Scenario
A patient presents to your office who self-identifies as lesbian and uses she/her/hers pronouns. She is experiencing symptoms of a possible vaginal infection.
You know that the population she identifies with experiences major barriers to health care, including a history of negative health experiences as well as a lack of clinician knowledge and financial barriers.
Assessment Deliverable
Consider the patient in the scenario and how would you approach your assessment of the patient.
Create an 8- to 12-slide presentation, with speaker notes, in which you address the following:
- Give examples of sexual and reproductive health disparities related to caring for patients in the LGBTQ community.
- Describe the barriers this population may face in accessing health care.
- Explain the strategies you can use to decrease the patient’s discomfort while you are assessing them.
- Give examples of how you will use appropriate wording that is inclusive and considers the patient’s identity and pronouns during your assessment.
- Discuss resources available in your community to providers and patients regarding health care for individuals in the LGBTQ community.
- Discuss how the patient’s age may influence the assessment. If this patient were an adolescent versus an older adult.
Cite a minimum of 4 scholarly resources.
Format your citations and references according to APA guidelines.
NSG/523 v1
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
NSG/523 Grading Rubrics Wk 2 Summative Assessment: Patient Interviewing Reflection ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
Wk 5 Summative Assessment: Cultural Competence Presentation ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
Wk 6 Summative Assessment: Ethical and Legal Concerns in Advanced Health Assessment Paper ………………………………………………………………. 8
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 2 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Wk 2 Summative Assessment: Patient Interviewing Reflection
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
Health History
Weight: 20%
Thoroughly explained the process used to gather information on Tina Jones; included a full discussion of how the information from the health history helped them in assessing Tina’s symptoms; fully addressed how they engaged in therapeutic communication
Partially explained the process used to gather information on Tina Jones; partially included a brief discussion of how the information from the health history helped them in assessing Tina’s symptoms; partially addressed how they engaged in therapeutic communication
Inadequately explained the process used to gather information on Tina Jones; did not include a discussion of how the information from the health history helped them in assessing Tina’s symptoms; minimally addressed how they engaged in therapeutic communication
Vaguely explained or did not explain the process used to gather information on Tina Jones
Patient Health Conditions
Weight: 20%
Fully described the patient heath conditions that they were able to conclude based on the evidence they collected; accurately prioritized the patient’s needs and identified which require immediate care
Partially described the patient heath conditions that they were able to conclude based on the evidence they collected; somewhat accurately prioritized the patient’s needs and identified which require immediate care
Inadequately described the patient heath conditions that they were able conclude based on the evidence they collected; incorrectly prioritized the patient’s needs and misidentified which require immediate care
Vaguely described or did not describe the patient heath conditions that they were able to conclude based on the evidence they collected
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 3 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
Cultural Competency
Weight: 20%
Provided several insightful ways of adapting the interview to ensure the patient’s culture is considered in order to make the patient more comfortable and inclined to provide more information regarding their immediate symptoms; adaptations showed a high degree of cultural sensitivity
Provided a few ways of adapting the interview to ensure the patient’s culture is considered in order to make the patient more comfortable and inclined to provide more information regarding their immediate symptoms; adaptations showed a degree of cultural sensitivity
Provided a few ways of adapting the interview to ensure the patient’s culture is considered, but the ways would not be very effective in making the patient feel comfortable; adaptations showed a limited degree of cultural sensitivity
Provided one way of adapting the interview to ensure the patient’s culture is considered, but it would unlikely make the patient comfortable, or did not provide any way of adapting the interview to ensure any culture considerations
Adjustments for Developmental Stages
Weight: 20%
Fully discussed the ways the interview could be adjusted based on the developmental state of the patient
Partially discussed the ways the interview could be adjusted the interview based on the developmental state of the patient
Inadequately discussed the ways the interview could be adjusted based on the developmental state of the patient
Vaguely discussed or did not discuss the ways the interview could be adjusted based on the developmental state of the patient
Technology and Population Health Data
Weight: 10%
Thoroughly described how technology could be used to obtain population health data that could be relevant to their patient
Partially described how technology could be used to obtain population health data that could be relevant to their patient
Inadequately described how technology could be used to obtain population health data that could be relevant to their patient
Vaguely described or did not describe how technology could be used to obtain population health data that could be relevant to their patient
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 4 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
Expression of ideas or thought and audience awareness in oral communication Weight: 5%
