MN505 M1-1 Interpret Epidemiologic Data on Morbidity and Mortality Related to Acute and Chronic Disease States

This competency assessment assesses the following Outcome(s): MN505M1-1: Interpret epidemiologic data on morbidity and mortality related to acute and chronic disease states. Individual Screening Directions Individual Screening Review the clinician provider guidelines and recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force A and B Recommendations. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Name/uspstf-a-and-b-recommendations/ For the MSN-prepared nurse, knowledge of epidemiology and its application to preventive screening guidelines is important in many clinical areas: administrative, education, and nurse practitioner fields. Consider you are working in a clinic and need to order a preventive screening on a patient for one of the conditions listed below. While this is a preventive measure, it also can be a diagnostic tool in other circumstances. For this assignment, the screening is a secondary prevention measure. Please select one screening below. Your screening methodology must come from the United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines.

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
Breast Cancer
Cervical Cancer
Colon Cancer
Diabetes Mellitus II
Lung Cancer

Condition and Screening

Identify and define the condition and type of screening. Screening choice is one from the assignment directions.

Epidemiology of Condition

Include a correct definition of the condition and defines the epidemiology of the condition in the United States through three statistical terms.
Include the correct mortality and related morbidity statistics in numerical format.
Address trends using terms such as increasing, larger, or less. Includes related disparities and population rate comparison (i.e., racial, sex, age, etc.)

Methodology

Incorporate USPSTF guideline development methodology process into the methodology section of the paper.
Discuss the population for the guideline using age, sex, or related characteristic, for the screening.
Include information on two risk factors addressed in the guideline methodology.
Justify the screening based on these risks using statistical rationale.
Explain and support measures of the screening.

Guideline

Provide a summation of the USPSTF guideline recommendation.
Include population characteristic/s, screening type, and interval.
Include most current recommendations.

Critical Analysis

Conduct a literature review of support used in the guideline. May include alternative studies found in more recent literature that supports or offers alternative views.
Cite four studies in the analysis.

Summary Provide a summary conclusion of the screening guideline, general benefit to the individual and why it is important. Format expectations:

Follows all assignment directions.
Introduction and conclusion are included.
Information in paragraphs and paper organized to convey the content to the reader.
Paper length paper should be 3–4 pages of content.
Follows APA in paper format, reference page, in-text citations, or headings.
Uses four or more credible peer-reviewed sources.

Master’s-prepared nurse educators, leaders, nurse practitioners, and all specialty nursing fields contribute to health promotion in populations across the life span. You will demonstrate understanding and correct interpretations of preventive screening guidelines. You should be able to apply this knowledge to your specialty focus related to health promotion and epidemiology. Minimum Submission Requirements

This assessment should be a Microsoft Word minimum 3- to 4-page document, in addition to the title and reference pages.
Respond to the questions in a thorough manner, providing specific examples of concepts, topics, definitions, and other elements asked for in the questions. Your submission should be highly organized, logical, and focused.
Your submission should provide a clearly established and sustained viewpoint and purpose.
Your writing should be well ordered, logical, and unified, as well as original and insightful.
Your submission must be written in Standard English and demonstrate exceptional content, organization, style, and grammar and mechanics.
A separate page at the end of your submission should contain a list of references in APA format. Use your textbook, the Library, and the internet for research.
Be sure to include references for all sources and to cite them using in-text citations where appropriate. Your sources and content should follow current APA citation style. Review the writing resources for APA formatting and citation found in Academic Tools. Additional writing resources can be found within the Academic Success Center.
Your submission should:
- include a title page;
- be double-spaced;
- be typed in Times New Roman, 12-point font; and
- be free of spelling or punctuation errors.

Competency Assessment Rubric

All competency criteria must be met to earn a B grade and pass this Course Outcome. A predefined number of mastery criteria must be met to earn an A grade, indicating mastery of the Course Outcome. See the CLA and Grade Criteria Chart below.

	MET	NOT YET MET
Condition and screening
Competency
Condition and type of screening is appropriate.
Mastery
Condition and type of screening is clearly defined.
Epidemiology of condition
Competency
Epidemiology of condition is present.
Mastery
Epidemiology of condition is well addressed; comprehensive and appropriate.
Methodology
Competency
Methodology with screening measures and support are applied to a population addressing risks and related factors.
Mastery
Methodology with screening measures and support are properly applied to a specific population addressing risks and related factors.
United States Preventive Services Task Force followed
Competency
Guidelines are identified and relate to the screening population, and some features per directions.
Mastery
Guidelines are identified and are relevant to the screening population, and key features per directions.
Critical Analysis
Competency
Conducts a preliminary literature review of the support used in the guideline.
Mastery
Conducts a thorough literature review of the support used in the guideline.

Total Competency Criteria:
Total Mastery Criteria:

CLA and Grade Criteria Chart

CRITERIA	CLA Score	Grade	Points
Meets all competency criteria and 50%-100% of mastery criteria	5	A	1000
Meets all competency criteria and 0%-49% of mastery criteria	4	B	850
Meets 75%-99% of competency criteria	3	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 50%-75% of competency criteria	2	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 1%-49% of competency criteria	1	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 0 competency criteria	0	Not Yet Competent*	0
No submission	NA	Not Yet Competent*	0

*Not Yet Competent grades convert to an F at term end *If work submitted for this competency assessment does not meet the minimum submission requirements, it will be returned for revision without being scored. If the work submitted does not meet the minimum submission requirements by the end of the term you will receive a failing score.

MN505M1-1 Individual Screening Example Solution Paper

Preventive healthcare is integral in preventing mortality and morbidity. Preventing health interventions range from primary to tertiary interventions. Health screening is essential as a preventative measure and also a diagnostic measure. Healthcare providers should assess patient needs to determine the best screening interventions for them. This essay evaluates a condition, the best screening intervention, and the supporting literature for the intervention.

