E-Mail Address: support@nursingpaperacers.com

Whatsapp Chats: +1 (601) 227-3647

Case Study: Antimicrobial Agents

Case Study: Antimicrobial Agents

Case Study: Antimicrobial Agents

NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: Case Study: Antimicrobial Agents

Antimicrobial agents are essential components in the treatment of various bacterial infections as they help to kill or prevent the growth of microbes such as bacteria, fungi, and protozoans. Prior to the discovery of antimicrobial agents, treatment options for patients with bacterial infections were limited. For many patients, treatment often resulted in the amputation of limbs or even death. Today, treatment options for bacterial infections typically have a more positive prognosis. Due to the various types of infections presented in patients, it is essential to be able to identify the underlying cause of the infection—whether bacterial or viral—before recommending drug treatments. This will help you identify whether or not an antimicrobial agent would be appropriate and which specific agent would target the infection. In this Assignment, you consider the appropriate use of antimicrobial agents for infections.

To prepare:

  • – Review this week’s media presentation      on principles of antimicrobial therapy, as well as Chapter 8 of the      Arcangelo and Peterson text.
  • – Consider the categories of      antimicrobial agents.
  • – Think about differences between viral      and bacterial infections.
  • – Reflect on why proper identification      of the infection is key to selecting the proper antimicrobial agent.

POST a 2- to 3- page paper that addresses the following:

  • – Describe the categories of      antimicrobial agents.
  • – Describe differences between viral      and bacterial infections.
  • – Explain why proper identification of      viral and bacterial infections is key to selecting the proper      antimicrobial agent.

This work should have Introduction and conclusion

– This work should have at 4 to 6 current references (Year 2012 and up)

– Use at least 3 references from class Learning Resources

The following Resources are not acceptable:

1. Wikipedia

2. Cdc.gov- nonhealthcare professionals section

3. Webmd.com

4. Mayoclinic.com

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 8, “Principles of      Antimicrobial Therapy” (pp. 111-134)
    This chapter covers factors that impact the selection of an antimicrobial      treatment regimen. It also examines the clinical uses, adverse events, and      drug interactions of various antimicrobial agents such as penicillin.
  • Chapter 12, “Fungal Infections      of the Skin” (pp. 163-196)
    This chapter explores the pathophysiology of several fungal infections of      the skin as well as related drug treatments and examines the importance of      patient education when managing these infections.
  • Chapter 14, “Bacterial      Infections of the Skin” (pp. 181-196)
    This chapter begins by examining causes of bacterial infections. It then      explores the importance of selecting an appropriate agent for treating      bacterial infections.
  • Chapter 32, “Urinary Tract      Infection” (pp. 519-526)
    This chapter covers drugs used to treat urinary tract infections and      identifies special considerations when treating geriatric patients,      pediatric patients, and women.
  • Chapter 35, “Sexually      Transmitted Infections” (pp. 512-535)
    This chapter outlines the causes, pathophysiology, and drug treatment of      six sexually transmitted infections, including gonorrhea, syphilis, and      human papilloma virus infection (HPV). It also examines the importance of      selecting the proper agent and monitoring patient response to treatment.
  • Chapter 49, “Human Immunodeficiency Virus” (pp.      843-860)
    This chapter presents the causes, pathophysiology, diagnostic criteria,      and prevention methods for HIV. It also covers various methods of drug      treatment and patient factors to consider when selecting, administering,      and managing drug treatments.

Krummenacher, I., Cavassini, M., Bugnon, O., & Schneider, M. (2011). An interdisciplinary HIV-adherence program combining motivational interviewing and electronic antiretroviral drug monitoring. AIDS Care, 23(5), 550–561.

This article analyzes medication adherence in HIV patients and examines factors that increase adherence as well as factors that contribute to termination or discontinuation of treatment.

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.

Scourfield, A., Waters, L., & Nelson, M. (2011). Drug combinations for HIV: What’s new? Expert Review of Anti-Infective Therapy, 9(11), 1001–1011.

Note: Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

This article examines current therapies and strategies for treating HIV patients. It also examines factors that impact selection of therapy, including drug interactions, personalization of therapy, costs, management of comorbidities, and patient response.

Required Media

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2012). Antimicrobials. Baltimore, MD: Author.

This media presentation outlines principles of antimicrobial therapy 

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 7 minutes.

Mayer, K. H., & Krakower, D. (2012). Antiretroviral medication and HIV prevention: New steps forward and New Questions. Annals of Internal Medicine, 156(4), 312–314.

 


Excellent
Good Fair Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 (0%) – 3 (10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Total Points: 30