NRNP 6541 Week 1 Discussion: Primary Care of Adolescents and Children
Week One Discussion:
Hello everyone, my name is Tonya Belknap-Tufaro. I began my nursing career in 2005 as an LPN. From that time, I did some work in long-term care, and eventually, I acquired my associate degree and began working in Labor and delivery, where I worked for 15 years. I finished my bachelor’s degree, then turned around and got my master’s degree in 2018. I have worked in labor and delivery, pediatric oncology, pediatric home health, trauma ICU, Emergency Department, and travel nursing. I am originally from Kentucky but relocated to Virginia in 2019. My current job is as a Home Health Start of Care Nurse, working on Weekends. NRNP 6541 Week 1
My Strengths related to the Pediatric population include experience in the Pediatric Oncology unit and experience in Pediatric Home health. I have spent a limited time in the Neonatal ICU, which was very challenging as some babies were so tiny you almost felt like they would break if you picked them up. I enjoy the pediatric population and think I have an excellent, calming demeanor when working with children and adolescents.
[elementor-template id="165244"]ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NRNP 6541 Week 1 HERE
Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us
At this point in my educational journey, I am not 100% sure of my career goals. My current employer has mentioned me staying with them once I graduate as a Home Health NP. The pediatric population has a special place in my heart.
The work in this course will help me decide if working with the Pediatric/adolescent population is a good fit for me.
Working with a preceptor in the Pediatric field will help me to understand better the needs and issues that are introduced within the pediatric/adolescent population. Working with this patient population will allow me to become more compassionate to the needs of the patients, parents, and caregivers.
It is an honor and a joy to care for this vulnerable population; I look forward to learning more about this population of patients and the best way to care for them.
Reference:
Deering, M. (2022). Pediatric Nurse Practitioner Career Overview. Retrieved August 26, 2023, from https://www.nursejournal.org/nurse-practitioner/pediatric/
LEARNING RESOURCES
NRNP 6541 Week 1 Required Readings
Hagan, J. F., Jr., Shaw, J. S., Duncan, P. M. (Eds.) (2017). Bright futures: Guidelines for health supervision of infants, children, and adolescents (4th ed.). American Academy of Pediatrics.
“Promoting Family Support” (pp. 41–64) “Promoting Healthy Weight” (pp. 151–166) “Promoting Healthy Nutrition” (pp. 167–192) “Promoting Physical Activity” (pp. 193–203)
“Promoting Safety and Injury Prevention” (pp. 235–256)
Maaks, D. G., Starr, N., Brady, M., Gaylord, N. Driessnack, M., & Duderstadt, K. (Eds.). (2020). Burns’ pediatric primary care (7th ed.). Elsevier.
Chapter 3, “Genetics and Genomics: The Basics for Child Health” (pp. 12–27)
Note: You should have this textbook in your personal library, as it was the required text in NRNP 6541: Primary Care of Adolescents and Children.
National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners, Professional Issues Committee. (2019). NAPNAP position statement on age parameters for pediatric nurse practitioner practice . Journal of Pediatric Healthcare, 33(2), A9–A11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2018.10.007
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2020). Immunizations . https://www.aap.org/en/patient- care/immunizations/
Note: This website provides evidence-based resources for a range of health topics including adolescent health, early and middle childhood, family planning, nutrition and weight status, and physical activity.
NRNP 6541 Week 1 Practicum Resources
Document: FNP Clinical Skills and Procedures Self-Assessment Form (Word document)
Document: FNP Clinical Skills List and Resource Review (Word document) Document: FNP Procedures List and Resource Review (Word document) Document: Practicum Site Information Form (Word document)
HSoft Corporation. (2019). Welcome to Meditrek . https://edu.meditrek.com/Default.html
Note: Use this website to log in to Meditrek to report your clinical hours and patient encounters.
| 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. | 44 to >39.0 pts Excellent
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. |
39 to >34.0 pts Good
Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current credible references. NRNP 6541 Week 1 |
34 to >30.0 pts Fair
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. |
30 to >0 pts Poor
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. |
44 pts |
|||
| Main Posting:Writing | 6 to >5.0 pts Excellent | 5 to >4.0 pts Good | 4 to >3.0 pts Fair | 3 to >0 pts Poor | ||||
| Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.
Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.
Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
6 pts |
||||
| Main Posting:Timely and full participation | 10 to >8.0 pts Excellent
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. |
8 to >7.0 pts Good
Posts main Discussion by due date. Meets requirements |
7 to >6.0 pts Fair
Posts main Discussion by due date. NRNP 6541 Week 1 |
6 to >0 pts Poor
Does not meet requirements for full participation. |
10 pts | |||
| Posts main Discussion by due date. | 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 to >8.0 pts Excellent
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. NRNP 6541 Week 1 |
8 to >7.0 pts Good
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 to >6.0 pts Fair
Response is on topic, may have some depth. |
6 to >0 pts Poor
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. |
9 pts |
|||||
| First Response:Writing | 6 to >5.0 pts Excellent | 5 to >4.0 pts Good | 4 to >3.0 pts Fair | 3 to >0 pts Poor | ||||||
| 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. |
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.
Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in Standard, Edited English. |
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. | Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
6 pts |
||||||
| First Response:Timely and full participation | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent
Meets requirements for timely, full, |
4 to >3.0 pts Good
Meets requirements for full |
3 to >2.0 pts Fair
Posts by due date. NRNP 6541 Week 1 |
2 to >0 pts Poor
Does not meet requirements |
5 pts | |||||
| and active participation. Posts by due date. | participation. Posts by due date. | 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 to >8.0 pts Excellent
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. |
8 to >7.0 pts Good
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 to >6.0 pts Fair
Response is on topic, may have some depth. |
6 to >0 pts Poor
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. |
9 pts |
|||||
| Second Response:Writing | 6 to >5.0 pts Excellent | 5 to >4.0 pts Good | 4 to >3.0 pts Fair | 3 to >0 pts Poor | ||||||
| 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. |
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.
Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English. NRNP 6541 Week 1 |
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. | Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
6 pts |
||||||
| Second Response:Timely and full | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent | 4 to >3.0 pts Good | 3 to >2.0 pts Fair | 2 to >0 pts Poor | 5 pts | |||||
| participation | ||||||||||
| Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. | Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date. | Posts by due date. | Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. | ||
|
Total Points: 10 |
|||||
[elementor-template id="165244"]