Condition and Screening

The condition of interest is breast cancer. The choice screening is Cervical Cancer screening for women aged 21-65. Cervical cancer is the hyperproliferation of cervical epithelial cells. The type (name) and severity of cervix cancer depend on the affected cells and their location. Cervical cancers are named after the cells involved, and the major type of cervical cancer is squamous cell carcinoma. The choice screening is Cervical cancer screening: women aged 21 to 65. The risk for cervical cancer increases with age and other factors. USPSTF recommends screening for cervical cancer every three years with cervical cytology alone in women aged 21 to 29. For women aged 30 to 65 years, the USPSTF recommends screening every three years with cervical cytology alone, every five years with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing alone, or every five years with hrHPV testing in combination with cytology (co-testing) (Fontham et al., 2020).

Epidemiology of Condition

Cervical cancers are the fourth most diagnosed/common cancer and the fourth leading cause of death. The five-year survival rate for cervical cancer differs in age, ethnicity, and race, with an average of 66%: 71% in white women and 58% in black women (Islami et al., 2019). In 2018, Cervical cancer was the leading cause of cancer death for women. However, the increase in diagnostic and preventive measures has greatly improved prognosis over the last 40 years, reducing mortality and morbidity. Around 600 000 cases and 300000 deaths are reported each year (Islami et al., 2019). Cervical cancer management entails surgical procedures, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, emphasizing retention of reproductive system integrity. Cervical surgery and hysterectomy in metastatic cancer lead to loss of fertility and pelvic integrity. Thus, cervical cancer leads to mortalities and morbidity in a majority of the surviving population.

Methodology

Cervical cancer screening among women between 21-65 is integral. The growth of reproductive system cells is under hormonal influence. The guideline addresses two risk factors which are sexual activity and hormonal regulations (Fontham et al., 2019). AS mentioned earlier, cell division and growth in the reproductive organs are dependent on hormonal levels. Hormonal imbalance may lead to hyperproliferation of cells creating cell abnormalities, hence cancer development. Infection of the cervix is prevalent in sexually active women because the human papillomavirus has to access the cervix to cause an infection (Kim et al., 2018). The risk is higher in women with higher parities hence the need for additional tests- cytology for women aged 30 to 65 years (Bookswofie et al., 2020). Hormonal regulation is absent or markedly decreased in women. Cytology studies study abnormal cells and diagnose them based on cell characteristics. Unlike other cancers, cervical cancer majorly involves squamous cells. A high vaginal swab collects cells for cytology from women in the mentioned age category. Testing for human papillomavirus is vital because HPV is the leading cause of infective cervical cancer; it causes over 99% of cervical cancers (Swiecki‐Sikora et al., 2019).

Guideline

The USPSTF recommended intervention in cervical cancer screening has three options: hrHPV, cytology, and co-testing. It recommends every three years with cervical cytology alone in women aged 21 to 29 years. For women aged 30 to 65 years, the USPSTF recommends screening every three years with cervical cytology alone, every five years with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing alone, or every five years with hrHPV testing in combination with cytology (co-testing). Sexually active women are given more priority in this testing. HPV causes over 99% of all cervical cancers. The American Cancer Society updated the cervical cancer screening tests and recommended preliminary hrHPV testing as the preferred screening option for average-risk women aged between 25 and 65 years in 2020 (Fontham et al., 2020). It also recommends the rise of HPV tests to begin at age 25.

Critical Analysis

The hrHPV tests are preferred to diagnose cervical cancer but are associated with low specificity (hence a high number of false positives) and colposcopy (Bedell et al., 2020). Cytology alone has low sensitivity in detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. According to Fontahm et al. (2020), hrHPV and cytology tests are recommended for women at higher risks for cervical cancer aged 25 to 65 years. ACS also recommends phasing out cytology testing due to their widespread shortfalls. The acceptability and application of hrHPV tests are limited by the small number of FDA-approved tests (there are only two FDA-approved tests apparently) and their costs. According to Guo et al. (2018), national rates of HPV vaccines have been increasing gradually, hence a gradual decrease in HPV infections and the corresponding cervical cancer rates. However, Swiecki‐Sikora et al. (2019) state that the vaccination rates in the country fall way below the national targets. The vaccination coverage and vaccination resistance in the nation are high. Raising the age would place the vulnerable populations without HPV vaccine at risk for developing cervical cancer unnoticed. Thus, that consideration can be made after achieving national HPV vaccination targets. Despite expanding cervical cancer screening options, cervical cytology, hrHPV, and co-testing effectively diagnose precancer and cancerous lesions (Rerucha et al., 2018). Fontham et al. (2020) emphasize that the specific strategy is less important than the overall adherence to testing. Healthcare providers should stress the importance of adherence to cervical screening.

Summary

The screening guideline discussed above helps detect cervical cancer early, thus providing room for treatment. Women of reproductive age and post-menopausal women are the populations of interest due to the risk exposure. Cytology, hrHPV, and co-testing are the available cancer screening methods. These screenings also give room for health education to the clients. As seen above, adherence to these screening tests is more important than deciding on the test of choice because they are all effective. Preventing cancer development is integral to reduce the associated mortalities and morbidity.