Thoroughly expressed ideas and thoughts with words, using relevant content and appropriate forms of communication to convey the information; demonstrated comprehensive awareness of audience through use of effective delivery techniques, evidence, sources, and illustrations to support stance
Moderately expressed ideas and thoughts with words, using relevant content and appropriate forms of communication to convey the information; demonstrated adequate awareness of audience through use of effective delivery techniques, evidence, sources, and illustrations to support stance
Vaguely expressed ideas and thoughts with words, using relevant content and appropriate forms of communication to convey the information; demonstrated minimal awareness of audience through use of delivery techniques, evidence, sources, and illustrations to support stance
Did not sufficiently express ideas and thoughts with words, using relevant content and appropriate forms of communication to convey the information; did not sufficiently demonstrate awareness of audience through use of effective delivery techniques, evidence, sources, and illustrations to support stance
APA, grammar, and writing mechanics
Weight 3%
Accuracy in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice enhanced content; when applicable, attention to APA citation and formatting enhanced the content
Rare inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, word choice; when applicable, APA citation and formatting did not detract from the content
Occasional inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice; when applicable, APA citation and formatting detracted from the content
Frequent inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice; when applicable, APA formatting made the content inaccessible
Supporting evidence
Weight: 2%
Student fully integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student partially integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student inadequately integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student did not integrate relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 5 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Wk 5 Summative Assessment: Cultural Competence Presentation
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
Health disparities in the LGBTQ community
Weight: 10%
Provided numerous examples of the health disparities experienced by patients of the LGBTQ community; examples were historically based and supported by evidence
Provided some examples of the health disparities experienced by patients of the LGBTQ community; examples were historically based and supported by evidence
Provided limited examples of the health disparities experienced by patients of the LGBTQ community; did not provide evidence to support the examples
Provided one vaguely stated example or did not provide any examples of the health disparities experienced by patients of the LGBTQ community
Access to healthcare barriers
Weight: 10%
Accurately described the barriers this population may face in accessing health care
Partially described the barriers this population may face in accessing health care; description was mostly accurate
Inadequately described the barriers this population may face in accessing health care; accuracy of the description was questionable
Vaguely described or did not describe the barriers this population may face in accessing health care
Assessment strategy
Weight: 25%
Provided a strategy for decreasing the patient’s discomfort while being assessed that was based on the population’s needs and showed a high degree of cultural sensitivity; strategy would most likely produce the desired results
Provided a strategy for decreasing the patient’s discomfort while being assessed that was mostly based on the population’s needs and showed a notable degree of cultural sensitivity; strategy would likely produce the desired results
Provided a strategy for decreasing the patient’s discomfort while being assessed that was minimally based on the population’s needs and showed a low degree of cultural sensitivity; strategy was unlikely to produce the desired results
Provided a vague strategy or did not provide a strategy for decreasing the patient’s discomfort while being assessed
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 6 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
Inclusion
Weight: 25%
Examples of inclusive language were insightful; included a discussion of pronoun preferences that showed a deep understanding of gender identity concerns of the patient
Examples of inclusive language were adequate; included a discussion of pronoun preferences that showed a good understanding of gender identity concerns of the patient
Examples of inclusive language were limited; included a discussion of pronoun preferences that showed a lack of understanding of gender identity concerns of the patient
Provided minimal examples of or did not provide any examples of inclusive language nor any discussion of pronoun preferences
Resources
Weight: 10%
Fully described the health care resources that are available for the LGBTQ community
Partially described the health care resources that are available for the LGBTQ community
Inadequately described the health care resources that are available for the LGBTQ community
Vaguely described or did not describe the health care resources that are available for the LGBTQ community
Age
Weight: 10%
Thoroughly addressed the influence the patient’s age can have on the assessment; provided examples of how different ages between adolescents and older adults would impact the assessment
Partially addressed the influence the patient’s age can have on the assessment; provided examples of how different ages between adolescents and older adults would impact the assessment
Inadequately addressed the influence the patient’s age can have on the assessment; provided no examples of how different ages between adolescents and older adults would impact the assessment
Vaguely addressed or did not address the influence the patient’s age can have on the assessment
Critical thinking and problem solving: analyze alternative
Weight: 5%
Fully recognized a need for a solution and thoroughly explored possible solutions
Moderately recognized a need for a solution and adequately explored possible solutions
Vaguely recognized a need for a solution and narrowly explored possible solutions
