Case Study Of Spinal Cord Injury

Written assignment:
Poor (1)
Fair (2 )
Good (3)
Excellent (4)
Score

Determine and select model of practice/frame of reference to best guide the treatment of the identified impairments.
 
Unable to determine appropriate Application of model of practice/frame of reference
Additional questions arise. Difficult to follow, yet selected practice/frame of reference is present.
 
Application of model of practice/frame of reference requires additional clarification
Application of model of practice/frame of reference is best suited
 

Use of proper OTPF terminology and grammar
Use of inaccurate terminology or grammar on more than 8 occasions.
Use of inaccurate terminology or grammar on no more than 6 occasions.
Correct use; with use of inaccurate terminology or grammar on no more than 4 occasions.
Correct use; with use of inaccurate terminology or grammar on no more than 2 occasions.
 

Summary of primary and secondary medical diagnoses: signs, symptoms, prognosis, prevalence
Did not identify. Clarification needed
Missing 50% of data
Missing 25% of data
All relevant information provided
 

Developed a prioritized OT Problem list.
 
Explained justification of prioritization using the OTPF.
Not addressed or information not relevant.
Only two problems are OT relevant and student requires additional clarification about how practice framework is utilized to prioritize problem list.
Most problems are OT related and can be addressed by therapist. Most problems prioritized and justified with fair use of practice framework.
Problem list is accurate and prioritized considering patient specific diagnosis, needs, and wants. Utilized and explained clearly application of practice framework to problem list.
 
 

Identified all problems of the patient accurately
Did not identify problems accurately on 5-6 occasions
Did not identify problems accurately on 3-4 occasions
Identified all problems, but did not identify problems accurately on 1-2 occasions
Identified all problems accurately
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Identified accurately and correctly all strengths and opportunities of the patient in the case study
Did not identify accurately and correctly all strengths and opportunities of the patient in the case study on 5-6 occasions
Did not identify accurately and correctly all strengths and opportunities of the patient in the case study on 3-4 occasions
Identified accurately and correctly mostly, but failed to identify accurately and correctly on 1-2 occasions
Identified accurately and correctly all strengths and opportunities of the patient in the case study
 

Completed all long term goals accurately and correctly meeting all the criteria utilizing FEAST or other documented method
Did not complete long term goals accurately and correctly meeting all criteria on 5-6 occasions
Did not complete long term goals accurately and correctly meeting all criteria on 3-4 occasions
Completed long term goals accurately and correctly meeting most criteria, but missing on 1-2 occasions
Completed all long term goals accurately and correctly meeting all the criteria
 

Completed all short term goals as applicable
Did not complete 5-6 short term goals
Did not complete 3-4 short term goals
Good, but missed the completion of 1-2 short term goals
Completed all short term goals as applicable
 
 
 

Methods/Interventions
Listed methods used to treat patient in a comprehensive list to be used as treatment plan guide. Indicate FOR (s) for treatment session.
Information provided is vague.
Methodology is not comprehensive and lacking information.
Good, but additional clarification needed.
Comprehensive list of methods that will be used in intervention. Sound, research based methodology is evident FOR (s) is indicated.
 

Rationale/Justification
Describes the rationale behind above methods and gives reason why this will work (justification)
Unacceptableperformance and clinical reasoning
Rationale is missing or not sound on several methods
Good, but rationale is incomplete or not sound on some methods
Sound rationale given for each method. Comprehensive.
 

Created and developed two treatment sessions utilizing time management skills and progression in the treatment continuum
Did not create and develop treatment sessions accurately and correctly
Creation and development treatment of sessions require additional work. Uses clinical reasoning skills for 50% of session
Good overall. Additional clarification required. Most ideas are good and uses clinical reasoning skills for 75% of session
Created and developed two treatment sessions accurately and correctly, meeting the criteria
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Treatment session:
 
 
 
 
 
 

Description of main medical diagnosis, and any precautions.
Brief description of patient’s status and goals.
Too long or too short of expected length of time
 
 
 
Part of the treatment session is appropriate and addresses goals.
 