References

Bedell, S. L., Goldstein, L. S., Goldstein, A. R., & Goldstein, A. T. (2020). Cervical cancer screening: past, present, and future. Sexual Medicine Reviews, 8(1), 28-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2019.09.005 Buskwofie, A., David-West, G., & Clare, C. A. (2020). A review of cervical cancer: incidence and disparities. Journal of the National Medical Association, 112(2), 229-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnma.2020.03.002 Fontham, E. T., Wolf, A. M., Church, T. R., Etzioni, R., Flowers, C. R., Herzig, A., Etzioni, R., Flowers, c. r., Herzig, A., Guerra, C. E., Oeffinger, K. C., Shih, T. C., Walter, L. C., Kim J. J., Andrews, K. S., DeSantis, E. C., Fedewa, S. A., Manassaram-Baptiste, D., Saslow, D., and & Smith, R. A. (2020). Cervical cancer screening for individuals at average risk: 2020 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA: A Cancer Journal For Clinicians, 70(5), 321-346. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21628 Guo, F., Cofie, L. E., & Berenson, A. B. (2018). Cervical cancer incidence in young US females after human papillomavirus vaccine introduction. American journal of Preventive Medicine, 55(2), 197-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.03.013 Islami, F., Fedewa, S. A., & Jemal, A. (2019). Trends in cervical cancer incidence rates by age, race/ethnicity, histological subtype, and stage at diagnosis in the United States. Preventive Medicine, 123, 316-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.04.010 Kim, J. J., Burger, E. A., Regan, C., & Sy, S. (2018). Screening for cervical cancer in primary care: a decision analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA, 320(7), 706-714. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19872 Rerucha, C. M., Caro, R., & Wheeler, V. (2018). Cervical cancer screening. American Family Physician, 97(7), 441-448. https://www.aafp.org/afp/2018/0401/p441.html Swiecki‐Sikora, A. L., Henry, K. A., & Kepka, D. (2019). HPV vaccination coverage among US teens across the rural‐urban continuum. The Journal of Rural Health, 35(4), 506-517. https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12353

MN505M2-2: Apply a theory or model of health-related concepts to a community intervention.

Community Needs and Health Screening Initiative Directions For this assignment, you will pick one recommended screening from United States Preventive Task Force A and B Recommendations. An initiative is a project, an event, so something in the community is ideal. Workplace location for employees is fine too. Please include the following suggested level one headings so content is clear and easily identified. Theory or Conceptual Model

Identify a health promotion program theory or conceptual model and describe.
Explain how the model or theory applies to the initiative is present.

Population Screening Purpose

Identify the screening topic as an A or B preventive screening from the USPSTF.
Include two components of topic related community statistics numerically (e.g., mortality, prevalence).
Describe target population characteristics.
Include age and sex or risk factor and matches the guidelines.
Clarify the county and or neighborhood of the population.
Provide descriptions on the local population to be screened, including three components: number of persons in the county possibly affected based on sex, age, and racial diversity of the county or state.
Include current rates of screening or factors that would impact the need for screening.

Location/ Setting

Demonstrate details of the community or workplace event, including three components: type of area or building, time, and day (e.g., Monroe County Senior Center at 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. 4/20/21).
Include reasoning and explanation of appropriateness.

Screening Activity Screening activity plan meets the preventive guidelines process, is descriptive, and includes:

Education component description
Measures tested
Shows evidence the tests are aligned with guideline recommendations
Demonstrates possible positive measure/ normal and abnormal ranges
Follow up and referral content process included
Three clear and measurable outcome goals are included
Explanation of how each outcome is affected by the activity

Cost Detailed cost analysis to perform screening is provided in table form includes the six following line items but not limited to a table containing:

Testing instrument costs with source for pricing
Staff costs- as appropriate for screening
Rental cost- estimate
Simple supply costs
Any attendee cost
Total

(May use volunteer staff but not donations of items. Cost analysis for feasibility needs demonstrated.) Cost analysis total and summary statement should be included. Summary Provide a summary of your screening, general benefit to the community, and why it is important. A person should be able to read your paper and understand fully what you are screening, where, when, the costs, and how it is supported in the guideline. Ideally, a person would be able to duplicate your screening initiative based on the clarity you present. Format expectations:

Follows all assignment directions.
Introduction and conclusion are included.
Information in paragraphs and paper organized to convey the content to the reader.
Paper length paper should be 3–4 pages of content.
Follows APA in paper format, reference page, in-text citations, or headings.
Uses four or more credible peer-reviewed sources.

Master’s-prepared nurse educators, leaders, nurse practitioners, and all specialty nursing fields are contributors to health promotion in populations across the life span. This assignment is focused on preventive screening applications in the community, workplace, or school settings. You should be able to apply this knowledge to their specialty focus related to health promotion and epidemiology. Minimum Submission Requirements

This assessment should be a Microsoft Word 3–4 pages of content in document, in addition to the title and reference pages.
Respond to the questions in a thorough manner, providing specific examples of concepts, topics, definitions, and other elements asked for in the questions. Your submission should be highly organized, logical, and focused.
Your submission should provide a clearly established and sustained viewpoint and purpose.
Your writing should be well ordered, logical, and unified, as well as original and insightful.
Your submission must be written in Standard English and demonstrate exceptional content, organization, style, and grammar and mechanics.
A separate page at the end of your submission should contain a list of references in APA format. Use your textbook, the Library, and the internet for research.
Be sure to include references for all sources and to cite them using in-text citations where appropriate. Your sources and content should follow current APA citation style. Review the writing resources for APA formatting and citation found in Academic Tools. Additional writing resources can be found within the Academic Success Center.
Your submission should:
- include a title page;
- be double-spaced;
- be typed in Times New Roman, 12 -point font; and
- be free of spelling or punctuation errors.

Competency Assessment Rubric

	MET	NOT YET MET
Conceptual model
Competency
A health promotion theory or conceptual model chosen.
Mastery
A health promotion theory or conceptual model chosen and applied to initiative.
Population Screening purpose
Competency
Reason for screening population is noted via community statistics/ assessment data and supported in the guideline.
Mastery
Reason for screening population is explained in detail via community statistics/ assessment data and supported in the guideline.
Location/Setting
Competency
Setting for screening is provided and is appropriate for community or workplace preventive intervention.
Mastery
Setting for screening is provided with details, and is appropriate for community or workplace preventive intervention.
Screening Activity with Explanation of Outcome/Goals
Competency
Screening activity plan is included and lists some components.
Mastery
Screening activity plan is descriptive and includes all components
Cost
Competency
Cost analysis to perform screening is provided including table and components.
Mastery
Detailed cost analysis to perform screening is provided including table and components.
Summary
Competency
Summary includes components in directions including general benefit to the community.
Mastery
Summary includes components in directions including general benefit to the community and why it is important.

