Assignment: Comorbidity Analysis II

Assignment: Comorbidity Analysis II
For this Assignment, you will be completing another comorbidity analysis that will follow the same format as the one in Week 5. This time, your patient will have multiple sclerosis and a comorbid condition specific to the renal or urologic system. Be sure to incorporate any instructor feedback you received on your first comorbidity analysis.

Photo Credit: Getty Images/Hero Images

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Assignment: Comorbidity Analysis II
Get an essay WRITTEN FOR YOU, Plagiarism free, and by an EXPERT!
Order Essay

To prepare:

A patient has comorbidity of multiple sclerosis and a second disorder of your choosing from among the following list:
Urinary tract infection
Overactive bladder
Chronic kidney disease
Create a hypothetical patient profile for a patient who has multiple sclerosis and your second selected comorbidity. Be sure to include patient factors, sociodemographic indicators, and other characteristics.
Review the Resources related to multiple sclerosis and the second disorder you selected.
Assignment:
Write a 3- to 4-page complex case analysis that addresses the following:

Explain the pathophysiology of multiple sclerosis and your selected comorbidity. Explain how the alterations of each comorbid disorder impact each other. Be specific. Use the Learning Resources and/or best available evidence from current literature to support your explanation.
Explain how your patient’s factors and sociodemographic indicators might affect the pathophysiology of the disorders.
Describe the types of health assessments and diagnostic reasoning you would apply to this patient. Discuss special considerations related to gender, ethnicity, developmental level, etc., that you may need to consider and what effect they might have on assessment or treatment.
Explain any compensatory mechanisms (adaptive and maladaptive responses) the patient may be displaying.
Explain the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the medication(s) you would recommend to treat the symptoms associated with the patient’s comorbidities, taking into consideration this specific patient’s factors.
Explain how potential interactions between the medications that might be prescribed to treat the patient’s comorbid conditions justify the selection of the medications for this patient. Use the Learning Resources and/or best available evidence from current literature to support your rationale.
Explain how these drugs might impact various body systems in your patient, as well as measures you might take to help reduce any negative effects.
Explain how you might educate your patient on the disorders present, taking into consideration age, developmental level, or other important factors that may impact understanding. Include your rationale for each approach, as well as how you would promote medication adherence. Use the Learning Resources and/or best available evidence from current literature to support your rationale.
Reminder: The School of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates). All papers submitted must use this formatting.

By Day 7 of Week 7
Submit your Assignment.

Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
Click the Week 7 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
Click the Week 7 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:

Week 7 Assignment Rubric

Excellent Good Fair Poor
In 3–4 pages, address the following:

• Explain the pathophysiology of multiple sclerosis and your second selected comorbidity. Explain how the alterations of each comorbid disorder impact each other. Be specific. Use the Learning Resources and/or best available evidence from current literature to support your explanation.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains the pathophysiology of the two comorbid disorders and how their alterations impact each other. Supported by more than one current, scholarly reference.
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
The response accurately explains the pathophysiology of the two comorbid disorders and how their alterations impact each other. Supported by at least one current, scholarly reference.
11 (11%) – 11 (11%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains the pathophysiology of the two comorbid disorders and how their alterations impact each other. Not supported by current, scholarly reference.
0 (0%) – 10 (10%)
The response is vague and inaccurate, or missing descriptions of the two comorbid disorders and their alterations. Not supported by current, scholarly reference.
• Explain how your patient’s factors and sociodemographic indicators might affect the pathophysiology of the disorders