 
 
Most of treatment session is appropriate & addresses goals.
 
 
 
Medical and diagnoses information covered. Important precautions mentioned. Brief discussion of patient’s status and goals-
 
 
 
 
 

 
Uses and prepares equipment in the lab.
Last minute preparation with materials.
Creativity shown.
 
 
Creativity, flexibility. Demonstrates how activity can be graded.
Overview of treatments selected and why they are appropriate for this patient is indicated.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Address Q & A.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unable to answer questions from instructor/ students related to rational or activity analysis or interventions.
Nervous, but attempts to answer questions at the end of treatment session.
 
Answers questions easily and somewhat accuratel y at the end of treatment session .
Student is able to explain and answer all questions at the end of treatment session. Shows how activities can be graded up or down. Rational is complete
Shows creativity. At the end of the treatment session, identifies opportunity to recommend to the occupational therapist the need for referring client for reevaluation, discharge planning and additional evaluation for other services and/or professional (s).
 

Written activity analysis for each activity.
Vague, not well elaborated, does not address value or meaning of activity. Explanation will not contribute to analysis.
Many questions arise. Data provided is acceptable, but more effort is required.
Data provided that may assist in identifying value of activity for use in treatment requires minimal additional clarification.
Well discussed, provides meaningful relevant data that may assist in identifying value of activity for use in treatment
 

Shows progression from adjunctive to purposeful as appropriate.
Rationale and explanation of interventions.
Unacceptable. More creativity and justification required.
Many questions arise. Rationale and explanation of interventions requires additional focus and concentration
Progression from adjunctive to purposeful requires additional thought process.
Rationale and explanation of interventions require additional work but can be followed. Some questions arise.
Progression from adjunctive to purposeful as appropriate.
Rationale and explanation of interventions is clearly identified.
 

Shows priority as related to discharge plans as appropriate.
 
 
 
Vague and not well elaborated.
Priority as related to discharge plans is not as evident. Many questions arise
 
Priority as related to discharge plans requires additional clarification
 
 
Priority as related to discharge plans as appropriate.
 
 
 

After treatment session, identification of
opportunity to
recommend to the occupational therapist the need for referring client for reevaluation and additional evaluation for other services and/or professional (s).
 
 
Unacceptable. Evidence of knowledge and understanding is not apparent
Identification of
opportunity to
recommend to the occupational therapist the need for referring client for reevaluation and additional evaluation for other services and/or professional (s) is articulated, however, many questions arise
Identification of
opportunity to
recommend to the occupational therapist the need for referring client for reevaluation and additional evaluation for other services and/or professional (s) is articulated., however, knowledge and understanding is not as apparent. Minimal clarification to increase knowledge and understanding required.
 
Identification of
opportunity to
recommend to the occupational therapist the need for referring client for reevaluation and additional evaluation for other services and/or professional (s) clearly articulated. Knowledge and understanding is evident.
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Evidence based treatment: AJOT or other researched based articles are used to support one intervention.
Copies of article included with paper.
No evidence of article or
more than 25% of the information is not accurately transcribed.
Selection of articles are not highly relevant to case study/or is/are insufficient.
Another article is recommended
Selected article supports specified intervention, but rationale requires additional clarification
Selected article addresses specified intervention with supporting rationale provided
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Treatment Note:
 
 
 
 
 

Completed all sections of the intervention/treatment note utilizing all the necessary criteria
Unacceptable contribution. Requires remediation in note writing.
Additional clarification is required. Moderate corrections required
Minimal corrections required, however, able to follow
Completed all sections of the intervention/treatment note
 

Subjective
 
 
 
 
 
 

Objective
 
 
 
 
 
 

Assessment
 
 
 
 
 
 

Plan
 
 
 
 
 
 

"Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you with a guaranteed plagiarism-free A+ quality paper. Discount Code: SUPER50!"
Assignment Writers