Total Competency Criteria:
Total Mastery Criteria:

CLA and Grade Criteria Chart

CRITERIA	CLA Score	Grade	Points
Meets all competency criteria and 50%-100% of mastery criteria	5	A	1000
Meets all competency criteria and 0%-49% of mastery criteria	4	B	850
Meets 75%-99% of competency criteria	3	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 50%-75% of competency criteria	2	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 1%-49% of competency criteria	1	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 0 competency criteria	0	Not Yet Competent*	0
No submission	NA	Not Yet Competent*	0

MN505M3-3: Analyze health promotion and illness prevention risk factors in a multicultural context.

PC-4.3: Apply concepts of multiculturalism and diversity to become an agent of change. Health Statistics and Populations Directions Consider you are preparing for a project to evaluate multicultural impact and diversity within a health condition. You will select a health topic of interest such as breastfeeding, domestic violence, or juvenile diabetes that affects a specific population such as older adults, women of reproductive age, or race diversity related to a condition. Locate health statistics for your selections. You must include national and state data, and may also include local county or city data if available. Access the Assignment Grid. Follow the guide directions in the left-hand column of the grid for each section. Research content regarding concepts of multiculturalism and diversity, and include interventions that address health disparities. Population of Interest and Condition

Identify and define a health condition or event.
Define the population by gender, age, and health status.
Identify cultural aspects in the literature review.

Search Process

Detail the search process and summarize three components of health sources used in the project.
Include names of journals, organizations, and agencies for health statistics.
Include state and national resources.
Include search criteria such as keywords and date ranges of sources.

Health Information

Document relevant health information obtained from the search, including four components of the topic: clinical health information, associated risk factors, significant statistics, and local and national epidemiological trends related to change in the US and global settings.

Research Findings

Demonstrate disparities statistically.
Address two evidence-based clinical interventions that are designed to reduce the specific disparities in the examined population.
Include two multicultural aspects of these interventions.
In the literature application, demonstrate concepts of multiculturalism and diversity to become an agent of change.
Include two clinical guidelines or evidence-based management/treatment of the overall health topic to support your stance.

Summary You will provide a summation of your review. Examples of concepts may include personal beliefs and values, the benefits of diverse perspectives, the importance of tolerance, etc. Provide examples of how to bridge cultural differences and build effective relationships for improved health outcomes on the topic. Tab 2 Format Expectations

Follows all assignment directions.
Information is inputted in the provided grid.
Information within sections is organized to convey the content to the reader.
Content grid should be 3–4 pages of information.
May be single-spaced. Bulleting may be used. Contains less than two APA errors in paper format, reference page, in-text citations, or headings.
Includes a title page and reference page.
Uses six or more credible peer-reviewed sources.

Carefully consider the directions in each section of the table. There should be substantive information in the last two sections particularly. Do not alter the left-hand column. Master’s-prepared nurse educators, leaders, nurse practitioners, and all specialty nursing fields contribute to health promotion in populations across the life span. This assignment is focused on the analysis of epidemiological and health information, including illness prevention, risk factors disparities, and intervention. Students should be able to integrate these concepts in a multicultural context to their specialty focus related to health promotion and epidemiology.

Competency Assessment Rubric

	MET	NOT YET MET
Population of interest and condition
Competency
A population of interest and health condition or event are represented. The population and condition are present.
Mastery
A population of interest and health condition or event are clearly represented. The population and condition are clearly defined.
Search process
Competency
The search process is summarized. Heath sources are presented.
Mastery
The search process is detailed and summarized clearly. Heath sources are presented along with details of the students search process, such as keywords and date ranges of sources
Health information
Competency
Relevant health information obtained in the search is documented. Information is accurate.
Mastery
Relevant health information obtained in the search is well documented. Information is accurate and current.
Research findings
Competency
Research findings and evidence of health disparities based on examined population are noted and documented. Interventions and examples are included.
Mastery
Research findings and evidence of health disparities based on examined population are fully explained and well documented. Interventions and examples are included and well detailed.
Summary
Competency
Examples present of how to bridge cultural differences and build relationships for improved health outcomes on the topic.
Mastery
Detailed examples present of how to bridge cultural differences and build effective relationships for improved health outcomes on the topic.

Total Competency Criteria:
Total Mastery Criteria:

CLA and Grade Criteria Chart

CRITERIA	CLA Score	Grade	Points
Meets all competency criteria and 50%-100% of mastery criteria	5	A	1000
Meets all competency criteria and 0%-49% of mastery criteria	4	B	850
Meets 75%-99% of competency criteria	3	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 50%-75% of competency criteria	2	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 1%-49% of competency criteria	1	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 0 competency criteria	0	Not Yet Competent*	0
No submission	NA	Not Yet Competent*	0

