Create a table differentiating the Adult-Gerontology Acute Care Nurse Practitioner and Adult-Gerontology Primary Care Nurse Practitioner competencies.
In a 750-1,000 word paper, describe how you perceive the differences between the specific competencies for the different practitioners. Address how these differences can affect practice in specific clinical areas. Provide individual examples from your own experience.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Table 1: Comparison of Adult Gerontology Acute Care NP and Adult-Gerontology Primary care NP.
|Adult Gerontology Acute CareNurse Practitioner||Adult-Gerontology Primary Care Nurse Practitioner|
|Health Promotion, Health Protection, Disease Prevention and treatment||Same as primary care nurse practitioner, just additional patients are characterized as “unstable, vulnerable in need of acute and critical care management” (AACN, 2012).||Population includes, “entire spectrum of adults including young adults, adults and older adults – provider of direct health care services” (AACN, 2010).|
|A. Assessment of Health status||Same as primary care nurse practitioner, just additional patients more “acute, critical and chronically ill or injured” (AACN, 2012).||Competencies of assessment include “health promotion, health protection and disease prevention” (AACN, 2010).|
|B. Diagnosis of Health status||Competency for diagnosis of health status includes, “physiologic instability or potential to experience rapid physiologic deterioration or life-threatening instability” (AACN, 2012).||Competencies of Diagnosis include, “critical thinking, differential diagnosis and integration and interpretation of data” (AACN, 2010)|
|C. Plan of Care and Implementation of treatment||Same as primary care nurse practitioner||Competencies of Plan of care and implementation include, “stabilizing the individual, minimizing physical and psychological complications, maximizing the individuals health potential and assist with palliative care management” (AACN, 2010).|
|Nurse Practitioner-Patient Relationship||Same as primary care nurse practitioner – but due to critical nature of patients have to be more cognizant of mental status. (AACN, 2012)||Competency for patient relationship includes demonstration of, “personal, collegial and collaborative approach” (AACN, 2010).|
|Teaching-Coaching Function||Same as primary care nurse practitioner – but with the addition of “imparting coping skills” (AACN, 2012)||Competency for teaching includes, “impart knowledge and associated psychomotor skills to individuals, family and other caregivers” (AACN, 2010).|
|Professional Role||Competency is similar to primary care, but “interprofessionalrelationships ..assist with complex acute, critical and chronic illnesses” (AACN, 2012).||Competency in professional role, “commitment to the implementation and evolution and critical thinking” (AACN, 2010).|
|Managing and negotiating health care delivery system||Same as primary care nurse practitioner and in addition “addresses the development and implementation of system policies affecting services” (AACN, 2012).||Competency in Managing the health care system include achievement of, improved health outcomes for “individuals, communities and systems by overseeing an directing the delivery of clinical services” (AACN, 2010).|
|Monitoring and ensuring the quality of health care practice||Same as primary care nurse practitioner||Competencies for monitoring include, “quality of care through consultation, collaboration, continuing education, certification and evaluation” (AACN, 2010).|
|Cultural and Spiritual Competence||Same as primary care nurse practitioner||Competency in cultural and spiritual care includes “delivery of individual cultural and spiritual beliefs..for patients of diverse backgrounds.|
American Association of Colleges of Nursing [AACN] (2010) Adult-Gerontology Primary Care Nurse Practitioner competency, retrieved on 5/12/16 from http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/competencies/adult-geropccomps2010.pdf
American Association of Colleges of Nursing [AACN] (2012) Adult-Gerontology Acute Care Nurse Practitioner competency, retrieved on 5/12/16 from http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/competencies/adult-geroaccompsfinal2012.pdf
Arizona State Board of Nursing [ASBN] (2016) Advanced Practice Advisory Committee, retrieved on 5/12/16 from https://www.azbn.gov/media/1122/ap-committee-meeting-schedule-2016.pdf
Demonstrates full and deep knowledge of the subject. Develops and explains and informed position on the differences in education and training between the ACNPC-AG and FNPC-AG. Integrates the concepts of differing education and training into a solid, convincing thesis. Accurately interprets the position of the Arizona Board of Nursing regarding nurse practitioners in the acute care setting. Integrates table into paper.
|1Unsatisfactory 0-75%0.00%||2Less Than Satisfactory 76-80%80.00%||3Satisfactory 81-88%88.00%||4Good 89-92%92.00%||5Excellent 93-100%100.00%|
|70.0 %Module 1 Rubric|
|70.0 %Subject Knowledge||Does not demonstrate knowledge of the concept. Fails to identify the impact of the published competencies of the Adult-Gerontology Acute Care Nurse Practitioner (ACNPC-AG) versus those of the Adult-Gerontology Primary Care Nurse Practitioner (FNPC-AG).||Demonstrates minimal knowledge of the subject. Does not adequately visualize the Scope of Practice ACNPC-AG compared to that of FNPC-AG. Does not justify the impact of differing didactic and clinical educational preparation.||Demonstrates moderate knowledge of the subject. Recognizes the basic Scope of Practice ACNP compared to that of FNP. Misinterprets evidence and implications of the published competencies differentiating the ACNPC-AG and FNPC-AG.||Demonstrates good knowledge of the subject. Correctly describes the Scope of Practice for the ACNP. Compares and contrasts the ACNPC-AG scope of practice to that of FNPC-AG. States a perspective concerning these differing roles. Justifies some of the impact of the Arizona Board of Nursing White Paper (2009).||Demonstrates full and deep knowledge of the subject. Develops and explains and informed position on the differences in education and training between the ACNPC-AG and FNPC-AG. Integrates the concepts of differing education and training into a solid, convincing thesis. Accurately interprets the position of the Arizona Board of Nursing regarding nurse practitioners in the acute care setting. Integrates table into paper.|
|20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness|
|7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose||Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.||Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.||Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.|
|8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction||Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.||Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.||Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. Presents minimal justification of claims. Logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources are credible. Introduction & conclusion bracket the thesis.||Argument shows logical progression Techniques of argumentation are evident. Smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.||Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.|
|5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)||Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.||Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.||Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.||Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.||Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.|
|5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)||Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.||Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.||Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.||Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.||All format elements are correct.|
|5.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)||No reference page is included. No citations are used.||Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.||Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present||Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.||In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.|
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more