Case study Discussion Post

Clinical Requirement:

Please paraphrase this discussion post with no plagiarism or AI use. I will also post the instructions and the rubric so you can double check if anything is needed. Instructions: For this Discussion, you examine a case study and explain the disease that is suggested. You examine the symptoms reported and explain the cells that are involved and potential alterations and impacts. You must use current evidence-based resources (Primary and secondary) to support your initial posting and all responses to your colleagues. Post an explanation of the disease highlighted in the scenario you were provided. Include the following in your explanation: Which genetic mutations are commonly associated with the disease? Why is the patient presenting with the specific symptoms described? Discuss the pathophysiological mechanisms of the disease in detail.  What do the blood test results tell us about the disease and disease progression? Rubric: Main Posting 50 to >44.0 ptsExcellentAnswers all parts of the Discussion question(s) with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. ... Supported by at least three current, credible sources. ... Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 44 to >39.0 ptsGoodResponds to the Discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. ... At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. ... Supported by at least three credible sources. ... Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 39 to >34.0 ptsFairResponds to some of the Discussion question(s). ... One or 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 two credible sources. ... Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. ... Contains some APA formatting errors. 34 to >0 ptsPoorDoes not respond to the Discussion question(s) adequately. ... 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 one or no credible sources. ... Not written clearly or concisely. ... Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. ... Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. 50 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Post: Timeliness 10 to >0.0 ptsExcellentPosts main post by Day 3. 0 ptsFairN/A 0 ptsGoodN/A 0 ptsPoorDoes not post main post by Day 3. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response 18 to >16.0 ptsExcellentResponse exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. ... Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. ... Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. ... Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. ... Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. ... Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 16 to >14.0 ptsGoodResponse exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. ... Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. ... Responses 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. 14 to >12.0 ptsFairResponse is on topic and may have some depth. ... Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. ... Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. ... Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. 12 to >0 ptsPoorResponse may not be on topic and lacks depth. ... Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. ... Responses to faculty questions are missing. ... No credible sources are cited. 18 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response 17 to >15.0 ptsExcellentResponse exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. ... Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. ... Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. ... Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. ... Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. ... Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 15 to >13.0 ptsGoodResponse exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. ... Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. ... Responses 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. 13 to >11.0 ptsFairResponse is on topic and may have some depth. ... Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. ... Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. ... Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. 11 to >0 ptsPoorResponse may not be on topic and lacks depth. ... Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. ... Responses to faculty questions are missing. ... No credible sources are cited. 17 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParticipation 5 to >0.0 ptsExcellentMeets requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. 0 ptsFairN/A 0 ptsGoodN/A 0 ptsPoorDoes not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. 5 pts Total Points: 100 Scenario: Patient is a 45 year old male presenting with acute onset of pain that began in his legs and has since spread to his lower back. The pain is rated 9/10 and described as deep, throbbing, and constant. He has had several similar episodes in the past year, usually following dehydration or infection. He denies trauma. Lab Pt value Normal values Hemaglobin 8.1 13.5-17.5 Hematocrit 24 38-50 RBC 2.9 4.7-6.1 WBC 13000 4000-11000 Reticulocyte count 8% 0.5-2.5% Total bilirubin 3.5 0.2-1.2 LDH 520 140-280 Peripheral smear Presence of sickled cells, target cells, Howell-Jolly bodies Questions – • Which genetic mutations are commonly associated with the disease? • Why is the patient presenting with the specific symptoms described? • Discuss the pathophysiological mechanisms of the disease in detail. • What do the blood test results tell us about the disease and disease progression? Questions for response to other students – Expand on one thing you learned from reading this post Did you agree or disagree with the post