NRNP 6552 WEEK 1 Social Determinants of Health Among the Female Population
NRNP 6552 WEEK 1 Social Determinants of Health Among the Female Population
World Health Organization (WHO) describes social determinants of health (SDoH) as non-medical factors that influence health outcomes, such as economic stability and housing, among other factors. The Health-Related Social Needs (HRSN) Screening Tool consisting of five domains, including housing instability, food insecurity, transportation problems, utility help needs, and interpersonal safety, revealed that the African-American population, especially women, is disadvantaged, resulting in poor health outcomes (Moen et al., 2020). The above factors are mainly due to financial constraints and an associated low socioeconomic status that affects healthcare costs and outcomes. For instance, poor nutrition and physical inactivity have contributed to the gradual rise of cases of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and certain gastrointestinal cancers among the population (Hill-Briggs et al., 2022). The low socioeconomic status further contributes to the rising number of cases due to the high cost of healthcare and uninsured persons.
Financial constraints also limit the quality of housing or the neighborhood they live in. As a result, the community is more susceptible to air and water-borne diseases due to poor housing or stab, blunt, and gunshot wounds resulting from increased crime and violence. It is also crucial to note that the population also faces racial discrimination, which limits their access to health, employment opportunities, and education, further worsening the challenges they face (Monroe et al., 2023). As a result, it is crucial to empower the community by providing various insurance schemes and educating them on health promotion measures such as regular exercise, good nutrition, and regular screening for certain diseases. In addition, I would advocate for equality and ensure all services, including health, education, housing, and employment, are given to every person, irrespective of race and religion (Chelak et al., 2022). I would also liaise with the city council to ensure they improve the living, education, and security standards among all neighborhoods in the state, resulting in improved living standards.
References
Chelak, K., & Chakole, S. (2022). The Role of Social Determinants of Health in Promoting Health Equality: A Narrative Review. Cureus, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.33425
Hill-Briggs, F., Ephraim, P. L., Vrany, E. A., Davidson, K. W., Pekmezaris, R., Salas-Lopez, D., Alfano, C. M., & Gary-Webb, T. L. (2022). Social Determinants of Health, Race, and Diabetes Population Health Improvement: Black/African Americans as a Population Exemplar. Current Diabetes Reports, 22(3), 117-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-022-01454-3
Moen, M., Storr, C., German, D., Friedmann, E., & Johantgen, M. (2020). A Review of Tools to Screen for Social Determinants of Health in the United States: A Practice Brief. Population Health Management, 23(6), 422-429. https://doi.org/10.1089/pop.2019.0158
Monroe, P., Campbell, J. A., Harris, M., & Egede, L. E. (2023). Racial/ethnic differences in social determinants of health and health outcomes among adolescents and youth ages 10–24: A scoping review. BMC Public Health, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15274-x
CLICK HERE TO ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER
Social Determinants of Health Among the Female Population
An individual’s health is influenced by many factors. Nurse Practitioners must be versed in all factors and adept in assessing the impact of economic conditions, education, environment, and social conditions on health.
Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) have a major impact on people’s health, well-being, and quality of life. Examples of SDOH include:
Safe housing, transportation, and neighborhoods
Racism, discrimination, and violence
Education, job opportunities, and income
Access to nutritious foods and physical activity opportunities
Polluted air and water
Language and literacy skills
For this Discussion, you will explore Social Determinants of Health and five areas that are impacted. For your community where you reside, assess these five areas. You will also explore available instruments to complete a full assessment of an individual’s SDOH.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Schuiling, K. D., & Likis, F. E. (2022). Gynecologic health care (4th ed.). Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Chapter 1, “A Feminist Perspective of Women’s Health” (pp. 3–10)
Chapter 3,” Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans) pp. 39–49)
Chapter 4, “Using Evidence to Support Clinical Practice” (pp. 55–69)
Chapter 5, “Health Promotion” (pp. 75–86)
Chapter 7, “Gynecologic History and Physical Examination”?(pp. 99–124)?
