You have the opportunity to showcase your clinical expertise and creativity by developing a visually engaging, evidence-based presentation on a topic of your choice from the course curriculum. In this Assessment

ASSESSMENT: PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC MANAGEMENT OF COMPLEX PATIENTS PRESENTATION

You have the opportunity to showcase your clinical expertise and creativity by developing a visually engaging, evidence-based presentation on a topic of your choice from the course curriculum. In this Assessment, you are encouraged to harness your creativity and actively engage your audience by designing a visually compelling and clinically relevant presentation. This activity encourages you to synthesize and organize key information from your coursework, presenting it in a clear and logical manner that demonstrates your ability to communicate complex ideas effectively. By preparing and delivering your presentation, you will not only deepen your understanding of the subject matter but also gain confidence in your oral communication abilities, an essential skill for advanced nursing practice and leadership roles.

You are encouraged to approach this assessment with creativity, utilizing visual aids and innovative presentation formats where appropriate. The goal is to create an engaging and informative experience.

Level 1: No AI Permitted

AI tools may not be used at any stage
Common for clinical documentation or performance‑based work

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this assessment.

Required Resources

To prepare:

Select any topic from the course curriculum relevant to advanced pharmacology.
You will explore a case and treatment rationale associated with your selected topic.

BY SUNDAY OF WEEK 10

Submit a 3-minute voiceover presentation summarizing your selected case and treatment rationale.

Your presentation should include five slides. Your slides should be clear, concise, and visually engaging. You are required to use a minimum of three scholarly sources published within the past 5 years.

The five slides should include the following:

Slide 1: Topic Selection
- Choose any topic from the course curriculum relevant to advanced pharmacology.
Slide 2: Case Development
- Create a detailed patient case scenario featuring at least two comorbid conditions.
- Include relevant patient history, presenting symptoms, and diagnostic findings.
Slide 3: Treatment Plan
- Develop a pharmacotherapeutic plan addressing all comorbidities.
- Justify drug choices based on current guidelines, patient factors, and potential drug interactions.
- Discuss monitoring parameters, expected outcomes, and possible adverse effects.
Slide 4: Ethical and Legal Considerations
- Evaluate ethical dilemmas and legal implications related to your treatment plan (e.g., informed consent, prescriptive authority).
Slide 5: References
- Cite all scholarly sources published within the past 5 years using APA formatting.

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.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as MD5Assgn_LastName_FirstInitial
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NURS_6521_Module5_Assignment2_Rubric

NURS_6521_Module5_Assignment2_Rubric
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCase Development and Clinical Complexity	10 to >8.9 ptsExcellentCreates a highly detailed, realistic patient case with ≥2 clearly described comorbidities; integrates relevant history, symptoms, and diagnostics accurately and logically. 8.9 to >7.9 ptsGoodProvides a clear case with ≥2 comorbidities; includes appropriate history and diagnostics with minor gaps. 7.9 to >6.9 ptsFairProvides a clear case with ≥2 comorbidities; includes appropriate history and diagnostics with minor gaps. 6.9 to >0 ptsPoorCase is incomplete, lacks required comorbidities, or contains inaccurate or missing clinical details.	10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePharmacotherapeutic Plan and Rationale	7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentDevelops a comprehensive treatment plan addressing all comorbidities; thoroughly justifies drug choices using current guidelines; clearly explains interactions, monitoring, outcomes, and adverse effects. 6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodTreatment plan is accurate and addresses most comorbidities; justification is mostly sound but may lack nuance or detail. 5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairPlan addresses some issues but is incomplete; justification is weak or lacks strong evidence; monitoring or interactions minimally addressed. 5.2 to >0 ptsPoorTreatment plan is inaccurate, incomplete, unsupported, or missing key rationale.	7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEthical and Legal Considerations	7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentProvides a thoughtful, well‑supported analysis of ethical dilemmas and legal implications relevant to the case; demonstrates advanced understanding of prescriptive authority and patient rights. 6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodAddresses major ethical and legal considerations accurately but with limited depth or specificity. 5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairMentions ethical and legal concepts but with minimal detail, accuracy issues, or weak connection to the case. 5.2 to >0 ptsPoorEthical and legal considerations are inaccurate, missing, or not applied to the scenario.	7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLength of Presentation	5 ptsExcellentPresentation is no more than 3 minutes in length. 0 ptsPoorPresentation is longer than 3 minutes.	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProfessionalism and Design	7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentPresentation is consistently professional, well designed, and easy to follow. Visuals consistently complement the content. 6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodPresentation is mostly professional, well designed, and easy to follow. Visuals mostly complement the content. 5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairPresentation is minimally professional. Some parts are poorly designed and difficult to follow. Visuals are poorly designed and/or do not complement content in some sections. 5.2 to >0 ptsPoorPresentation is disorganized, unclear, or incomplete. Visuals are distracting, confusing, or do not complement the content.	7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpeaker Delivery	7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentSpeaker delivery is consistently engaging and clear. 6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodSpeaker delivery is mostly engaging and clear. 5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairSpeaker delivery is minimally engaging. Some sections lack clarity. 5.2 to >0 ptsPoorSpeaker delivery is unclear or incomplete.	7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Attribution and APA Formatting	2.5 to >2.2 ptsExcellentAll sources are cited in APA format without any errors. Student work is original– no AI-generated text is presented as student’s own, independent work. 2.2 to >1.9 ptsGoodAll sources are cited in APA format with some minor errors. Student work is original– no AI-generated text is presented as student’s own, independent work. 1.9 to >1.7 ptsFairAll sources are cited with frequent APA formatting errors. Student work is original– no AI-generated text is presented as student’s own, independent work. 1.7 to >0 ptsPoorMissing source citations and/or minimal adherence to APA formatting rules. Student work is not original– AI-generated text is presented as student’s own, independent work.	2.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Mechanics, and Punctuation	2.5 to >2.2 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 2.2 to >1.9 ptsGoodUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with few errors. 1.9 to >1.7 ptsFairUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with frequent errors. 1.7 to >0 ptsPoorPost contains frequent errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that interfere with comprehension.	2.5 pts

