagnosing odontogenic sinusitis: An international multidisciplinary consensus statement. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, 11(8), 1235–1248. https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.22777

Ghorbani, Z., Togha, M., Rafiee, P., Ahmadi, Z. S., Rasekh Magham, R., Haghighi, S., Razeghi Jahromi, S., & Mahmoudi, M. (2019). Vitamin D in migraine headache: A comprehensive review on literature. Neurological Sciences, 40(12), 2459–2477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-019-04021-z

Ghoreishy, S. M., Askari, G., Mohammadi, H., Campbell, M. S., Khorvash, F., & Arab, A. (2022). Associations between potential inflammatory properties of the diet and frequency, duration, and severity of migraine headaches: A cross-sectional study. Scientific Reports, 12(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06819-y

Ha, H., & Gonzalez, A. (2019). Migraine Headache Prophylaxis. American Family Physician, 99(1), 17–24.

Psillas, G., Papaioannou, D., Petsali, S., Dimas, G. G., & Constantinidis, J. (2021). Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis: A comprehensive review. Journal of Dental Sciences, 16(1), 474–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2020.08.001

Wyler, B., & Mallon, W. K. (2019). Sinusitis Update. Emergency Medicine Clinics, 37(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emc.2018.09.007

Zhang, Y., Lan, F., & Zhang, L. (2021). Advances and highlights in allergic rhinitis. Allergy, 76(11), 3383–3389. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.15044

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Case Study Assignment: Assessing Neurological Symptoms

Imagine not being able to form new memories. This is the reality patients with anterograde amnesia face. Although this form of amnesia is rare, it can result from severe brain trauma. Anterograde amnesia demonstrates just how impactful brain disorders can be to a patient’s quality of living. Accurately assessing neurological symptoms is a complex process that involves the analysis of many factors.

In this Case Study Assignment, you will consider case studies that describe abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting.

Resources

 

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Readings

  • Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2023). Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (10th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.
    • Chapter 7, “Mental Status”
      This chapter revolves around the mental status evaluation of an individual’s overall cognitive state. The chapter includes a list of mental abnormalities and their symptoms.
    • Chapter 23, “Neurologic System”
      The authors of this chapter explore the anatomy and physiology of the neurologic system. The authors also describe neurological examinations and potential findings.
  • Dains, J. E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. (2019). Advanced health assessment and clinical diagnosis in primary care (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.
    Credit Line: Advanced Health Assessment and Clinical Diagnosis in Primary Care, 6th Edition by Dains, J.E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. Copyright 2019 by Mosby. Reprinted by permission of Mosby via the Copyright Clearance Center.

    • Download Chapter 31, “Sleep Problems”
      In this chapter, the authors highlight the main causes of sleep problems. They also provide possible questions to use in taking the patient’s history, things to look for when performing a physical exam, and possible laboratory and diagnostic studies that might be useful in making the diagnosis.
  • Sullivan, D. D. (2019). Guide to clinical documentation (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.
    • Chapter 2, “The Comprehensive History and Physical Exam” (“Cranial Nerves and Their Function” and “Grading Reflexes”) (Previously read in Weeks 1, 2, 3, and 5)

Shadow Health Support and Orientation Resources

Use the following resources to guide you through your Shadow Health orientation as well as other support resources:

Required Media

Neurologic System – Week 9 (16m)

 

Online media for Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination

It is highly recommended that you access and view the resources included with the course text, Seidel’s Guide to Physical Examination. Focus on the videos and animations in Chapters 7 and 23 that relate to the assessment of cognition and the neurologic system. Refer to the Week 4 Learning Resources area for access instructions on  https://evolve.elsevier.com/

Links to an external site.

Optional Resources

  • LeBlond, R. F., Brown, D. D., & DeGowin, R. L. (2020). DeGowin’s diagnostic examination (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical.
    • Chapter 14, “The Neurologic Examination”
      This chapter provides an overview of the nervous system. The authors also explain the basics of neurological exams.
    • Chapter 15, “Mental Status, Psychiatric, and Social Evaluations”
      In this chapter, the authors provide a list of common psychiatric syndromes. The authors also explain the mental, psychiatric, and social evaluation process.
  • Kim, H., Lee, S., Ku, B. D., Ham, S. G., & Park, W. (2019). Associated factors for cognitive impairment in the rural highly elderly.
  • Links to an external site. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 96, 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.02.007

To Prepare

  • By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to a specific case study for this Case Study Assignment. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your assignment from your Instructor.
  • Also, your Case Study Assignment should be in the Episodic/Focused SOAP Note format rather than the traditional narrative style 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.

With regard to the case study you were assigned:

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

The Case Study Assignment

Use the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template and create 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. Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for each case. List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis, and justify why you selected each.

By Day 6 of Week 9

Submit your Assignment.

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

  1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK9Assgn1+last name+first initial.
  2. Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
  3. Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

 

Rubric

NURS_6512_Week_9_Assignment1_Rubric

NURS_6512_Week_9_Assignment1_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Using the Episodic/Focused SOAP Template: · Create documentation or an episodic/focused note in SOAP format about the patient in the case study to which you were assigned. ·  Provide evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for your case.
50 to >44.0 ptsExcellent

The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response thoroughly and accurately provides detailed evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.

44 to >38.0 ptsGood

The response accurately follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response accurately provides detailed evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.

38 to >32.0 ptsFair

The response follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness and inaccuracy. The response provides evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness or inaccuracy in the evidence selected.

32 to >0 ptsPoor

The response incompletely and inaccurately follows the SOAP format to document the patient in the assigned case study. The response provides incomplete, inaccurate, and/or missing evidence from the literature to support diagnostic tests that would be appropriate for the patient in the assigned case study.

50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome ·   List five different possible conditions for the patient’s differential diagnosis, and justify why you selected each.
35 to >29.0 ptsExcellent

The response lists five distinctly different and detailed possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study and provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the five conditions selected.

29 to >23.0 ptsGood

The response lists four to five different possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study and provides an accurate justification for each of the five conditions selected.

23 to >17.0 ptsFair

The response lists three to four possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, with some vagueness and/or some inaccuracy in the conditions and/or justification for each.

17 to >0 ptsPoor

The response lists three or fewer, or is missing, possible conditions for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, with inaccurate or missing justification for each condition selected.

35 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent

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 to >3.0 ptsGood

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 to >2.0 ptsFair

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.

2 to >0 ptsPoor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.

5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.0 ptsGood

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >2.0 ptsFair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

2 to >0 ptsPoor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.0 ptsGood

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3 to >2.0 ptsFair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

2 to >0 ptsPoor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts
Total Points: 100

 


Open chat
Dr.Nursingpapers
Hello
Can we help you?