• Explain any compensatory mechanisms (adaptive and maladaptive responses) the patient may be displaying.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains how the patient’s factors and sociodemographic indicators might affect the pathophysiology of the disorder. A clear, accurate, and detailed explanation of any compensatory mechanisms the patient may be displaying is provided.
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
The response accurately explains how the patient’s factors and sociodemographic indicators might affect the pathophysiology of the disorder. An accurate explanation of any compensatory mechanisms the patient may be displaying is provided.
11 (11%) – 11 (11%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains how the patient’s factors and sociodemographic indicators might affect the pathophysiology of the disorder. The explanation of compensatory mechanisms the patient may be displaying is vague and/or contains some inaccuracies.
0 (0%) – 10 (10%)
The response is vague and inaccurate, or missing explanations of how the patient’s factors and sociodemographic indicators might affect the pathophysiology of the disorder. The explanation of compensatory mechanisms the patient may be displaying is vague and inaccurate, or missing.
• Describe the types of health assessments and diagnostic reasoning you would apply to this patient. Include potential issues (e.g., language barriers, developmental level) or special considerations related to gender or ethnicity that you may need to consider.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail describes the types of health assessments and diagnostic reasoning applied to this patient. Potential issues or special considerations related to gender or ethnicity are clearly and accurately articulated.
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
The response accurately describes the types of health assessments and diagnostic reasoning applied to this patient. Potential issues or special considerations related to gender or ethnicity are accurately described.
9 (9%) – 11 (11%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy describes the types of health assessments and diagnostic reasoning applied to this patient. Potential issues or special considerations related to gender or ethnicity are vague or contain some inaccuracies.
0 (0%) – 8 (8%)
The response is vague and inaccurate, or missing descriptions of the types of health assessments and diagnostic reasoning applied to this patient. Potential issues or special considerations related to gender or ethnicity are vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
• Explain the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the medication(s) you would recommend to treat the symptoms associated with the patient’s comorbidities, taking into consideration this specific patient’s factors.

• Explain how these drugs might impact various body systems in your patient, as well as measures you might take to help reduce any negative effects.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the medication(s) recommended to treat the symptoms associated with the patient’s comorbidities, and takes into consideration these specific patient’s factors. The response clearly and accurately articulates how these drugs might impact various body systems in the patient and measures taken to help reduce any negative effects.
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the medication(s) recommended to treat the symptoms associated with the patient’s comorbidities, and takes into consideration these specific patient’s factors. The response accurately explains how these drugs might impact various body systems in the patient and measures taken to help reduce any negative effects.
11 (11%) – 11 (11%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the medication(s) recommended to treat the symptoms associated with the patient’s comorbidities. Consideration of patient factors is vague or contains inaccuracies. The impact of these drugs on the patient’s body systems and measures taken to reduce negative effects is not stated clearly and contains some inaccuracies.
0 (0%) – 10 (10%)
The response is vague and inaccurate, or missing explanations of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the medication(s) recommended to treat the symptoms associated with the patient’s comorbidities. Consideration of patient factors is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanations of the impact of these drugs on the patient’s body systems and measures taken to reduce negative effects are vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
• Explain how potential interactions between the medications that might be prescribed to treat the patient’s comorbid conditions justify the selection of the medications for this patient.
9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail describes how potential interactions between the medications that might be prescribed to treat the patient’s comorbid conditions justify the selection of the medications for this patient. Supported by more than one current, scholarly reference.
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
The response accurately describes how potential interactions between the medications that might be prescribed to treat the patient’s comorbid conditions justify the selection of the medications for this patient. Supported by at least one current, scholarly reference.
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy describes how potential interactions between the medications that might be prescribed to treat the patient’s comorbid conditions justify the selection of the medications for this patient. Not supported by current, scholarly reference.
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
The response is vague and inaccurate, or missing descriptions and examples of how potential interactions between the medications that might be prescribed to treat the patient’s comorbid conditions justify the selection of the medications for this patient. Not supported by current, scholarly reference.
• Explain how you might educate your patient on the disorders present, taking into consideration age, developmental level, or other important factors that may impact understanding. Include your rationale for each approach, as well as how you would promote medication adherence.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response clearly, accurately, and with support of detailed rationales explains how the patient would be educated on the disorders present, taking into consideration age, developmental level, or other important factors that may impact understanding. Explanations of approaches for promoting medication adherence are clearly and accurately articulated. Supported by more than one current, scholarly reference
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
The response accurately and with support of appropriate rationales explains how the patient would be educated on the disorders present, taking into consideration age, developmental level, or other important factors that may impact understanding. Explanations of approaches for promoting medication adherence are accurate. Supported by at least one current, scholarly reference.
11 (11%) – 11 (11%)
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains how the patient would be educated on the disorders present, and does not take into consideration all factors that may impact understanding. Explanations of approaches for promoting medication adherence are vague or contain some inaccuracies. Not supported by current, scholarly reference.
0 (0%) – 10 (10%)
The response is vague and inaccurate, or missing explanations of how the patient would be educated. Explanations of approaches for promoting medication adherence are vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Not supported by current, scholarly reference.
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 (5%) – 5 (5%)
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 (4%) – 4 (4%)
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 (3%) – 3 (3%)
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.
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
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 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6380_Week7_Assignment_Rubric

