Assessment 2: Case Study (Topic areas – acute inflammatory response, immunisation, infection control) Weighting: 40% Word Count: 1200 words Due Date: Week 9 , Monday 11 th September 2017 at 1100 hours Submission Detail: Refer to submission requirements on page 16 Marking Criteria and Standards : See page 11-14 Aim of assessment The aim of this assessment is to increase students’ understanding of how microorganisms can cause health breakdown, and the role of relevant pharmacological interventions in the recovery processes. Students will explore various modes of transmission, relevant characteristics of pathogens and the importance of breaking the chain of infection. This assessment facilitates the development of the following skills: critical appraisal of the nurse’s role in infection control, literature searching, and academic writing and referencing. Details Students are provided with a hypothetical case study to read (see below) . They then must answer the questions provided relating to the study. Students should draw o n relevant literature provided to support their answers, and reference using the APA 6 th e d. style. Note : • Students must respond to each of the questions using academic writing. It is anticipated that the work will be presented in a question / answer format using full sentences and paragraphs. Students MUST use the electronic template for this assignment. A sof t word copy must be accessed from the assessment tab in the Unit ’s vUWS site. • Answers are to be written in the third person (he/she/it or they/them/their). • Answers are to be written clearly and concisely using correct spelling and grammar and written in complete sentences and paragraphs. Bullet points are NOT acceptable. • All answers must include in- text references and a reference list must be included at the end of the assessment. • As a guide, please aim to write around 35 words per allocated mark for each question. Thus, if a question is worth 10 marks, aim to answer it in around 350 words. • There is a word limit of 1200 words. Use your computer to total the number of words used in your assignment. However, do not include the reference list at the end of your assignment in the word count. In-text citations will be included in the additional 10% word count. If you exceed the word limit by more than 10% the ma rker will stop marking at 1200 words plus 10%. Case Study : Mary , aged 50 years, was digging manure into her rose garden when she sustained a deep 4 cm cut to her right calf . She was brought into the medical centre, her wound cleaned and sutured. She was a lso given a tetanus booster injection and sent home. 48 hours later she returned to the medical centre complaining of pain and feeling febrile. She had a T emperature of 38.2 ̊C with a Blood Pressure of 12 0/80 mmHg . ©School of Nursing and Midwifery Page 9 of 28 University of Western Sydney trading as Western Sydney University ABN 53 014 069 881 CRICOS Provider No: 00917K 401006 – Bioscience 2 Learning Guide – Spring 2017 On inspection of her wound, the foll owing observations were made: 1. Wound edges red and hot to touch 2. Surrounding tissues swollen 3. Purulent and odorous discharge A wound swab was taken for culture and sensitivity. The report of the culture found the colonizing organism to be Staphylococcus aureus which was sensitive to Amoxicillin. Mary was prescribed Augmentin, 250mg every eight hours for five days. Using the supplied template (to be accessed from the Assessment tab in the Unit’s vUWS site), answer the following questions: 1. Explain why a booster tetanus injection was given to Mary. (5 Marks) 2. Describe the physiological basis of the three wound observations. Relate your response to the case study. (10 Marks) 3. Explain how Mary’s fever developed and state two benefits of fever. (5 Marks) 4. Name one endogenous and one exogenous possible source of contamination of the wound by S. aureus and explain how the organism was transmitted to the wound from each source. (10 Marks) 5. Explain why Augmentin was one of the appropriate drugs given to Mary. (5 Ma rks) Resources i. There are a number of textbooks and resources available through the Western Sydney University Library that may assist you. Please refer to the unit’s vUWS site for specific unit resources. ii. The following f ive required r eferences MUST be use d and cited in this case study. Additional resources listed may also be used as long as the five r equired are present. Some of these can be accessed online as indicated. Others may be found on closed reserve in the library. iii. (Eds.) indicates an edited bo ok. You must reference the chapter/s used. Required References: Bullock, S., & Manias, E. (2017). Fundamentals of pharmacology (8th ed.). Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson Australia. Craft, J., & Gordon, C. (Eds.). (2015). Understanding pathophysiology (2nd Australian and New Zealand ed.). Chatswood, Australia: Elsevier. Available Online Department of Hea lth. (2017). 4.19 Tetanus . Retrieved from http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishing.nsf/Content/Handbook10- home~handbook10part4~handbook10- 4-19 Lee, G., & Bishop, P. (Eds.). (2016). Microbiology and infection control for health profess ionals (6th ed.). Melbourne, Victoria: Pearson Australia. Marieb, E.N., & Hoehn, K. (2016). Human anatomy & physiology (10th global ed.). Harlow, United Kingdom: Pearson Education. Additional References: Please see additional reading list in section 4 ©School of Nursing and Midwifery Page 10 of 28 University of Western Sydney trading as Western Sydney University 1.Criterion 1 – Rationale for giving Mary a Tetanus booster = Accurately and clearly explains two reasons why a booster was given and correctly links it to information in the case study.Uses all relevant prescribed literature appropriately to support explanation. 2.Criterion 2 – Physiological basis of the three wound observations = Correctly identifies, and explains clearly and precisely, the pathophysiology of the three wound observations with accurate and highly outstanding scientific detail. Clearly links each wound observation to the case study. Uses all relevant prescribed literature appropriately to support explanation. 3. Criterion 3 – Development and benefits of fever = Provides an accurate and outstanding scientifically relevant explanation for the development of fever. Correctly identifies and discusses two benefits of fever that are scientifically relevant.Uses all relevant prescribed literature appropriately to support explanation. 4. Criterion 4 –Possible sources of contamination and modes of transmission = Correctly identifies two sources of contamination relevant to the case study. Clearly outlines and fully describes the chain of infection from each of the two sources with an outstanding level of detail. Uses all relevant prescribed literature appropriately to support explanation. 5. Criterion 5 –Appropriateness of Augmentin as the antibacterial agent prescribed to Mary = Provides a very thorough, accurate and relevant scientific explanation for why Augmentin is a suitable drug for the treatment of Mary’s wound infection. Response extends to also include a thorough, very clear and specific explanation highlighting the role of the major ingredients in Augmentin .Uses all relevant prescribed literature appropriately to support explanation. 6. Criterion 6 –Academic style and referencing = Consistent writing style that communicates ideas coherently using correct sentence structure, grammatical construction, spelling and punctuation.Referencing is consistent, thorough and well used to support all claims, and all references, consistently following APA 6th ed. style.Cites at least the five required references provided and accurately presents these citations in a reference list.