Epidemiology & Population Hlth

WK.11.Epidemiology.docx

Home >Nursing homework help >Epidemiology & Population Hlth

Epidemiology & Population Hlth

GLOBAL EPIDEMIOLOGY AND POPULATION HEALTH

INTRODUCTION

The development of global health goals has been established to improve the health and well-being of individuals and populations within the global context. Yet, how has global health changed? How might it change in the future?

The realm of global health entails unique challenges and perspectives as they pertain to health and disease. Examining different social, environmental, cultural, behavioral, and political dimensions may reveal trends that might help to define why variation occurs with respect to the global burden of disease. As an advanced practice nurse, why is it important to understand the global health perspective?

This week you explore epidemiological and population health concepts through the lens of natural disasters.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Students will:

· Apply epidemiological and population health concepts to the assessment and mitigation of health effects following natural disasters

· Identify leadership roles that nurses have in mitigating negative health outcomes following disasters

INFECTIOUS DISEASE AND NATURAL DISASTER

The earthquake that struck Haiti in 2010 was one of the worst natural disasters in history. According to Peranteau et al. (2010):

Immediately after the earthquake the need so vastly outstripped the resources that patients generally lacked basic identifiers and medical records […] Treatment plans were reduced to word of mouth. At first we used scraps of paper or cardboard taped to the patient … (p. 127)

Nearly a quarter of a million people were killed with another quarter of a million injured, and millions of people were displaced from their homes (World Health Organization, 2010). In the ensuing months, a cholera epidemic ravaged the already traumatized country. The destruction of infrastructure, contamination of water supply, and increased human vulnerability from displacement create favorable conditions for the spread of infectious diseases following natural disasters. Respiratory infections and diarrheal diseases are also commonly found encountered after floods, tsunamis, and other types of meteorological and geophysical disasters.

In the aftermath of such tragedies, priority is placed on implementing control measures to re-establish basic healthcare and prevent epidemics. Nurses often play important leadership roles in both domestic and international disaster response. For this Discussion, you consider disasters from an epidemiologic perspective and how nurses can address health outcomes following them.

References: Peranteau, W. H., Havens, J. M., Harrington, S., & Gates, J. D. (2010). Re-establishing surgical care at Port-au-Prince General Hospital, Haiti. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 211(1), 126–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.04.015

World Health Organization. (2010, September). Letter from the editor. Focus: Emergency and Humanitarian Action, 5. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/205106/B4566.pdf;jsessionid=3C735D0DC06BD1C7497635EDF5928C93?sequence=1

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

· Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2020). Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice (3rd ed.). Springer.

· Chapter 12, “Implications of Global Health in Population-Based Nursing”

· Maness, L. R. (2019). The effect of hurricanes on pathogenic diseases. Journal of Environmental Health, 81(6), 16–20.

· Mavrouli, M., Mavroulis, S., Lekkas, E., & Tsakris, A. (2021). Respiratory infections following earthquake-induced tsunamis: Transmission risk factors and lessons learned for disaster risk management.Links to an external site. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(9), Article 4952. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094952

· Nuzzo, J. B., Meyer, D., Snyder, M., Ravi, S. J., Lapascu, A., Souleles, J., Andrada, C. I., & Bishai, D. (2019). What makes health systems resilient against infectious disease outbreaks and natural hazards? Results from a scoping reviewLinks to an external site. . BMC Public Health, 19(1), Article 1310. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7707-z

· World Health Organization. (2018, February 22). Health inequities and their causes [Multimedia]Links to an external site. . https://www.who.int/news-room/facts-in-pictures/detail/health-inequities-and-their-causes

Required Media

· Global Epidemiology and Population Health

· Time Estimate: 2 minutes

· Walden University, LLC. (2021). Monitoring and controlling pandemicsLinks to an external site. [Interactive media]. Walden University Blackboard. https://waldenu.instructure.com

· Walden University. (2021, October 26). Talks for good: Racial inequalities in healthcare [Video]Links to an external site. . YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS1ziY0loMw

Note: The approximate length of this media piece 60 minutes.

TO PREPARE:

· Consider the role of epidemiologic methods in preparing for or responding to natural disasters.

· Focus on global health initiatives, effects of natural disasters on health outcomes, and global health inequities and how they are magnified by natural disasters.

· Select a recent (within past 10 years) natural disaster. You may choose an event that occurred in the U.S. or internationally.

· Explore the current literature and identify the specific leadership roles that nurses have in mitigating negative health outcomes following disasters.

POST

· Briefly describe your selected recent natural disaster.

· Discuss the health consequences of the disaster at the population level.

· Explain how the concepts of population health and epidemiology discussed in this course were or could have been used to assess health outcomes after this disaster.

· Explain how the concepts of population health and epidemiology discussed in this course were or could have been used to mitigate negative health effects following this disaster.

· Describe the specific leadership roles that nurses have in mitigating negative health outcomes following disasters.

· NURS_8310_Week11_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8310_Week11_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 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 library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)

30 to >29.0 pts

Excellent

Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

29 to >23.0 pts

Good

Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

23 to >18.0 pts

Fair

Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.

18 to >0 pts

Poor

Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)

10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

9 to >8.0 pts

Good

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

8 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

10 pts

Total Points: 100