Nursing Care Plan Homework Help

What Makes a High-Scoring Nursing Care Plan?

A strong care plan demonstrates clinical reasoning, patient safety, and measurable progress. Instructors look for clear alignment between the nursing diagnosis, the chosen outcomes, and the interventions you implement at the bedside. At BooksFieldNursingHub.com, we combine NANDA-I, NOC, and NIC with current evidence to produce care plans that read like professional documentation while meeting academic requirements. Below is our approach so you know exactly what to expect.

Clinical Reasoning Framework We Follow

• Assessment: Compile subjective and objective data, labs, imaging, and trends (e.g., vitals, I&O, pain scores).
• Analysis: Cluster cues, identify patterns, and prioritize problems using Maslow, ABCs, or facility protocols.
• Nursing Diagnosis: Select NANDA-I labels with defining characteristics and related/etiologic factors.
• Outcomes (NOC): Choose outcomes and indicators that match the diagnosis; define realistic targets and timelines.
• Interventions (NIC): Specify independent and collaborative interventions with rationales and references.
• Evaluation: Document response to care, progress against indicators, and necessary plan adjustments.

Sample Care Plan (Abbreviated)

This example illustrates our structure; your plan will be tailored to your rubric and patient scenario.

Patient Summary: 68-year-old with COPD exacerbation, productive cough, RR 26, SpO₂ 88% on room air, coarse crackles, increased work of breathing, anxiety about dyspnea.

Nursing Diagnosis (NANDA-I): Impaired Gas Exchange related to alveolar-capillary membrane changes and mucus plugging as evidenced by low SpO₂, tachypnea, adventitious lung sounds, and dyspnea.

Outcomes (NOC): Respiratory Status: Gas Exchange (indicator targets in 12–24 hours) — SpO₂ ≥ 92% on 2 L NC; RR 16–20; clear to diminished crackles; decreased use of accessory muscles; anxiety rating ≤ 3/10.

Interventions (NIC) & Rationales:

• Airway Management: Encourage huff coughing and pursed-lip breathing q1–2h to improve ventilation and reduce air trapping. Evidence shows PLB increases expiratory time and reduces dynamic hyperinflation.
• Oxygen Therapy: Titrate O₂ to maintain 90–92% per COPD protocol; avoid over-oxygenation to reduce risk of CO₂ retention. Monitor ABGs if ordered.
• Medication Management: Administer bronchodilators and systemic corticosteroids as prescribed; evaluate response (wheeze reduction, improved SpO₂).
• Positioning: High-Fowler’s and tripod positioning to maximize diaphragmatic excursion and reduce WOB.
• Anxiety Reduction: Calm coaching, short phrases, and reassurance; consider anti-anxiety measures per provider if anxiety worsens dyspnea.
• Education: Teach PLB, energy conservation, and when to seek care; provide written COPD action plan.

Evaluation: After 6 hours, SpO₂ 92% on 2 L NC, RR 20, scattered crackles, anxiety 3/10, patient demonstrates PLB technique; continue plan and reinforce education.

Rubric Alignment and Marking Criteria

• Diagnostic Accuracy: NANDA label matches evidence; etiology and defining characteristics are documented.
• Measurable Outcomes: NOC indicators include specific targets, units, and timelines.
• Evidence-Based Interventions: NIC interventions include rationales backed by recent scholarly references.
• Patient-Centered: Culturally sensitive teaching points, consent/communication, safety, and discharge planning.
• Professional Writing: Clear clinical language, correct spelling/grammar, and consistent formatting.

Formatting & Referencing

We format care plans per your template or facility tool (grid, narrative, or EHR-style). Citations follow APA 7th by default, with MLA/Chicago/Vancouver on request. We prefer peer-reviewed sources from the last 5 years unless classic guidelines apply (e.g., NANDA-I definitions).

Common Care Plan Topics We Handle

What We Need From You

• Rubric, template, or EHR export (if provided).
• Patient profile: age, diagnosis, key labs/vitals, course of care.
• Instructor expectations: required diagnoses, word count, citation style.
• Deadline and any special instructions (tables, concept maps, teaching sheets).

Turnaround, Revisions, and Guarantees

Choose 24–48-hour express service for urgent care plans or a standard timeline for complex multi-diagnosis submissions. We include unlimited revisions within the agreed scope and a plagiarism report on request. Your identity and files remain confidential.

Academic Integrity

Use our care plans as high-quality models or references to build your own submission. We encourage learning and skill development; we do not support academic misconduct.

Extended Sample (Narrative Care Plan)

Chief Concern: Post‑op day 1 following laparoscopic cholecystectomy; reports 7/10 incisional pain, RR 22, shallow breathing, SpO₂ 93% on RA, diminished bases bilaterally.

Primary Diagnosis: Acute Pain related to surgical incision as evidenced by self‑report 7/10, guarding, and facial grimace.

Secondary Diagnosis: Ineffective Breathing Pattern related to pain and splinting as evidenced by shallow respirations, RR 22, and diminished breath sounds at bases.

NOC Outcomes: Pain Level ≤ 3/10 within 8 hours; Respiratory Status: Ventilation—RR 12–20, symmetrical chest expansion; Knowledge: Pain Management—verbalizes non‑pharm strategies before discharge.

NIC Interventions: Analgesic Administration (as ordered, multimodal); Splinting Education and Incentive Spirometry q1h WA; Positioning (semi‑Fowler’s) and early ambulation per protocol; Non‑pharmacologic pain relief (guided breathing, heat as appropriate).

Rationales: Combining pharmacologic and non‑pharmacologic strategies reduces opioid requirements and improves ventilation; incentive spirometry reduces atelectasis risk; positioning facilitates diaphragmatic excursion.

Evaluation: After 2 hours, pain 4/10; after IS coaching and analgesia, RR 18, improved aeration at bases; patient demonstrates splinting and IS technique to 1250 mL; update plan to taper analgesics and reinforce mobility goals.

US/UK/CA/AU Standards At‑a‑Glance

• US (AACN/NANDA‑I): Emphasis on measurable outcomes, safety bundles, and SBAR hand‑offs.
• UK (NMC/RCN): Person‑centred language, safeguarding, and reflection on professional values.
• Canada (CNO/CNA): Competency‑based outcomes, cultural safety, and Indigenous health considerations.
• Australia (NMBA/AHPRA): Scope of practice clarity, risk assessment, and documentation standards.

Common Mistakes and How We Fix Them

• Vague diagnoses: We include defining characteristics and related factors to justify the label.
• Non‑measurable outcomes: We add indicators, targets, and timelines (e.g., RR, SpO₂, pain score).
• Missing rationales: Every intervention is backed by a concise evidence‑based rationale.
• Template mismatch: We adapt to any grid/narrative/EHR structure required by your course.

Care Plan Checklist

• Diagnosis aligns with assessment; includes defining characteristics
• Outcomes are specific, measurable, and time‑bound
• Interventions include independent and collaborative actions
• Rationales reference guidelines or peer‑reviewed sources
• Evaluation documents progress and next steps

Scoring Matrix (Typical)

• Assessment & Data Clustering — 20%
• Nursing Diagnosis Accuracy — 20%
• Outcomes & Indicators — 20%
• Interventions & Rationales — 30%
• Formatting & Documentation — 10%

Sample References (APA 7th)

• American Association of Critical‑Care Nurses. (2021). Evidence‑based practice resources.
• NANDA International. (2021). Nursing Diagnoses: Definitions & Classification.
• Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2023). Patient safety guidelines.

Comprehensive FAQs (Extended)