Applying Concepts of Multiculturalism and Diversity Example Solution

Unit 6 Assignment Grid

Data Search Directions	Summarize Your Findings
Identify the population of interest and health condition or event to your practice. Specify how you define the population (e.g., age, gender, health status, etc.).	Healthcare disparities are controllable society or community differences in access to healthcare services and disease burden. Type 2 diabetes is a chronic health condition and a global health issue. About 450 million individuals globally have diabetes, and more than 1 million people die of diabetes each year, making it a leading cause of death (Khan et al., 2020). Different ages and populations are affected by the condition. According to the American Diabetes Association, diabetes is the most expensive condition, and more than 20% of the healthcare spending is on diabetes (Khan et al., 2020). Type 2 diabetes is more prevalent among adults above 18, accounting for over 90% of all cases (CDC, 2021). Diabetes affects both genders, but female Hispanics/Latinos are more affected. The prevalence of diabetes and the severity of diabetes complications is highest in this population.
Summarize your search process. Specify what sources, organizations, and agencies for health statistics were searched to find relevant health statistics. Be specific and thorough in your search.	Some reputable databases provided data to inform the analysis. They include Cochrane Library (Wiley), PubMed, Medline, and EBSCO databases. They provide peer-reviewed healthcare articles that are well structured to inform research and provide healthcare data. In addition to these databases, various healthcare organizations were integral in the search. These organizations are the CDC, WHO, IHI, AHRQ, and ADA (American Diabetes Association). These organizations provided evidence from national and regional high-level studies and programs. The data was searched using various keywords such as “diabetes burden,” “diabetes and Hispanic Americans,” “Diabetes health disparities,” and “Diabetes racial predisposition. The literature search results were filtered to include data from 2018 up to date.
Provide the health information obtained in the search. Include new research. Include any significant statistics and information on healthrisk factors trends local (state) US national epidemiology data on your topic.	According to the CDC, all individuals have at least a 40% chance of getting type 2 diabetes in their lifetime, and the risk is higher among Hispanic Americans with over 66% chance (CDC, 2021). The risk is also relatively high among African Americans and Asian Americas. Genetics, food/ eating habits, and activity/weight are the significant risk factors for type 2 diabetes. Most Latinos view being overweight as a sign of health and not ill-health, and their foods are high in fats and calories (CDC, 2021). A family history of diabetes also exposes one to diabetes, but the genetic risk is complicated. According to Khan et al., 2020), about 37.3 million (11.8%) US citizens have diabetes. The rates are steadily rising, significantly in the developed countries. Khan et al. (2020) explain that the prevalence of diabetes is expected to project to 21% from 1. According to Hill-Briggs et al. (2021), minority groups such as Hispanics and African Americans face various social and environmental problems and genetic risks. According to the American Diabetes Association (2019), US diabetes prevalence as of 2019 was as follows: 7.4% of non-Hispanic whites, 14.5% of American Indians, 11.8% of Hispanics, 9.5% of Asian Americans, and 12.1% African American. The Hispanics in the state (Georgia) are relatively higher than the general population (CDC, 2021).
Interpret your findings and determine if there is any evidence of health disparities based on the population examined. Address multicultural factors that influence the health issue. Address clinical guidelines/ evidence-based management of the overall health topic with interventions and programs to improve health disparities. Provide a summation of your review with examples of how to bridge cultural differences and build effective relationships for improved health outcomes on the topic.	Healthcare disparities exist in access and utilization of diabetes health services among Hispanic Americans. According to the presented evidence, the risk and severity of diabetes are higher in Hispanic Americans than in the general population (Khan et al., 2020; CDC, 2021; ADA, 2021). These disparities are caused by genetic exposure and cultural, communication, and financial barriers to healthcare access. These disparities and their risk factors will be addressed in other sections in this paper. The major cultural factors that affect diabetes include eating habits, healthcare-seeking behavior, and weight/ activity (CDC, 2021). Diet and exercise have a significant effect on diabetes risk and management. Poor eating habits such as foods rich in calories and fats carry a significant risk of developing insulin resistance, the conditions underlying the condition. Failure to exercise leads to low body metabolism, overweight, and obesity, increasing the risks for diabetes (ADA, 2021). Vigorous exercises also help reduce weight and the risk of other conditions such as cardiovascular disease and stroke. The population also has lower education and social class, hence financial disparities that reduce access to quality healthcare services (CDC, 2021). These disparities can be addressed, According to WHO and ADA diabetes management frameworks, dieting, exercise, and medications are the best management interventions according to individual needs (ADA, 2021; WHO, 2018 ). Some individuals achieve effective glycemic control with proper dieting and exercise. Individuals with resistant diabetes require daily insulin or medications. The existing guidelines also recommend yearly diabetic foot exams, eye exams, and HbA1c tests as part of the follow-up program (ADA, 2021). Diabetes education is an integral part of diabetes management. Existing evidence shows that diabetes education is essential in promoting patients’ self-efficacy and self-management and ensuring better patient health outcomes (Ghisi et al., 2021). Diabetes is a chronic and expensive healthcare condition, as discussed earlier. The burden of the disease is higher among Hispanic adults. The risk factors are genetic, social, and environmental factors hence the need to address the healthcare problem. Addressing these factors can thus significantly improve the burden in this population. Mass education programs, like those carried out by the National Diabetes Education Program targeting, are integral in sensitizing the people of the significant health risks associated with diabetes. Health education leads to improved health-seeking and promotes responsible health behavior. In addition, education increases awareness of available resources, increasing their access and utilization. Communication and financial barriers to healthcare access. Providing translators and good healthcare insurance systems effectively increases individuals’ access to healthcare services. Al Shamsi et al. (2020) state that ineffective communication leads to poor communication, poor patient-nurse relationships, increased errors, hence the need for translators or translating systems in multicultural communities. Another effective way of bridging cultural differences is sensitizing healthcare providers of these community differences (Hill-Briggs et al., 2021). Informing healthcare providers ensures they recognize and respect cultural differences and assist patients in achieving health statuses despite the cultural differences. Healthcare insurance acts and policies such as Universal Health Coverage, Medicare, and Affordable Care Act have been the frontline in reducing healthcare disparities and financial barriers to healthcare access (Iqbal, 2019). Economic empowerment through easier access to healthcare insurance significantly improves an individual’s health. According to Iqbal (2019), financing healthcare significantly improves access to healthcare services and can thus reduce the healthcare disparities in these minority groups. The government and healthcare institutions leaders should take these issues seriously to manage the healthcare disparities and reduce the high diabetes burden among Hispanic whites.