NURS_6521_Module5_Assignment2_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCase Development and Clinical
Complexity

10 to >8.9 ptsExcellentCreates a highly detailed, realistic
patient case with ≥2 clearly described comorbidities; integrates relevant
history, symptoms, and diagnostics accurately and logically.

8.9 to >7.9 ptsGoodProvides a clear case with ≥2
comorbidities; includes appropriate history and diagnostics with minor gaps.

7.9 to >6.9 ptsFairProvides a clear case with ≥2
comorbidities; includes appropriate history and diagnostics with minor gaps.

6.9 to >0 ptsPoorCase is incomplete, lacks required
comorbidities, or contains inaccurate or missing clinical details.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePharmacotherapeutic Plan and
Rationale

7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentDevelops a comprehensive treatment
plan addressing all comorbidities; thoroughly justifies drug choices using
current guidelines; clearly explains interactions, monitoring, outcomes, and
adverse effects.

6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodTreatment plan is accurate and
addresses most comorbidities; justification is mostly sound but may lack
nuance or detail.

5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairPlan addresses some issues but is
incomplete; justification is weak or lacks strong evidence; monitoring or
interactions minimally addressed.

5.2 to >0 ptsPoorTreatment plan is inaccurate,
incomplete, unsupported, or missing key rationale.

7.5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEthical and Legal Considerations

7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentProvides a thoughtful, well‑supported
analysis of ethical dilemmas and legal implications relevant to the case;
demonstrates advanced understanding of prescriptive authority and patient
rights.

6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodAddresses major ethical and legal
considerations accurately but with limited depth or specificity.

5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairMentions ethical and legal concepts
but with minimal detail, accuracy issues, or weak connection to the case.

5.2 to >0 ptsPoorEthical and legal considerations are
inaccurate, missing, or not applied to the scenario.

7.5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLength of Presentation

5 ptsExcellentPresentation is no more than 3
minutes in length.

0 ptsPoorPresentation is longer than 3
minutes.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProfessionalism and Design

7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentPresentation is consistently
professional, well designed, and easy to follow. Visuals consistently
complement the content.

6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodPresentation is mostly professional,
well designed, and easy to follow. Visuals mostly complement the content.

5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairPresentation is minimally
professional. Some parts are poorly designed and difficult to follow. Visuals
are poorly designed and/or do not complement content in some sections.

5.2 to >0 ptsPoorPresentation is disorganized,
unclear, or incomplete. Visuals are distracting, confusing, or do not
complement the content.

7.5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpeaker Delivery

7.5 to >6.7 ptsExcellentSpeaker delivery is consistently
engaging and clear.

6.7 to >5.9 ptsGoodSpeaker delivery is mostly engaging
and clear.

5.9 to >5.2 ptsFairSpeaker delivery is minimally
engaging. Some sections lack clarity.

5.2 to >0 ptsPoorSpeaker delivery is unclear or
incomplete.

7.5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Attribution and APA
Formatting

2.5 to >2.2 ptsExcellentAll sources are cited in APA format
without any errors. Student work is original– no AI-generated text is
presented as student’s own, independent work.

2.2 to >1.9 ptsGoodAll sources are cited in APA format
with some minor errors. Student work is original– no AI-generated text is
presented as student’s own, independent work.

1.9 to >1.7 ptsFairAll sources are cited with frequent
APA formatting errors. Student work is original– no AI-generated text is
presented as student’s own, independent work.

1.7 to >0 ptsPoorMissing source citations and/or
minimal adherence to APA formatting rules. Student work is not original–
AI-generated text is presented as student’s own, independent work.

2.5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Mechanics, and Punctuation

2.5 to >2.2 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and
punctuation with no errors.

2.2 to >1.9 ptsGoodUses correct grammar, spelling, and
punctuation with few errors.

1.9 to >1.7 ptsFairUses correct grammar, spelling, and
punctuation with frequent errors.

1.7 to >0 ptsPoorPost contains frequent errors in
grammar, spelling, and punctuation that interfere with comprehension.

2.5 pts

Total Points: 50

You have the opportunity to showcase your clinical expertise and creativity by developing a visually engaging, evidence-based presentation on a topic of your choice from the course curriculum. In this Assessment

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

You have the opportunity to showcase your clinical expertise and creativity by developing a visually engaging, evidence-based presentation on a topic of your choice from the course curriculum. In this Assessment

Related Posts

As you master the skills related to the test, including how to run the test in SPSS, you engage with your peers in the Collaboration Lab. The final activity in most weeks, including this week, is an Article Critique,

imagine that you are the Vice President of Human Resources (VP of HR) for CapraTek. The Western sales division has had more turnover than any other part of the company. Since 2010, there have been six different sets of directors

For this assessment, you will look at the different forms of payment in healthcare and why this makes healthcare unique from any other industry. You will dive into the new payment method of value-based

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories