NR 305 Week 5 Discussion

Student Name

Chamberlain University

NR-305: RN Health Assessment

Prof. Name:

Date

Week 5 Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4

iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)

Purpose
The purpose of this debriefing is to reflect on the experience of completing the Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment assignment and engage in collaborative discussions with faculty and peers. This process encourages students to:

Reflect on the simulation activity.
Share successful aspects and identify alternative actions.
Participate in meaningful dialogue with classmates.
Clearly and professionally express opinions in a logical manner.

Course Outcomes
This debriefing enables students to achieve the following course outcomes:

CO 2: Differentiate between normal and abnormal health assessment findings. (PO 4)
CO 3: Describe physical, psychosocial, cultural, and spiritual influences on an individual’s health status. (PO 1)
CO 4: Demonstrate effective communication skills during health assessment and documentation. (PO 3)

Due Date
The discussion is open for participation during the assigned week, starting Sunday and closing the following Sunday. Students are required to:

Post at least twice during the week.
Contribute on two separate days.

Points Possible
50 points

Directions
Debriefing involves critically analyzing one’s experiences from the completed virtual simulation. Students are expected to:

Demonstrate understanding of weekly concepts.
Engage in meaningful discussions with classmates and/or instructors.
Clearly and logically articulate opinions in a professional manner.

Students should refer to the rubric provided on the course page to guide their responses. Scholarly sources are not required for this debriefing.

Best Practices

Participate early in the week to foster meaningful discussions.
Regularly access the debriefing to review and learn from peers’ posts.
Reply to different classmates each week to diversify engagement.

Reflection Table

Paragraph	Reflection
Paragraph One	In reflecting on the simulation, I observed an improvement in my comfort level with iHuman. Despite initial apprehension due to limited neuro experience, I was satisfied with successfully completing the preparatory work. While the scenario felt realistic, the patient’s brief responses posed challenges for a thorough neuro assessment.
Paragraph Two	Anticipating the next simulation, I plan to use a different computer and internet browser to mitigate technical difficulties. This week’s issues, such as problems with interactive sounds and the blood pressure cuff inflation feature, were similar to those experienced previously. Although I expected a lower score due to limited neuro experience, I was pleasantly surprised by my higher-than-anticipated feedback.
Paragraph Three	This simulation reinforced that I possess more neuro assessment knowledge than I believed. Navigating the simulation helped resurface relevant information, boosting my confidence for future neuro ICU interactions. Taking time during the assessment allowed for deeper engagement, though technical issues with interactive sounds remain a frustration shared by my peers.

References

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.