References

ADA’s Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes. (2021). Clinical diabetes: a publication of the American Diabetes Association, 39(1), 128. https://doi.org/10.2337/cd21-pe01 Al Shamsi, H., Almutairi, A. G., Al Mashrafi, S., & Al Kalbani, T. (2020). Implications of language barriers for healthcare: a systematic review. Oman Medical Journal, 35(2), e122.https://dx.doi.org/10.5001/omj.2020.40 American Diabetes Association, (2019). Statistics About Diabetes. Overall numbers. https://www.diabetes.org/about-us/statistics/about-diabetes Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2021). Hispanic/Latino Americans and Type 2 Diabetes. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/library/features/hispanic-diabetes.html Cheng, Y. J., Kanaya, A. M., Araneta, M. R. G., Saydah, S. H., Kahn, H. S., Gregg, E. W., Fujimoto, W. Y., & Imperatore, G. (2019). Prevalence of diabetes by race and ethnicity in the United States, 2011-2016. JAMA, 322(24), 2389-2398.https://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.19365 Ghisi, G. L. D. M., Seixas, M. B., Pereira, D. S., Cisneros, L. L., Ezequiel, D. G. A., Aultman, C., & da Silva, L. P. (2021). Patient education program for Brazilians living with diabetes and prediabetes: findings from a development study. BMC Public Health, 21(1), 1-16.https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11300-y Hill-Briggs, F., Adler, N. E., Berkowitz, S. A., Chin, M. H., Gary-Webb, T. L., Navas-Acien, A., Thornton, P. L., & Haire-Joshu, D. (2021). Social determinants of health and diabetes: a scientific review. Diabetes Care, 44(1), 258-279.https://doi.org/10.2337/dci20-0053 Iqbal, M. H. (2019). Disparities of health service for the poor in the coastal area: does Universal health coverage reduce disparities?. Journal Of Market Access & Health Policy, 7(1), 1575683. https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/jegh.k.191028.001 World Health Organization (WHO) (2018). WHO Guidelines on Diabetes Management in Low-Resource Settings. https://www.jwatch.org/na47446/2018/09/20/who-guidelines-diabetes-management-low-resource-settings

MN505M4-4: Develop An Evidence-Based Health Promotion Program To Reduce Health Risks Of A Vulnerable Population.

This competency assessment assesses the following Outcome(s): MN505M4-4: Develop an evidence-based health promotion program to reduce health risks of a vulnerable population. Immunization Presentation Directions For this assignment you are creating a PowerPoint® presentation. Your presentation audience is the community. Master’s-prepared nurse educators, leaders, nurse practitioners, and all specialty nursing fields contribute to health promotion in populations across the life span. This assignment is focused on child and adolescent immunization, health information, epidemiology, and surrounding influences. This is not on a singular immunization but pediatric immunization education for a community audience. Presentation Content and Slides:

Content slides: 12–14 are required.
Each slide’s speaker notes must have two paragraphs of content. Each slide should have substantive content on the slide and further information in the speaker notes.
Include bulleted and professional graphics.

Immunity

Content on slides should include three components of information: immunity, herd immunity, and types of immunity related to vaccination.

Effects of Immunization

Content on slides should include three components of information on the effects of immunization: individual, community, and worldwide.

Trends

Content on slides should include components of information: pediatric vaccination trends, related disease trends, including statistics for conditions prevented with pediatric vaccinations.

Myths

Content on slides should include at least four documented myths about vaccinations with published information to debunk.

Pediatric Schedule

Content on slides should include a pediatric vaccination schedule for infants, children, and teens.

Legal, Ethical and Cultural Issues

Content on slide should include three components on slides: legal, ethical, and cultural considerations of pediatric vaccinations.

Format Expectations:

Include a title slide, conclusion slide, and reference slide (do not count toward total content slide number).
Use at least four credible resources.
There is no audio or voice in this assignment.
Presentation is a professional design and style; succinct, not overly wordy; with appropriate text and visual appeal; and accurate and complete content.
Use appropriate APA formatting and citation style.

Submit your assignment to the Competency Assessment Dropbox.

Save a copy of your work.
Confirm that your assignment file uploaded correctly.

This assessment should be a PowerPoint file and follow the formatting directions within the assessment, in addition to the title and reference slides.
Respond to the questions in a thorough manner, providing specific examples of concepts, topics, definitions, and other elements asked for in the questions. Your submission should be highly organized, logical, and focused.
Your submission should provide a clearly established and sustained viewpoint and purpose.
Your writing should be well ordered, logical, and unified, as well as original and insightful.
Your submission must be written in Standard English and demonstrate exceptional content, organization, style, and grammar and mechanics.
A separate page at the end of your submission should contain a list of references in APA format. Use your textbook, the Library, and the internet for research.
Be sure to include references for all sources and to cite them using in-text citations where appropriate. Your sources and content should follow current APA citation style. Review the writing resources for APA formatting and citation found in Academic Tools. Additional writing resources can be found within the Academic Success Center.

MN505M4 Competency Assessment Rubric

	MET	NOT YET MET
Immunity
Competency
Content on slides and speaker notes on: herd immunity, types of immunity related to vaccination.
Mastery
Comprehensive content on slides and speaker notes on: herd immunity, types of immunity related to vaccination.
Effects of Immunization
Competency
Content on slides and speaker notes on: individual, community and worldwide effects of immunization.
Mastery
Comprehensive content on slides and speaker notes on: individual, community and worldwide effects of immunization.
Trends
Competency
Content on slides and speaker notes on: vaccination trends, and disease statistics for those conditions prevented with vaccination.
Mastery
Comprehensive content on slides and speaker notes on: vaccination trends, and disease statistics for those conditions prevented with vaccination.
Myths
Competency
Content on slides and speaker notes on: common vaccination myths and published support to debunk.
Mastery
Comprehensive content on slides and speaker notes on: common vaccination myths and published support to debunk.
Immunization schedule
Competency
Pediatric vaccination schedule is included in slides.
Mastery
Pediatric vaccination schedule is included in slides and speaker notes.
Legal, ethical, and cultural considerations
Competency
Content on slides and speaker notes on: legal, ethical and cultural considerations.
Mastery
Comprehensive content on slides and speaker notes on: legal, ethical and cultural considerations.