Chapter 11, “Gynecologic Health Care for Lesbian, Bisexual, Queer Women, and Transgender and Nonbinary Individuals” (pp. 173–210)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.). Health People 2030: Social determinants of healthLinks to an external site.. https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives#social-determinants-of-health
Guideline Resources
American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). Scope of practiceLinks to an external site.. https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/scope-of-practice/
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2020). Well-woman visit (Number 755) [Committee Opinion].Links to an external site. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2018/10/well-woman-visit
American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP). (2014). Algorithms: Updated consensus guidelines for managing abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursorsLinks to an external site.. https://www.asccp.org/Guidelines
Competency Resources
The National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties (NONPF). (2017). Nurse Practitioner Core Competencies ContentLinks to an external site.. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/competencies/2017_NPCoreComps_with_Curric.pdf
American Academy of Physician Assistants (AAPA) (2013). Competencies for the Physician Assistant Profession.Links to an external site. https://www.aapa.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/PA-Competencies-updated.pdf
Ethics Resources
American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). View the code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements.Links to an external site. https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/nursing-excellence/ethics/code-of-ethics-for-nurses/
Keuroghlian, A. S., Ard, K. L., & Makadon, H. J. (2017). Advancing health equity for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people through sexual health education and LGBT-affirming health care environmentsLinks to an external site.. Sexual Health, 14, 119–122. https://doi.org/10.1071/SH16145
Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., Hoy-Ellis, C. P., Goldsen, J., Emlet, C. A., & R, N., Hooyman. (2014). Creating a vision for the future: Key competencies and strategies for culturally competent practice with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) older adults in the health and human servicesLinks to an external site.. Journal of Gerontologic Social Work, 57(0), 80–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2014.890690
Screening Tools and/or Apps
As you download and/or consider using the following screening tools and/or apps on your mobile device, be mindful that if should you have any technical difficulties, please access technology support from the tool or app you are needing help with.
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. (n.d.). Browse information for health professionalsLinks to an external site.. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Name/tools-and-resources-for-better-preventive-care/
Ewing, J. (2004). Cage questionnaire.Links to an external site. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Home/GetFileByID/838
American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP). (2020). New guidelines. New App.Links to an external site. www.asccp.org/mobile-app
Note: This app will become available in 2020 and may require a fee for purchase. Please be mindful that you are not required to purchase the app for this course. However, it may be an app that will be useful for your professional practice.
Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital (n.d.). Women’s Health Study.Links to an external site. https://whs.bwh.harvard.edu/index.html
Study Guides
The following documents are to assist you in preparing for both your Midterm and Final Exams.
Document: Midterm Exam Study Guide Download Midterm Exam Study Guide(PDF document)
Document: Final Exam Study Guide Download Final Exam Study Guide(PDF document)
Required Media
Introduction to the Primary Care of WomenLinks to an external site.
In this interactive media program, Dr. Rebecca Lee and Cindy Nypaver discuss the importance of the role of the advanced nurse practitioner when caring for women (1 min).
Gynecologic Health Part 1
Dr. Anne Salomone discusses and summarizes the topics in both Weeks 1 and 2. Consider how these topics inform and support your advanced nursing practice (31 mins).
Gynecologic Health Part 2 (47 mins)
Women’s Health Issues and Special Populations of WomenLinks to an external site.
In this interactive media program, Dr. Rebecca Lee and Cindy Nypaver describe their experiences with special populations of women (3 mins).
Special Populations of Women: Grandmothers Raising Grandchildren
In this media presentation, Dr. Barbara Resnick and Dr. Kristen Mauk describe their experiences with grandmothers raising grandchildren (8 mins).
Geeky Medics (2016). Vaginal examination (PV) – OSCE Guide [Video]Links to an external site.. https://youtu.be/Z-O_JYtyQqE
Note: This media program is approximately 5 minutes.
As you review this video, consider also reviewing the Pelvic Examination on pp. 109-125 of Chapter 6 in the Schuiling text.
Geeky Medics (2015). Breast examination – OSCE Guide [Video]Links to an external site.. https://youtu.be/76g_tNWMhCE
Note: This media program is approximately 6 minutes.
Medical Procedures & Health Informations (2014). Pap test – Procedure [Video]Links to an external site.. https://youtu.be/0zI58NJd1yE
Note: This media program is approximately 1 minute.
As you review this video, also consider reviewing Appendix 6-A Cervical Cytology Screening in Chapter 6 in the Schuiling text on p. 128.
Cleveland Clinic (2018). Laura Lipold, MD: Women’s Health Primary Care.Links to an external site. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7isij8hL08
Note: This media program is approximately 33 minutes.
Optional Resources
The following resources are available to assist you as you prepare for your Midterm and Final Exams. Note: Some items may be available for purchase only; however, you are not required to purchase for this course.
Note: In Weeks 1-10, these resources are optional for your review. In Week 11, you will be required to review each of the PowerPoint slides from the text Gynecologic Health Care (4th ed.).
