Schapiro, N. A. (2009). Confidentiality and access to adolescent health care services. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 24(2), 133136. Burns, C. E., Dunn, A. M., Brady, M. A., Starr, N. B., Blosser, C. G., & Garzon, D. L. (Eds.). (2017). Pediatric primary care (6th ed.). St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier. Chapter 7, Developmental Management of School-Age Children (pp. 101-120) Gagan, M. J. (2009). The SOAP format enhances communication. Kai Tiaki Nursing New Zealand, 15(5), 15. 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.). Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics. You receive a phone call from a mother who is concerned that her son is using drugs. The 16-year-old boy is seeing you in the afternoon for a follow-up for acne. The mother requests that you obtain a drug test during the visit, but she does not want her son to know he is being screened or that she requested screening because I dont want him to stop trusting me. Review this weeks media presentation, as well as Developmental Management of School-Age Children and Developmental Management of Adolescents in the Burns et al. text and the Schapiro article in the Learning Resources. Think about confidentiality laws regarding providers, school-age children, adolescents, and their families. Select one of the three provided scenarios. Reflect on the providers role and responsibility regarding confidentiality between the patient and the patients family in the scenario. Consider the appropriate way for the provider to respond and facilitate the care of the patient in the scenario you selected. Think about interventions and strategies that the provider should use to address the issues presented. By Day 3 Post an explanation of the providers role and responsibility regarding confidentiality between the patient and the patients family in the scenario you selected. Explain how the provider should appropriately respond and facilitate the care of the patient in the scenario. Include interventions and management strategies that the provider should use to address the issues presented. Rubric Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement 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 (44%) – 44 (44%) 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. supported by at least 3 current, credible sources 40 (40%) – 43 (43%) Responds to the discussion question(s) is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) 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 post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references 31 (31%) – 34 (34%) 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 0 (0%) – 30 (30%) 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 Main Posting: Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) Written clearly and concisely Contains no grammatical or spelling errors Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style (%) – (%) Written clearly and concisely May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Written concisely May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error 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 0 (0%) – 4 (4%) Not written clearly or concisely Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style Main Posting: Timely and full participation 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts main discussion by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%) 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 (%) – (%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings (%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting (%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic, lacks depth First Response: Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) 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 professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are 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 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) 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 (%) – (%) Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited 0 (0%) – 4 (4%) Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited First Response: Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%) 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 (%) – (%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings (%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting (%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic, lacks depth Second Response: Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) 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 professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are 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 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) 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 (%) – (%) Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited 0 (0%) – 4 (4%) Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited Second Response: Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely and full participation Posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation
Show more