Total Competency Criteria:
Total Mastery Criteria:

CLA and Grade Criteria Chart

CRITERIA	CLA Score	Grade	Points
Meets all competency criteria and 50%-100% of mastery criteria	5	A	1000
Meets all competency criteria and 0%-49% of mastery criteria	4	B	850
Meets 75%-99% of competency criteria	3	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 50%-75% of competency criteria	2	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 1%-49% of competency criteria	1	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 0 competency criteria	0	Not Yet Competent*	0
No submission	NA	Not Yet Competent*	0

MN50M5-5: Evaluate Interprofessional Health Promotion Resources.

This competency assessment assesses the following Outcome(s): MN50M5-5: Evaluate interprofessional health promotion resources. Diverse Populations, Age, and Interprofessional Health Promotion Resources This paper is a 3- to 4-page project that analyzes interprofessional resources on one health topic for the adult population throughout the adult lifespan. What interprofessional resources exist for the topic? Also, consider using terms such as multidisciplinary and team-based care in your search related to the topic. The adult lifespan, young, middle, and older adult, by ages/ranges in adulthood, should be addressed clearly via the epidemiology of the condition. Are there interventions that benefit the outcome? Epidemiological support and evidence-based practice guidelines should be included in the paper. Topic Defined Throughout the Adult Life Span

Define topic. Definition should include content related to young, middle, and older adults and should not include teen or childhood content.

Epidemiology

Define the epidemiology of the condition in the United States via three epidemiology terms numerically.
Define statistics by young, middle, and older adults or by specific age ranges in adulthood.

Interventions

Explain one clinical management guideline with 2–3 criteria considerations.

Interprofessional Collaboration

Provide 4–5 specific examples of interprofessional roles and functions for the collaborative management of the condition.
Include two studies addressing interprofessional collaboration.

Summary

Summarize the general interprofessional collaborative content related to the topic and the benefit to populations.
Include why it is important.

Tab 2 Format Expectations:

Follows all assignment directions.
Introduction and conclusion are included.
Information in paragraphs and paper organized to convey the content to the reader.
Paper length paper should be 3–4 pages of content.
Follows APA in paper format, reference page, in-text citations, or headings.
Uses four or more credible peer-reviewed sources.

Resources on interprofessional collaboration should be clear and supported with evidence-based sources. Analysis of interprofessional collaboration covers all aspects of nursing. Master’s-prepared nurse educators, leaders, nurse practitioners, and all specialty nursing fields contribute to health promotion in populations across the life span. This assignment is focused on the adult. You should choose a topic that affects your area of specialty focus as it relates to health promotion and epidemiology. Minimum Submission Requirements

This assessment should be a Microsoft Word, 3–4 pages of content in document, in addition to the title and reference pages.
Respond to the questions in a thorough manner, providing specific examples of concepts, topics, definitions, and other elements asked for in the questions. Your submission should be highly organized, logical, and focused.
Your submission should provide a clearly established and sustained viewpoint and purpose.
Your writing should be well ordered, logical, and unified, as well as original and insightful.
Your submission must be written in Standard English and demonstrate exceptional content, organization, style, and grammar and mechanics.
A separate page at the end of your submission should contain a list of references in APA format. Use your textbook, the Library, and the internet for research.
Be sure to include references for all sources and to cite them using in-text citations where appropriate. Your sources and content should follow current APA citation style. Review the writing resources for APA formatting and citation found in Academic Tools. Additional writing resources can be found within the Academic Success Center.
Your submission should:
- include a title page;
- be double-spaced;
- be typed in Times New Roman, 12-point font; and
- be free of spelling or punctuation errors.

MN50M5-5 Competency Assessment Rubric

Competency Assessment Rubric

	MET	NOT YET MET
Topic
Competency
Topic is defined as it affects adults throughout the lifespan.
Mastery
Topic is clearly defined as it affects adults throughout the lifespan.
Epidemiology
Competency
Epidemiological information and statistics are included in the paper.
Mastery
Epidemiological information and statistics are included in the paper, accurately and applied appropriately.
Interventions
Competency
Addresses interventions via clinical management guideline.
Mastery
Addresses interventions via clinical management guideline and specifics.
Interprofessional Collaboration
Competency
Several examples of resources for interprofessional collaboration with studies.
Mastery
Several examples of resources for interprofessional collaboration with studies; clear, well developed and supported with evidence-based support.
Summary
Competency
General interprofessional collaborative benefit to populations.
Mastery
General interprofessional collaborative benefit to populations and why it is important.

Total Competency Criteria:
Total Mastery Criteria:

CLA and Grade Criteria Chart

CRITERIA	CLA Score	Grade	Points
Meets all competency criteria and 50%-100% of mastery criteria	5	A	1000
Meets all competency criteria and 0%-49% of mastery criteria	4	B	850
Meets 75%-99% of competency criteria	3	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 50%-75% of competency criteria	2	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 1%-49% of competency criteria	1	Not Yet Competent*	0
Meets 0 competency criteria	0	Not Yet Competent*	0
No submission	NA	Not Yet Competent*	0

Diverse Populations, Age, and Interprofessional Health Promotion Resources Example Solution

Diabetes is a chronic illness and a rising global crisis. Diabetes is divided into type 1 and type 2, depending on the cause. The chronic illness is notorious for its high healthcare costs across the lifetime because individuals are treated throughout their life. The disease complicates health and the management of other healthcare conditions, and it worsens with progression in age due to growing insulin resistance and the progressive inability to produce insulin. It is the world’s 8^th leading cause of death and death from acute conditions such as COVID-19, acute renal failure, infections, and cardiovascular diseases (American Diabetes Association, 2018). The diabetes burden is thus higher in adults, and its management requires interprofessional collaboration due to the various cohorts of life affected. This essay explores the diabetes burden and management in adults.

