Assignment:
Diabetes and Drug Treatments
Diabetes is an endocrine system disorder that affects millions of children and adults (ADA, 2011). If left untreated, diabetic patients are at risk for several alterations including heart disease, stroke, kidney failure, neuropathy, and blindness. There are various methods for treating diabetes, many of which include some form of drug therapy. The type of diabetes as well as the patients behavior factors will impact treatment recommendations. In this Assignment, you compare types of diabetes including drug treatments for type 1, type 2, gestational, and juvenile diabetes.To prepare:
Review this weeks media presentation on the endocrine system and diabetes, as well as Chapter 46 of the Arcangelo and Peterson text and the Peterson et al. article in the Learning Resources.
Reflect on differences between types of diabetes including type 1, type 2, gestational, and juvenile diabetes.
Select one type of diabetes.
Think about the short-term and long-term impact of the diabetes you selected on patients including effects of drug treatments.Write a 2- to 3- page paper that addresses the following:Explain the differences between types of diabetes including type 1, type 2, gestational, and juvenile diabetes.
Describe one type of drug used to treat the type of diabetes you selected including proper preparation and administration of this drug. Include dietary considerations related to treatment.
Explain the short-term and long-term impact of this diabetes on patients including effects of drugs treatments.This assignment requires a title page, introduction, summary, and references. Learning ResourcesThis page contains the Learning Resources for this week. Be sure to scroll down the page to see all of this week’s assigned Learning Resources.
Required Readings
Arcangelo, V. P., Peterson, A. M., Wilbur, V., & Reinhold, J. A. (Eds.). (2017). Pharmacotherapeutics for advanced practice: A practical approach (4th ed.). Ambler, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.. Chapter 36, Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis (pp. 591-609)
This chapter examines the causes, pathophysiology, and diagnostic criteria of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. It then outlines the process of selecting, administering, and managing drug therapy for both disorders.
Chapter 46, Diabetes Mellitus (pp. 785-806)
This chapter begins by identifying the causes, pathophysiology, and diagnostic criteria of diabetes mellitus. It then examines the process of selecting, administering, and managing drug therapy for patients with diabetes mellitus.
Chapter 47, Thyroid Disorders (pp. 809-822)
This chapter explores the causes, pathophysiology, diagnostic criteria, and administration of drug therapy for patients with thyroid disorders, including hypothyroidism, hyperthyroidism, thyroid nodules, subclinical thyroid disease, and thyroiditis. It also discusses the mechanisms of prescribed drugs, as well as proper dosages and potential adverse reactions.
Ben-Zacharia, A. (2011). Therapeutics for multiple sclerosis symptoms. The Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, 78(2), 176191.
This article covers the diagnosis, treatment, and management of multiple sclerosis and explores methods for treating other health issues that arise from multiple sclerosis.Kargiotis, O., Paschali, A., Messinis, L., & Papathanasopoulos, P. (2010). Quality of life in multiple sclerosis: Effects of current treatment options. International Review of Psychiatry, 22(1), 6782. This article examines the process of evaluating and diagnosing patients who present with symptoms of multiple sclerosis and explores treatment and rehabilitation methods.Peterson, K., Silverstein, J., Kaufman, F., & Warren-Boulton, E. (2007). Management of type 2 diabetes in youth: An update. American Family Physician, 76(5), 658664. This article outlines the process of diagnosing, treating, and managing youths with or at risk of type 2 diabetes. It also suggests methods for body weight management and reducing cardiovascular disease risks. Drugs.com. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.drugs.com/ This website presents a comprehensive review of prescription and over-the-counter drugs including information on common uses and potential side effects. It also provides updates relating to new drugs on the market, support from health professionals, and a drug-drug interactions checker.Required Media
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2012). The endocrine system and diabetes. Baltimore, MD: Author. This media presentation explores the endocrine system and diabetes including diagnosis and treatment of the disease. Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 5 minutes. Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2012). Advanced pharmacology – Mid-course review. Baltimore, MD: Author. Rubric Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement
Main 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 (44%) – 44 (44%)
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. supported by at least 3 current, credible sources
40 (40%) – 43 (43%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
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 post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
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
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
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
Main Posting:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely Contains no grammatical or spelling errors Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Written clearly and concisely May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Written somewhat concisely May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors Contains some APA formatting errors
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Not written clearly or concisely Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style
Main Posting:
Timely and full participation
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts main discussion by due date
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
First Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
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
8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings
7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting
6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
First Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
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
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are 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 (5%) – 5 (5%)
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
4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited
First Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts by due date
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
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
8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings
7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting
6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
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
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are 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 (5%) – 5 (5%)
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
4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited
Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation Posts by due date
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
