One critical element of any physical exam is the ability of the examiner to put the patient at ease. By putting the patient at ease, nurses are more likely to glean quality, meaningful information that will help the patient get the best care possible. When someone feels safe, listened to, and cared about, exams often go more smoothly. This is especially true when dealing with issues concerning breasts, genitals, prostates, and rectums, which are subjects that many patients find difficult to talk about. As a result, it is important to gain a firm understanding of how to gain vital information and perform the necessary assessment techniques in as non-invasive a manner as possible.
For this week, you explore how to assess problems with the breasts, genitalia, rectum, and prostate.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
- Evaluate abnormal findings on the genitalia and rectum
- Apply concepts, theories, and principles relating to health assessment techniques and diagnoses for the breasts, genitalia, prostate, and rectum
Learning Resources
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)
Ball, J. W., Dains, J. E., Flynn, J. A., Solomon, B. S., & Stewart, R. W. (2019). Seidel’s guide to physical examination: An interprofessional approach (9th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.
- Chapter 17, “Breasts and Axillae”
This chapter focuses on examining the breasts and axillae. The authors describe the examination procedures and the anatomy and physiology of breasts.
- Chapter 19, “Female Genitalia”
In this chapter, the authors explain how to conduct an examination of female genitalia. The chapter also describes the form and function of female genitalia.
- Chapter 20, “Male Genitalia”
The authors explain the biology of the penis, testicles, epididymides, scrotum, prostate gland, and seminal vesicles. Additionally, the chapter explains how to perform an exam of these areas.
- Chapter 21, “Anus, Rectum, and Prostate”
This chapter focuses on performing an exam of the anus, rectum, and prostate. The authors also explain the anatomy and physiology of the anus, rectum, and prostate.
Dains, J. E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. (2019). Advanced health assessment and clinical diagnosis in primary care (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby.
Credit Line: Advanced Health Assessment and Clinical Diagnosis in Primary Care, 6th Edition by Dains, J.E., Baumann, L. C., & Scheibel, P. Copyright 2019 by Mosby. Reprinted by permission of Mosby via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Chapter 6, “Breast Lumps and Nipple Discharge”
This chapter focuses on the important topic of breast lumps and nipple discharge. Because breast cancer is the most common type of cancer in women, it is important to get an accurate diagnosis. Information in the chapter includes key questions to ask and what to look for in the physical exam.Chapter 7, “Breast Pain”
Determining the cause of breast pain can be difficult. This chapter examines how to determine the likely cause of the pain through diagnostic tests, physical examination, and careful analysis of a patient’s health history.Chapter 27, “Penile Discharge”
The focus of this chapter is on how to diagnose the causes of penile discharge. The authors include specific questions to ask when gathering a patient’s history to narrow down the likely diagnosis. They also give advice on performing a focused physical exam.Chapter 36, “Vaginal Bleeding”
In this chapter, the causes of vaginal bleeding are explored. The authors focus on symptoms outside the regular menstrual cycle. The authors discuss key questions to ask the patient as well as specific physical examination procedures and laboratory studies that may be useful in reaching a diagnosis.Chapter 37, “Vaginal Discharge and Itching”
This chapter examines the process of identifying causes of vaginal discharge and itching. The authors include questions on the characteristics of the discharge, the possibility of the issues being the result of a sexually transmitted infection, and how often the discharge occurs. A chart highlights potential diagnoses based on patient history, physical findings, and diagnostic studies.
Sullivan, D. D. (2019). Guide to clinical documentation (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.
- Chapter 3, “SOAP Notes” (Previously read in Week 8)
This article describes the benefits of new technology and guidelines for pelvic exams. The authors also detail which guidelines and technology may become obsolete.
Document: Final Exam Review (Word document)
Optional Resource
LeBlond, R. F., Brown, D. D., & DeGowin, R. L. (2014). DeGowin’s diagnostic examination (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical.