Chapter 1, “A Feminist Perspective of Women’s Health” Download “A Feminist Perspective of Women’s Health”
Chapter 3, “Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans)Download “Women’s Growth and Development Across the Life Spans)
Chapter 4, “Using Evidence to Support Clinical Practice” Download “Using Evidence to Support Clinical Practice”
Chapter 5, “Health Promotion”Download “Health Promotion”
Chapter 7, “Gynecologic History and Physical Examination”Download “Gynecologic History and Physical Examination”
Chapter 11, “Gynecologic Health Care for Lesbian, Bisexual, Queer Women, and Transgender and Nonbinary Individuals” Download “Gynecologic Health Care for Lesbian, Bisexual, Queer Women, and Transgender and Nonbinary Individuals”
Kelsey, B. M.R. (2018). Midwifery & women’s health nurse practitioner certification review guide (4th ed.). Burlington, MA, USA: Jones & Learning.
Prescribers’ Digital Reference (PDR) (2020). Mobile PDR.Links to an external site. https://www.pdr.net/resources/mobilePDR/
Tarascon (n.d.). Tarascon pocket pharmacopoeia 2020 Classic shirt-pocket edition.Links to an external site. https://www.tarascon.com/Products/Details.aspx/19614-6
epocrates (n.d.). Be more confident in the moment of care.Links to an external site. https://www.epocrates.com/
Note: As you review this website, this tool will allow you to access clinical support quickly and efficiently. This app will need to be downloaded to your device to use if you choose to do so.
To prepare:
Who is most affected?
What major challenges have you found?
What changes could you propose?
What risk assessment instruments would be appropriate to use when assessing your community?
Identify any potential health-related risks based upon the community age groups.
By Day 3
Post a brief summary of the findings of the Social Determinants of Health in your community for each of the five areas described above. When providing your summary, take into consideration the preparation questions above and incorporate those into the summary.
References should be used to support your findings.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts on two different days and provide additional insight to your colleagues related to issues and topics they may want to also consider. Use the Learning Resources and/or the best available evidence from current literature to support your explanation.
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the Reply button to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Post Reply, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Post Reply!
NRNP_6552_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
NRNP_6552_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
44 to >39.16 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s)… Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources… No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth… Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.
39.16 to >34.76 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Responds to most of the discussion question(s)… Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module… 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth… Supported by at least 3 credible references.
34.76 to >30.36 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Responds to some of the discussion question(s)… One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed… Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis… Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module… Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.
30.36 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Does not respond to the discussion question(s)… Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria… Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis… Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module… Contains only 1 or no credible references.
44 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:Writing
6 to >5.34 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Written clearly and concisely… Contains no grammatical or spelling errors… Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
5.34 to >4.74 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Written concisely… May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors… Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
4.74 to >4.14 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Written somewhat concisely… May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors… Contains some APA formatting errors.
4.14 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Not written clearly or concisely… Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors… Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:Timely and full participation
10 to >8.9 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts main discussion by due date.
8.9 to >7.9 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Posts main discussion by due date… Meets requirements for full participation.
7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Posts main discussion by due date.
6.9 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post main discussion by due date.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 to >8.01 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings… Responds to questions posed by faculty… The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
8.01 to >7.11 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7.11 to >6.21 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
6.21 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:Writing
6 to >5.34 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed… Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources… Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.
5.34 to >4.74 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed… Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources… Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
4.74 to >4.14 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication… Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed… Few or no credible sources are cited.
4.14 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication… Response to faculty questions are missing… No credible sources are cited.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:Timely and full participation
5 to >4.45 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts by due date.
4.45 to >3.95 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Meets requirements for full participation… Posts by due date.
3.95 to >3.45 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Posts by due date.
3.45 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post by due date.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 to >8.01 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings… Responds to questions posed by faculty… The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
8.01 to >7.11 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7.11 to >6.21 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
6.21 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:Writing
6 to >5.34 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed… Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources… Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.
5.34 to >4.74 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues… Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed… Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources… Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
4.74 to >4.14 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication… Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed… Few or no credible sources are cited.
4.14 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication… Response to faculty questions are missing… No credible sources are cited.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:Timely and full participation
5 to >4.45 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation… Posts by due date.
4.45 to >3.95 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Meets requirements for full participation… Posts by due date.
3.95 to >3.45 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Posts by due date.
3.45 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation… Does not post by due date.
5 pts
Total Points: 100