Did not or inaccurately recognized a need for a solution and did not explore possible solutions/explored infeasible solutions
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 7 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
APA, grammar, and writing mechanics Weight 3%
Accuracy in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice enhanced content; when applicable, attention to APA citation and formatting enhanced the content
Rare inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, word choice; when applicable, APA citation and formatting did not detract from the content
Occasional inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice; when applicable, APA citation and formatting detracted from the content
Frequent inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice; when applicable, APA formatting made the content inaccessible
Supporting evidence
Weight: 2%
Student fully integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student partially integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student inadequately integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student did not integrate relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 8 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Wk 6 Summative Assessment: Ethical and Legal Concerns in Advanced Health Assessment Paper
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
Language barrier
Weight: 15%
Provided a complete response to how they will overcome the language barrier to obtain the patient’s health history
Provided an acceptable response to how they will overcome the language barrier to obtain the patient’s health history
Provided an inadequate response to how they will overcome the language barrier to obtain the patient’s health history
Provided an inappropriate response or did not provide any response to how they will overcome the language barrier to obtain the patient’s health history
Legal and ethical concerns
Weight: 20%
Thoroughly discussed the legal and ethical concerns that are produced by the scenario
Partially discussed the legal and ethical concerns that are produced by the scenario
Inadequately discussed the legal and ethical concerns that are produced by the scenario
Barely discussed or did not discuss the legal and ethical concerns that are produced by the scenario
Strategies and resources
Weight: 20%
Provided a comprehensive discussion of the strategies and resources that could help mitigate any ethical and legal concerns stemming from this patient visit
Provided a partial discussion of the strategies and resources that could help mitigate any ethical and legal concerns stemming from this patient visit
Provided an inadequate discussion of the strategies and resources that could help mitigate any ethical and legal concerns stemming from this patient visit
Provided a narrow discussion or did not provide any discussion of the strategies and resources that could help mitigate any ethical and legal concerns stemming from this patient visit
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1 Page 9 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
Therapeutic communication
Weight: 15%
Fully discussed the therapeutic communication techniques that could be used to speak to the patient and family; techniques would show a high degree of empathy and make the patient and family feel more comfortable
Partially discussed the therapeutic communication techniques that could be used to speak to the patient and family; techniques would show some empathy and make the patient and family feel somewhat comfortable
Inadequately discussed the therapeutic communication techniques that could be used to speak to the patient and family; techniques would show slight empathy but would have no impact on making the patient and family feel comfortable
Provided a narrow discussion of the therapeutic communication techniques that could be used to speak to the patient and family or did not provide any discussion of therapeutic communication techniques
Cultural barriers
Weight: 20%
Provided culturally sensitive responses to cultural barriers; responses were creative and would most likely remove the barrier
Provided responses that were most culturally sensitive to cultural barriers; responses were adequate and may remove the barriers
Provided responses that lack cultural sensitivity to cultural barriers; responses would unlikely remove the barriers
Provided a narrow response or did not provide any responses to cultural barriers
Critical thinking and problem solving: Analyze alternative
Weight: 5%
Fully recognized a need for a solution and thoroughly explored possible solutions
Moderately recognized a need for a solution and adequately explored possible solutions
Vaguely recognized a need for a solution and narrowly explored possible solutions
Did not or inaccurately recognized a need for a solution; did not explore possible solution or explored impractical solutions
Grading Rubrics NSG/523 v1
Page 10 of 10
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
APA, grammar, and writing mechanics
Weight 3%
Accuracy in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice enhanced content; when applicable, attention to APA citation and formatting enhanced the content
Rare inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, word choice; when applicable, APA citation and formatting did not detract from the content
Occasional inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice; when applicable, APA citation and formatting detracted from the content
Frequent inaccuracies/errors in grammar, sentence structures, sentence boundaries, and word choice; when applicable, APA formatting made the content inaccessible
Supporting evidence
Weight: 2%
Student fully integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student partially integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student inadequately integrated relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
Student did not integrate relevant supporting evidence from quality sources
- NSG/523 Grading Rubrics
- Wk 2 Summative Assessment: Patient Interviewing Reflection
- Wk 5 Summative Assessment: Cultural Competence Presentation
- Wk 6 Summative Assessment: Ethical and Legal Concerns in Advanced Health Assessment Paper