NR 545 Week 3 Focused Exam Write-Up Example

Pharmacology, Physical Assessment, and Pathophysiology Nurse Practitioner graduate placement Chamberlain University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

A focused examination built to test the congestion account of one patient's orthopnea, with every system chosen for a stated physiological reason, is shown in this NR 545 Week 3 sample paper. Chamberlain NR 545 (NR-545 in the catalog) turns Week 3 around so that nurse practitioner students examine because a mechanism demands it. The write-up states the question, trims the history to what changes the examination and records findings as observations with units and laterality: a jugular pressure near 11 cm of water, a third heart sound, bibasilar crackles and 2+ edema with warm extremities. It closes by saying which predictions held and which alternatives weakened.

CourseNR 545 Pharmacology, Physical Assessment, and Pathophysiology Nurse Practitioner graduate placement
Week3
Paper typeFocused exam write-up
LengthAbout 1,120 words, 2 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolChamberlain University
ProgramMSN, nurse practitioner core
UpdatedSeptember 2026

Free sample paper for NR 545 Week 3

1

Focused Exam Write-Up: Testing the Congestion Account of a 64-Year-Old Patient's Orthopnea at the Neck, Heart, Lungs, Abdomen and Legs, With Each System Chosen for a Stated Physiological Reason

Student Name

College of Nursing, Chamberlain University

NR 545: Pharmacology, Physical Assessment, and Pathophysiology

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title makes the examination a test of a mechanism already on the table, and promises a reason for every system examined, which is the feature this course adds to a standard exam record. Student APA 7 title page.
2

Focused Exam Write-Up: Testing the Congestion Account of a 64-Year-Old Patient's Orthopnea at the Neck, Heart, Lungs, Abdomen and Legs, With Each System Chosen for a Stated Physiological Reason

The Question This Examination Answers

The Week 2 mechanism write-up proposed that this patient's breathlessness, orthopnea, nocturnal waking and ankle swelling are caused by raised filling pressures from a left ventricle ejecting only 30% of its volume. It predicted three findings: an elevated jugular venous pressure, pulmonary congestion and pitting edema. It also predicted that extremities would be warm and pulse pressure adequate, because resting output appeared sufficient. The question for this focused examination is whether the patient is congested, and if so, whether perfusion is preserved. That places the patient in one of four hemodynamic profiles, warm or cold and wet or dry, which predicts outcome and guides therapy (Nohria et al., 2003).

History, Cut to What Matters

Subjective. A 64-year-old retired machinist reports breathlessness climbing one flight of stairs, worsening over three weeks. The patient sleeps on two pillows, up from one, and woke twice in the past week breathless, relieved by sitting up. Ankle swelling appears by evening and resolves overnight. The patient denies chest pain at rest or on exertion, palpitations, fainting, fever, cough with sputum or calf pain. Weight has risen by about 3 kg in a month by home scale. The patient reports taking all medications and has not added salt substitutes or anti-inflammatory drugs. Past history includes hypertension, type 2 diabetes and 30 pack-years of smoking, stopped 10 years ago.

Other history, such as surgical and family history, was reviewed and did not change what would be examined, so it is not repeated here.

The patient uses no over-the-counter cold remedies or herbal products and drinks alcohol rarely, which matters because both alcohol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can worsen heart failure.

General and Vital Signs

Reason: overall perfusion, sympathetic activation and whether the patient is breathless at rest.

Alert and conversing in full sentences, sitting upright. Blood pressure 138/84 mmHg seated, right arm, repeated after five minutes. Heart rate 92 per minute, regular. Respiratory rate 20 per minute. Oxygen saturation 95% on room air. Temperature 36.8 °C. Weight 91.4 kg, height 175 cm. Proportional pulse pressure (systolic minus diastolic, divided by systolic) is 0.39, well above the threshold associated with low cardiac output in chronic heart failure (Stevenson & Perloff, 1989).

Neck

Reason: the jugular venous pressure is the most direct bedside estimate of right-sided filling pressure, and the mechanism predicts it is raised.