Learning Resources
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

Arcangelo, V., Peterson, A., Wilbur, V., & Reinhold, J. (2017). Pharmacotherapeutics for advanced practice: A practical approach (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 32, “Urinary Tract Infection” (pp. 519–526)
Pharmacotherapeutics for Advanced Practice: A Practical Approach 4th Edition by Arcangelo, V. P., Peterson, A. M., Wilbur, V., & Reinhold, J. A. Copyright 2016 by LWW. Reprinted by permission of LWW via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Arcangelo, V., Peterson, A., Wilbur, V., & Reinhold, J. (2017). Pharmacotherapeutics for advanced practice: A practical approach (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 34, “Overactive Bladder” (pp. 545–564)
Pharmacotherapeutics for Advanced Practice: A Practical Approach 4th Edition by Arcangelo, V. P., Peterson, A. M., Wilbur, V., & Reinhold, J. A. Copyright 2016 by LWW. Reprinted by permission of LWW via the Copyright Clearance Center.

McCance, K., & Huether, S. (2019). Pathophysiology: The biologic basis for disease in adults and children (8th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier/Mosby.

Chapter 38, “Structure and Function of the Renal and Urologic System” (pp. 1228–1245)
Chapter 39, “Alterations of Renal and Urinary Tract Function” (pp. 1246–1277)
American Academy of Neurology. (2019). Policy and guidelines: Multiple sclerosis. Retrieved from https://www.aan.com/Guidelines/home/ByTopic?topicId=18

American College of Physicians. (2013). ACP releases guideline on screening, monitoring, and treatment of stage 1 to stage 3 chronic kidney disease. Annals of Internal Medicine, 90(2), 121–122. Retrieved from https://www.aafp.org/afp/2014/0715/p121.pdf

American Family Physician. (2010). Diagnosis and treatment of urethritis is men. Retrieved from https://www.aafp.org/afp/2010/0401/p873.html

Huang, W. J., Chen, W. W., & Zhang, X. (2017). Multiple sclerosis: Pathology, diagnosis and treatments. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 13(6), 3163–3166. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.3892/etm.2017.4410

National Multiple Sclerosis Society. (n.d.). Medications. Retrieved September 12, 2019, from https://www.nationalmssociety.org/Treating-MS/Medications

Portis, A. J., & Sundaram, C. P. (2001). Diagnosis and initial management of kidney stones. American Family Physician, 63(7), 1329–1339. Retrieved from https://www.aafp.org/afp/2001/0401/p1329.htm

Zephir, H. (2018). Progress in understanding the pathophysiology of multiple sclerosis. Revue Neurologique, 174(6), 358–363.

Discussion: Pathophysiology and Pharmacology of Renal an

Homework Market
Order a unique copy of this paper
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Since all our papers are written from scratch, the papers we submit are plagiarism free and we strictly adhere to lecturer’s instructions. Our writers are highly qualified from all over the world and include graduates and professors from most of the largest and known universities in the world. Once you have assigned us your assignment, we select the most qualified and reliable writer to handle your assignment.

Money-back guarantee

Unlike other writing companies, we encourage clients to draw back their money at any stage of the writing process if they experience any uncertainties with the quality of generated content. However, you will hardly have to make this decision because of our business approach that suits your needs.

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

We have an advanced plagiarism-detection system that flags any work that fails to meet the required academic expectations. Our company thrives in honesty, and as such, you will be guaranteed to achieve a paper that meets your expectations.

Timely delivery of urgent papers

At homeworkpaper.org we have online agents that you can chat with to have your assignment taken care of with the little remaining time. Also, we have professional academic writers who will work on your assignment providing you with a high-quality paper at the same time. We can take care of your urgent assignments in less than 5 hours.

Privacy policy

We uphold confidentiality and privacy through our interactions with clients, an aspect that has enhanced our relationship with prospective customers seeking for assignment help. We do not disclose your information with third-parties; neither do we share your work with any other person apart from you.

We do not offer pre-written essays

We do not resell previously-done tasks delivered to other clients. When we deliver orders to our clients, we safeguard their privacy and confidentiality by ensuring the third party does not access the work. By writing the papers from scratch, we have managed to maintain a certain level of originality, which defines our business model. Our qualified editors proofread all submitted work to eliminate mistakes that can interfere with the credibility of the assignment.

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency