Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion

Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion

Episodic/Focused SOAP Note

Patient Information:

M.B., 9 years, Male

S.

CC: The patient presents with a sore throat that started yesterday and felt warm. The patient did not check their temperature.

HPI: M.B., a 9-year-old male, presents to the clinic with his father and siblings complaining of a sore throat since yesterday. He describes feeling warm at times. He denies nasal drainage, cough, headache, upset stomach, or eye drainage. His appetite is normal, but he reports pain upon swallowing. Siblings are also experiencing similar symptoms.

ORDER  HERE A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Location: Throat Onset: Started yesterday

Character: Soreness, warmth

Associated signs and symptoms: Denies nasal drainage, cough, headache, upset stomach, or eye drainage. Reports pain upon swallowing. Siblings also experiencing similar symptoms.

Timing: Since yesterday

Exacerbating/relieving factors: Not specified

Severity: Not specified

Current Medications: Amoxicillin 400 mg/5 mL oral liquid, 6.25 mL every 12 hours, prescribed for strep throat.

Allergies: Gentamicin ophthalmic (specific reaction not mentioned)

PMHx: Ongoing strep pharyngitis and Circumcision

Soc & Substance Hx (Social & Substance History): Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion

Lives with father, mother, and siblings.

No alcohol use reported.

No electronic cigarette/vaping reported.

One cat in the household.

Regular nutrition, no dietary restrictions.

Sleep without concerns reported.

Fam Hx:

Mother has a history of heart attack.

Mother has a history of Von Willebrand disease.

Surgical Hx: Circumcision

Mental Hx: There’s no mention of this in the case study

Violence Hx: There’s no mention of this in the case study

Reproductive Hx: Not applicable as the patient is a 9-year-old male.

ROS:

GENERAL: Well-appearing, in no distress.

HEENT:

Head: Normocephalic, atraumatic.

Eyes: Conjunctivae clear, sclera non-icteric.

Ears: External auditory canals clear. Tympanic membranes within normal limits.

Nose: Bilateral patent nares, green rhinorrhea.

Throat: Moderate erythema, tonsils +3 with crypts.

SKIN: Warm, dry, and good turgor.

CARDIOVASCULAR: Regular rate and rhythm, no murmurs.

RESPIRATORY: Clear to auscultation bilaterally, no wheezes, rhonchi, or rales. Breathing unlabored.

GASTROINTESTINAL: Abdomen soft, non-tender, non-distended, no hepatosplenomegaly or masses.

GENITOURINARY: Not assessed in the provided case study.

NEUROLOGICAL: Not assessed in the provided case study.

MUSCULOSKELETAL: Not assessed in the provided case study.

HEMATOLOGIC: Not assessed in the provided case study.

LYMPHATICS: Not assessed in the provided case study.

PSYCHIATRIC: No history of depression or anxiety.

ENDOCRINOLOGIC: Not assessed in the provided case study

REPRODUCTIVE: Not applicable as the patient is a 9-year-old male.

ALLERGIES: Gentamicin ophthalmic. Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion

O.

Physical Exam:

General:

Appearance: Well-appearing, no distress.

Skin: Warm, dry, with good turgor.

HEENT:

Head: Normocephalic, atraumatic.

Eyes: Conjunctivae clear, sclera non-icteric.

Ears: External auditory canals clear. Tympanic membranes within normal limits.

Nose: Bilateral patent nares, green rhinorrhea.

Throat: Moderate erythema, tonsils +3 with crypts.

Cardiovascular:

Heart: Regular rate and rhythm, no murmurs.

Respiratory:

Lungs: Clear to auscultation bilaterally, no wheezes, rhonchi, or rales. Breathing unlabored.

Diagnostic Results:

  1. Strep A (GeneXpert) test: Positive
  2. CT Scan: Abnormal (specific findings not provided)

According to guidelines by Mustafa and Ghaffari (2020), patients presenting with sore throat symptoms should have a fast strep test performed to confirm the diagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis. Positive findings suggest the presence of germs and call for the use of antibiotics. Furthermore, if there are worries about complications or an unusual presentation of the disease, imaging examinations like a CT scan may be requested; however, the case study does not disclose particular results from the CT scan.

A.

Primary Diagnosis: Streptococcal Pharyngitis (Strep Throat)

Streptococcal pharyngitis is a frequent bacterial infection caused mostly by Group A Streptococcus (GAS) bacteria. It is characterized by a painful throat, a high body temperature and frequent tonsillar exudates. The major diagnostic test is the fast strep test, which identifies group A streptococcal antigens in throat swabs. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recommends quick identification and treatment with antibiotics such as amoxicillin or penicillin to avoid problems and transmission (Tanael, 2020). The recommendation recommends starting therapy in individuals with a positive quick strep test to relieve symptoms and reduce the risk of rheumatic fever and suppurative consequences (Mustafa & Ghaffari, 2020).

ORDER NOW

Differential Diagnoses:

  1. Viral Pharyngitis

Viral pharyngitis, commonly caused by adenovirus, influenza virus, or rhinovirus, presents with similar symptoms to streptococcal pharyngitis but typically lacks tonsillar exudates. Diagnosis is often clinical, with supportive management focusing on symptom relief. Antiviral medications may be considered in high-risk patients or during outbreaks (Sykes et al., 2020).

  1. Infectious Mononucleosis (IM)

The Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is the cause of infectious mononucleosis, which can manifest as lethargy, sore throat, fever, and lymphadenopathy. Diagnosis is confirmed through serological tests like the monospot test or EBV-specific antibody testing. Management includes supportive care, as antibiotics are ineffective against viral infections like IM (Naughton et al., 2021)Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion.

  1. Acute Retroviral Syndrome (ARS)

Acute retroviral syndrome, the initial presentation of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, may manifest with symptoms resembling streptococcal pharyngitis, including sore throat and fever. Diagnostic testing includes HIV antigen/antibody testing or nucleic acid testing. Early detection is crucial for timely initiation of antiretroviral therapy (AVA), as outlined in the guidelines from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) (Gabert et al., 2023).

  1. Strep Pharyngitis:
    1. Diagnostic Studies: Already confirmed with positive rapid strep test.
    2. Therapeutic Interventions: Initiate treatment with amoxicillin 400 mg/5 mL oral liquid, 6.25 mL every 12 hours for 10 days as prescribed.
    3. Education: Educate patient and family on the importance of completing the full course of antibiotics, proper hygiene practices to prevent spreading infection, and when to seek medical attention if symptoms worsen.
    4. Follow-up: Schedule a follow-up appointment in 1 week to assess response to treatment and resolution of symptoms.
  1. Management of Symptoms:
    1. Recommend acetaminophen or ibuprofen as needed for pain and fever.
    2. Advise rest and increased fluid intake to support recovery.
    3. Change toothbrush within 24-48 hours to prevent re-infection.
  1. Referral: No immediate referral necessary. However, if symptoms worsen or complications arise, consider referral to an otolaryngologist for further evaluation and management.

Reflection:

In this case, the course of therapy is in accordance with evidence-based recommendations for the handling of strep throat. According to Di Muzio et al. (2020), amoxicillin is a suitable antibiotic to treat bacterial illnesses like streptococcal pharyngitis. For patients to comply with treatment and to stop the illness from spreading to others, it is crucial to place a strong focus on education on completing the entire course of antibiotics and good cleanliness habits.

Reflecting on this case, I agree with the treatment provided by my preceptor. However, I learned the importance of considering potential complications such as peritonsillar abscess, especially in cases of severe sore throat. In the future, I would ensure thorough assessment for signs of complications and consider imaging studies if necessary.

In the context of illness prevention and health promotion, patient characteristics like age, socioeconomic level, and cultural background are critical. In this instance, promoting good hygiene habits among the patient and their family and getting medical care as soon as possible will help limit the propagation of illnesses within the community and at home.

Reference

Di Muzio, I., d’Angelo, D. M., Di Battista, C., Lapergola, G., Zenobi, I., Marzetti, V., … & Altobelli, E. (2020). Pediatrician’s approach to diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 39, 1103-1107. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00431-023-05211-w

Gabert, R., Lama, J. R., Valdez, R., Dasgupta, S., Cabello, R., Sanchez, H., … & Duerr, A. (2023). Acute retroviral syndrome is associated with lower CD4+ T cell nadir and delayed viral suppression, which are blunted by immediate antiretroviral therapy initiation. AIDS, 37(7), 1103-1108. https://doi.org/10.1097/qad.0000000000003511 Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion

Mustafa, Z., & Ghaffari, M. (2020). Diagnostic methods, clinical guidelines, and antibiotic treatment for group A streptococcal pharyngitis: a narrative review. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, 10, 563627. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2020.563627

Naughton, P., Healy, M., Enright, F., & Lucey, B. (2021). Infectious Mononucleosis: diagnosis and clinical interpretation. British journal of biomedical science78(3), 107-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/09674845.2021.1903683

Sykes, E. A., Wu, V., Beyea, M. M., Simpson, M. T., & Beyea, J. A. (2020). Pharyngitis: approach to diagnosis and treatment. Canadian Family Physician66(4), 251-257.

Tanael, M. (2020). Pharyngitis guidelines and missional goals. Military Medicine185(9-10), e1341-e1342. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usaa056

Will upload Patient INFO and SOAP TEMPLATE

Assignment

  • Subjective: What details did the patient or parent provide regarding the personal and medical history? Include any discrepancies between the details provided by the child and details provided by the parent as well as possible reasons for these discrepancies.
  • Objective: What observations did you make during the physical assessment? Include pertinent positive and negative physical exam findings. Describe whether the patient presented with any growth and development or psychosocial issues.
  • Assessment: What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses. List them from highest priority to lowest priority and include their ICD-10 code for the diagnosis. What was your primary diagnosis and why?
  • Plan: What was your plan for diagnostics and primary diagnosis? What was your plan for treatment and management? Include pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters as well as a rationale for this treatment and management plan.
  • Reflection notes: What was your “aha” moment? What would you do differently in a similar patient evaluation? Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion

RUBRIC

RAC_6541_Week3_Assignment2_Rubric

PRAC_6541_Week3_Assignment2_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization of Write-up
10 to >6.0 pts

Excellent

All information organized in logical sequence; follows acceptable format and utilizes expected headings.

6 to >3.0 pts

Good

Information generally organized in logical sequence; follows acceptable format and utilizes expected headings.

3 to >0.0 pts

Fair

Errors in format; information intermittently organized. Headings are used some of the time.

0 pts

Poor

Errors in format; information disorganized. Headings are not used appropriately.

10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThoroughness of History
20 to >15.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly documents all pertinent history components for type of note; includes critical as well as supportive information.

15 to >11.0 pts

Good

Documents most pertinent examination components.

11 to >7.0 pts

Fair

Documents some pertinent examination components.

7 to >0 pts

Poor

Physical examination cursory; misses several pertinent components.

20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHistory of Present Illness
10 to >6.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly documents all 8 aspects of HPI and pertinent other data relevant to chief complaint. Includes critical as well as supportive information.

6 to >4.0 pts

Good

Documents at least 6 aspects of the HPI and pertinent other data relevant to chief complaint. Includes critical information.

ORDER  HERE A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

4 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Documents at least 4 aspects of HPI and some data pertinent to chief complaint. Lacks some critical information or rambling in history.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Missing many aspects of HPI and pertinent data. Critical information missing.

10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThoroughness of Physical Exam
10 to >7.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly documents all pertinent examination components for type of note.

7 to >4.0 pts

Good

Documents most pertinent examination components.

4 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Documents some pertinent examination components.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Physical examination cursory; misses several pertinent components.

10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiagnostic Reasoning
10 to >7.0 pts

Excellent

Assessment consistent with prior documentation. Clear justification for diagnosis. Notes all secondary problems. Cost effective when ordering diagnostic tests.

7 to >4.0 pts

Good

Assessment consistent with prior documentation. Clear justification for diagnosis. Notes most secondary problems.

4 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Assessment mostly consistent with prior documentation. Fails to clearly justify diagnosis or note secondary problems or orders inappropriate diagnostic tests.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Assessment not consistent with prior documentation. Fails to clearly justify diagnosis or note secondary problems or orders inappropriate diagnostic tests.

10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTreatment Plan/Patient Education
20 to >15.0 pts

Excellent

Treatment plan addresses all issues raised by diagnoses, excellent insight into patient’s needs. Medications prescribed are appropriate and full prescription is included. Evidence based decisions. Cost effective treatment.

15 to >10.0 pts

Good

Treatment plan addresses most issues raised by diagnoses. Medications prescribed are appropriate but include 1 or 2 error in writing prescription.

10 to >5.0 pts

Fair

Treatment plan fails to address most issues raised by diagnoses. Medications are inappropriate or include 3 or more errors in writing prescription.

5 to >0 pts

Poor

Minimal treatment plan addressed. Medications are inappropriate or poorly written prescription.

20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePatient Education / Follow Up / Reflection
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Patient education addresses all issues raised by diagnoses, excellent insight into patient’s needs. Follow up plan in appropriate and reflects acuity of illness. Reflection is thoughtful and in depth.

8 to >5.0 pts

Good

Patient education addresses most issues raised by diagnoses. Follow up plan is appropriate but lacks specifics Reflection is thoughtful and in depth.

5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Patient education fails to address most issues raised by diagnoses. Follow up plan is lacking specifics or is inappropriate for patient acuity. Reflection is brief, vague. and does not discuss anything that would have been done in addition to or differently.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Minimal patient education addressed. Follow up plan is inappropriate Reflection is absent.

10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation. Professional language utilized
5 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Professional language utilized.

4 pts

Good

Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Contains a few errors (1 or 2) in professional language use.

2 pts

Fair

Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Contains several errors (3 -4) in professional language use.

0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Contains many errors in professional language use.

5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholarly References and Clinical Practice Guidelines. The assignment includes a minimum of 3 scholarly references that are not older than 5 years. Clinical practice guidelines are included if applicable.
5 pts

Excellent

Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 3 evidenced based references less than 5 years old are listed. Clinical practice guidelines are cited if applicable.

4 pts

Good

Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 2 evidenced based references less than 5 years old are listed. Clinical practice guidelines are cited if applicable.

2 pts

Fair

Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 1 evidenced based reference less than 5 years old is listed. Clinical practice guidelines are not cited if applicable.

0 pts

Poor

Contains no parenthetical/in-text citations and 0 evidenced based references listed. Clinical practice guidelines are not cited if applicable.

5 pts
Total Points: 100

Episodic SOAP Note Case Study Assignment Discussion