With the patient at 45 degrees, the internal jugular pulsation on the right is visible 6 cm above the sternal angle; adding the conventional 5 cm puts the estimated jugular venous pressure near 11 cm of water. Sustained firm pressure on the right upper quadrant lifted the pulsation by 4 cm, sustained while pressure was held, a positive abdominojugular test. No carotid bruits.

The waveform had two peaks per beat, could not be palpated and fell when the abdominal pressure was released, confirming it was venous rather than carotid.

Heart

Reason: a dilated ventricle predicts a displaced apex and possibly a third heart sound; a murmur of aortic stenosis or mitral regurgitation would suggest a different or additional cause.

Apex felt one space low, in the sixth interspace, and out at the anterior axillary line; diffuse, about 3 cm across. First and second heart sounds normal. A low-pitched third heart sound is heard at the apex with the bell, patient in left lateral position. A soft grade 2/6 holosystolic murmur at the apex, not radiating. No murmur at the right upper sternal border, no rub.

The apex was re-examined with the patient turned onto the left side, which brings the ventricle closer to the chest wall and makes a low-pitched filling sound easier to hear through the bell.

Lungs

Reason: pulmonary congestion is the central prediction; wheeze or focal signs would point toward lung disease, which the smoking history makes plausible.

Chest expansion symmetric. Percussion resonant except for mild dullness at the right base. Fine inspiratory crackles at both bases, reaching about a third of the lung height on the right side, not clearing with cough. No wheeze. No bronchial breathing.

Abdomen

Reason: hepatic congestion and ascites follow raised right-sided pressure.

Liver edge palpable 2 cm below the right costal margin, smooth and mildly tender. No shifting dullness.

Extremities

Reason: dependent edema follows fluid retention; temperature and capillary refill estimate perfusion.

Pitting edema to mid-shin bilaterally, graded 2+, leaving an indentation that persists for about 15 seconds. Hands and feet warm. Capillary refill under two seconds. Calves soft, equal in circumference, not tender. Dorsalis pedis pulses palpable bilaterally.

Systems Examined to Exclude

Thyroid examined because hyperthyroidism can cause high-output failure and tachycardia: not enlarged, no nodules, no tremor. Skin examined for signs of infection or cellulitis that might explain leg swelling: none.

What the Examination Changed

The congestion account survived. Every predicted finding was present: an elevated jugular venous pressure with a positive abdominojugular test, bibasilar crackles, pitting edema and a third heart sound. The third heart sound matters most, since in breathless patients it substantially raises the probability of heart failure (Wang et al., 2005). The prediction of preserved perfusion also held: warm extremities, brisk capillary refill and a proportional pulse pressure well above the low-output threshold. The patient is warm and wet.

Two findings added to the account. The apical holosystolic murmur is most likely functional mitral regurgitation from a dilated ventricle, which the echocardiogram should confirm. The dullness at the right base suggests a small effusion. Neither changes the conclusion. What the examination weakened was the lung disease alternative: no wheeze, no prolonged expiration and no focal signs. It is not excluded, and spirometry after decongestion would settle it. The next step is to weigh these findings against the alternative explanations for the breathlessness in a single integrated analysis.

The pertinent negatives were chosen, not listed. No wheeze and no prolonged expiration argue against active obstructive lung disease. Soft, symmetric calves without tenderness lower the concern for a deep vein thrombosis as a source of embolism. No murmur at the right upper sternal border makes significant aortic stenosis unlikely, which matters because it would change both the cause and the treatment. A normal temperature and no focal chest signs make pneumonia an unlikely source of the crackles. Each negative removes an alternative the history alone had left open.

References

Nohria, A., Tsang, S. W., Fang, J. C., Lewis, E. F., Jarcho, J. A., Mudge, G. H., & Stevenson, L. W. (2003). Clinical assessment identifies hemodynamic profiles that predict outcomes in patients admitted with heart failure. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 41(10), 1797-1804. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00309-7

Stevenson, L. W., & Perloff, J. K. (1989). The limited reliability of physical signs for estimating hemodynamics in chronic heart failure. JAMA, 261(6), 884-888. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1989.03420060100040

Wang, C. S., FitzGerald, J. M., Schulzer, M., Mak, E., & Ayas, N. T. (2005). Does this dyspneic patient in the emergency department have congestive heart failure? JAMA, 294(15), 1944-1956. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.294.15.1944