- Chapter 8, “The Chest: Chest Wall, Pulmonary, and Cardiovascular Systems; The Breasts” (Section 2, “The Breasts,” pp. 434–444)
Section 2 of this chapter focuses on the anatomy and physiology of breasts. The section provides descriptions of breast examinations and common breast conditions.
- Chapter 11, “The Female Genitalia and Reproductive System” (pp. 541–562)
In this chapter, the authors provide an overview of the female reproductive system. The authors also describe symptoms of disorders in the reproductive system.
- Chapter 12, “The Male Genitalia and Reproductive System” (pp. 563–584)
The authors of this chapter detail the anatomy of the male reproductive system. Additionally, the authors describe how to conduct an exam of the male reproductive system.
- Review of Chapter 9, “The Abdomen, Perineum, Anus, and Rectosigmoid” (pp. 445–527)
Required Media (click to expand/reduce)
Assignment: Lab Assignment: Assessing the Genitalia and Rectum
To Prepare
- Review the Episodic note case study your instructor provides you for this week’s Assignment. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your Episodic note case study.
- Based on the Episodic note case study:
- Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study. Refer to Chapter 3 of the Sullivan resource to guide you as you complete your Lab Assignment.
- Search the Walden library or the Internet for evidence-based resources to support your answers to the questions provided.
- Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient in the case study.
- Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
- Identify at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.
The Lab Assignment
Using evidence-based resources from your search, answer the following questions and support your answers using current evidence from the literature.
- Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
- Analyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
- Is the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not?
- Would diagnostics be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
- Would you reject/accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not? Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differential diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
By Day 7 of Week 10
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 “WK10Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
- Click the Week 10 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
- Click the Week 10 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 “WK10Assgn+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.
Name: NURS_6512_Week_10_Assignment_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| With regard to the SOAP note case study provided and using evidence-based resources from your search, answer the following questions and support your answers using current evidence from the literature: · Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation. | 10 (10%) – 12 (12%)The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation. | 7 (7%) – 9 (9%)The response accurately analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation. | 4 (4%) – 6 (6%)The response vaguely analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or inaccurately lists additional information to be included in the documentation. | 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)The response inaccurately analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation. |
| · Analyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation. | 10 (10%) – 12 (12%)The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation. | 7 (7%) – 9 (9%)The response accurately analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation. | 4 (4%) – 6 (6%)The response vaguely analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or inaccurately lists additional information to be included in the documentation. | 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)The response inaccurately analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation. |
| · Is the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not? | 14 (14%) – 16 (16%)The response clearly and accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a thorough and detailed explanation. | 11 (11%) – 13 (13%)The response accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a clear explanation. | 8 (8%) – 10 (10%)The response vaguely identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a vague explanation. | 0 (0%) – 7 (7%)The response inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an inaccurate or missing explanation. |
| · What diagnostic tests would be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis? | 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)The response thoroughly and accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly, thoroughly, and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. | 15 (15%) – 17 (17%)The response accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. | 12 (12%) – 14 (14%)The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. | 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)The response inaccurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case, with an inaccurate or missing explanation of how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis. |
| · Would you reject or accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not? · Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differenial diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature. | 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)The response states clearly whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a thorough, accurate, and detailed explanation of sound reasoning. The response clearly, thoroughly, and accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained clearly, accurately, and thoroughly using three or more different references from current evidence-based literature. | 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an accurate explanation of sound reasoning. The response accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained using three different references from current evidence-based literature. | 17 (17%) – 19 (19%)The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a vague explanation of the reasoning. The response identifies two to three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained vaguely and/or inaccurately using three or fewer references from current evidence-based literature. | 0 (0%) – 16 (16%)The response inaccurately states or is missing a statement of whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an explanation that is inaccurate and/or missing. The response identifies three or fewer conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is missing or explained inaccurately using two or fewer references from current evidence-based literature. |
| 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 |
|---|