Epidemiology

Diabetes is more prevalent in the adult population due to progressive complications in adulthood. Various organizations such as the American diabetes association, CDC, and WHO collect data and report on the prevalence, mortality, and morbidity and provide strategies to manage these conditions adequately. Young adults are individuals above 18years to 45 years, middle-adulthood 45-65 years, and older adults above 60 years old. According to the 2020 national diabetes statistics report, 34.2million or 10.5% of the US population have diabetes (CDC, 2020). Over 7million did not know that they have diabetes, raising the need for elaborate diabetes diagnosis plans in primary care settings. According to the report, diabetes affects about 3% of the younger adults, 13.8% of the middle-aged adults, and 21.4% of the older adults (CDC, 2020). The numbers are adjusted by undiagnosed diabetes, where individuals have the condition but are unaware. Diabetes mortality is higher in adults, and it’s the world’s 8^th leading cause of death after coronary heart disease and other conditions (CDC, 2022). Diabetes complicates illnesses and is a major cause of morbidity. Diabetes is a leading cause of blindness and deafness in older adults, diabetic foot complications, loss of function, amputations, hypertension, and acute renal injury (CDC, 2020). Diabetes exposes individuals to severe infection, and statistics show that diabetes-related infections lie at 6%, while 12% of infection-related deaths have diabetes as the major diagnosis. Diabetes prevalence increases with advancing age, and the condition is associated with high morbidity and mortality.

Clinical Management

Hafida et al. (2018) is a complex clinical diabetes management guideline with various interventions and considerations for older adults. The guideline encompasses the educational and health needs of the adults, owing to their higher vulnerability to the disease. Physical ability, teachability (have various educational needs), and immunity (grows weaker with aging) are factors to consider when determining the best interventions for diabetes management in this population (Hafida et al., 2018). Individuals with underlying conditions such as obesity, liver, renal, and heart diseases should be referred to specialists for more focused management. People with diabetes are managed using either three management interventions or a combination depending on the expected outcomes, disease’ stage, and disease severity (Hafida et al., 2018). Pharmacologic management includes medications such as insulin and metformin, which regulate blood sugar levels. The other interventions are dieting and physical exercise. The two interventions prevent diabetes complications and are recommended for all ages with diabetes. For younger adults, diet and exercise can be the mainstay treatment, while in older adults, other conditions complicate management hence the need for pharmacologic interventions. Evidence-based care interventions for diabetes management are the mainstay of treatment. Follow-up entails diabetic foot, eye, and HbA1c monitoring. Patient education is vital in ensuring patients understand their management and comply and participate in the management interventions. Pneumococcal and Influenza vaccines are required for older adults with diabetes (Hafida et al., 2018). It is also vital to address sexual and fertility issues and concerns.

Interprofessional collaboration

Diabetes is a condition that affects various aspects of life besides health, and an interprofessional team-best manages it. However, the interprofessional team should recognize the central role of patients in their care (Kangas et al.,2018). These professionals include nurses, doctors, pharmacists, psychologists, and nutritionists. Physical functioning and psychological health are also important considerations in diabetic patients. Nurses deliver care and periodic patient assessment to inform the medical team. Doctors assess patients and remedy the best interventions to provide individualized patient care. Nutritionists assess the nutritional needs of patients and advice on the diet. They also advise the care team on medical management in severe3 cases. Pharmacists are vital in reviewing medications and ensuring the safety of patient drug administration. Psychologists are vital in helping these individuals cope with their new health conditions and improve care collaboration. Other interventions such as patient education are vital for all these professionals in the care team (Kangas et al., 2018). Nagelkerk et al. (2018) show that interprofessional collaboration improves diabetes patient outcomes. Participation of all professionals ensures holistic patient care by the respective professionals, improving outcomes and the quality of care. Van Nuland et al. (2022) explains the overarching importance of intensive interprofessional collaboration in promoting patient outcomes. The qualitative study shows that each team player has unique roles which meet certain patient needs. Integration of various team members thus leads to better patient outcomes, safety, and quality care delivery.

Summary

Diabetes management in adults is a broad topic. As seen above, diabetes management requires interprofessional collaboration. Professionals have different roles in diabetes management; hence their collaboration is vital. Professionals act as consultants in their field to ensure patients receive appropriate, quality, and safe care. Health education is an important part of diabetes management, and all professionals should provide education to these patients. Professionals’ collaboration improves care provider and patient satisfaction and helps create a conducive working environment. It also leads to better patient outcomes. Hence, interprofessional collaboration is vital in care delivery.

References

American Diabetes Association. (2018). Economic costs of diabetes in the U.U.S. in 2017. Diabetes Care, 41(5), 917-928. https://doi.org/10.2337/dci18-0007 Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2020). National Diabetes Statistics Report 2020; Estimates of Diabetes and its Burden in the United States. US Department of Health and Huma Services. Accessed 14^th April 2022 from https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statistics-report.pdf \ Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), (2022) Diabetes FastStats. National Center for Health Statistics US Department of Health and Huma Services. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/diabetes.htm Hafida, S., Ganda, O. P., & Gabby, R. A., (2018). CHAPTER 1. Clinical Guideline for Adults with Diabetes. Evidence-Based Diabetes Management, 24,7. https://www.ajmc.com/view/chapter-1-clinical-guideline-for-adults-with-diabetes Kangas, S., Rintala, T. M., & Jaatinen, P. (2018). An integrative systematic review of interprofessional education on diabetes. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 32(6), 706-718. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2018.1500453 Nagelkerk, J., Thompson, M. E., Bouthillier, M., Tompkins, A., Baer, L. J., Trytko, J., Booth, A., Stevens, A., & Groeneveld, K. (2018). Improving outcomes in adults with diabetes through an interprofessional collaborative practice program. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 32(1), 4-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1372395 Van Nuland, E., Dumitrescu, I., Scheepmans, K., Paquay, L., De Wandeler, E., & De Vliegher, K. (2022). The Diabetes Team Dynamics Unraveled: A Qualitative Study. Diabetology, 3(1), 246-257. https://doi.org/10.3390/diabetology3010015

MN505 M1-1 Interpret Epidemiologic Data on Morbidity and Mortality Related to Acute and Chronic Disease States