Reading the NR 545 Week 3 instructions

The third week asks for a focused physical examination write-up linked to a clinical question. Most prompts want a subjective section, an objective section by system, pertinent positives and negatives, and a summary of what the examination shows. State the question the examination is meant to answer. Keep the history to what changes the examination. Choose systems for a reason, and write that reason under each system heading, including systems examined to exclude something. Record findings as observations, with units, position and laterality, and keep interpretation for the final section. Choose pertinent negatives deliberately and explain what each rules out. Record normal findings in the same detail as abnormal ones. Close by saying which earlier reasoning survived the examination. Cite examination evidence in APA 7.

How this NR 545 Week 3 example is built

The write-up opens by restating the Week 2 predictions and framing the question: is the patient congested, and is perfusion preserved. A trimmed history covers breathlessness, orthopnea, nocturnal waking, edema, weight gain and relevant negatives. General findings and vital signs include a calculated proportional pulse pressure of 0.39. Separate blocks for neck, heart, lungs, abdomen and extremities each carry an italic line giving the reason for examining them, followed by precise findings. A block records systems examined only to exclude thyroid disease and cellulitis. The final section confirms every predicted finding, classifies the patient as warm and wet, discusses the murmur and effusion, explains the chosen negatives and notes that obstructive lung disease is weakened but not excluded.

Where the points sit in the NR 545 Week 3 rubric

Focused exam write-ups are commonly marked on relevance of the systems examined, accuracy and precision of documentation, appropriate positives and negatives, correct technique descriptions and a clear link to clinical reasoning. A stated reason under each system shows the examination was planned, which is the feature this course looks for. Findings written as observations with units and laterality read as professional documentation. Pertinent negatives that each rule something out earn more than a list of normals. Recording normal systems in full detail gives the negatives credibility. A closing section that says which predictions held connects the examination to the reasoning that came before. Current evidence on examination findings, cited in APA 7, supports the interpretation and completes a strong submission.

Common NR 545 Week 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them

Write-ups often include a full head-to-toe record with no reason given for any system, which hides the reasoning the week is assessing. Choose systems and say why. Another weakness is writing interpretations in the findings, such as signs of heart failure, instead of observations like a third heart sound at the apex. Keep them separate. Some students list every normal finding as a negative without saying what each excludes. Choose the ones that matter. Avoid vague measurements; give jugular pressure in centimeters, edema by grade and extent, and blood pressure with position and arm. Do not skip the systems examined to exclude alternatives. End with what the examination changed, since a write-up that simply stops leaves the reader to draw the conclusions.

Get a NR 545 Week 3 example written to your instructions

Send your Week 3 instructions and the examination template your classroom uses, and a custom example is written into it around the case you supply, returned inside 24 to 48 hours and free the first time. It demonstrates the reasoning and the wording, while the examination itself stays yours to perform and record.

More NR 545 papers and MSN samples

NR 545 Week 3 questions, answered

Can I write this around a patient I examined?

Yes, with identifiers removed, and the example is built around whatever context you send. What no example can supply is the examination itself. Results you did not take should never appear in a document reporting that you took them, so the observations remain yours while the structure, reasoning and phrasing are what the example demonstrates.

What if my findings do not match the expected picture?

That is usable material rather than a problem. A write-up reporting an unexpected result and then saying what it does to the earlier reasoning is doing exactly what this course wants. The weak response is adjusting the finding quietly so it fits the mechanism, which a grader notices because everything in the document then agrees a little too neatly.

How focused is focused?

Sections vary and the published instructions decide it, but the useful rule is that a system belongs in the document when a defensible reason put it there. That normally means the system the mechanism implicates, the systems that could produce a similar picture, and any whose normality is needed to exclude something. Everything else is length without credit.

Where can I find a free NR 545 Week 3 sample paper?

The focused examination for suspected heart failure is posted above as the NR 545 Week 3 sample, fully visible. If your patient needs a different examination, share the question and the mechanism and a write-up can be prepared for it.

Why give a reason for each system in the NR 545 Week 3 exam?

Because the course asks the examination to test a mechanism. The sample places a line under each system naming the physiological expectation that sent the examiner there.