NR 571 Week 2 Myasthenia and Pneumonia Case Paper Example

Complex Diagnosis and Management in Acute Care Practicum Chamberlain University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

Pneumonia in a 72-year-old with generalized myasthenia gravis is the multisystem case in this NR 571 Week 2 sample paper, organized around decisions rather than organ systems. Chamberlain NR 571 (NR-571), Complex Diagnosis and Management in Acute Care Practicum, asks MSN students in the AGACNP specialty to manage patients whose conditions interfere with each other. The sample ranks seven problems with the finding that would move each, describes three conflicts with their sources (the pneumonia antibiotics, the beta blocker and the steroid dose), lays out the single arrangement actually run, reports what changed by day 3 and closes on what the case shows about qualifying each single-disease guideline before using it.

CourseNR 571 Complex Diagnosis and Management in Acute Care Practicum
Week2
Paper typeMultisystem case paper
LengthAbout 1,160 words, 5 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolChamberlain University
ProgramMSN, Adult-Gerontology Acute Care NP (AGACNP)
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for NR 571 Week 2

1

Pneumonia in a 72-Year-Old With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Multisystem Case Paper Organized Around the Decisions Rather Than the Organ Systems

Student Name

College of Nursing, Chamberlain University

NR 571: Complex Diagnosis and Management in Acute Care Practicum

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe headings name decisions, not body systems, so the reader meets the ranked problems, the point where two treatments stop fitting together and the arrangement actually being run.
2

Pneumonia in a 72-Year-Old With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Multisystem Case Paper Organized Around the Decisions Rather Than the Organ Systems

The Patient and the Admission

The patient is a composite drawn from the acute care service where I am placed this term. The patient is 72, a retired dental hygienist who lives with a spouse in a single-story house, gardens most days from April to October and drives. Generalized myasthenia gravis with antibodies against the acetylcholine receptor was diagnosed six years ago and has been stable for three on pyridostigmine 60 mg four times a day, prednisone 10 mg every morning and azathioprine 100 mg daily. Other conditions are atrial fibrillation on apixaban and metoprolol, type 2 diabetes on metformin with a last A1c of 7.4%, chronic kidney disease at stage 3a (estimated filtration rate 52) and osteoporosis treated with weekly alendronate since starting long-term prednisone.

The patient arrived with three days of cough, fever and breathlessness. The temperature was 38.6 C, pulse 118 and irregular, pressure 118/70, respiratory rate 24 and saturation 90% on room air, rising to 95% once 2 liters of oxygen ran through a nasal cannula. The chest film showed consolidation in the right lower lobe. The white count was 14.8, urea nitrogen 23 and glucose 246. The CURB-65 score was 2, for age and urea. The spouse added the detail that changed the admission: for two days the patient's eyelids had drooped by evening, and thin liquids had started to cause coughing.

Ranking the Problems

I ranked the problems on the first evening by what could cause the most harm in the next 48 hours, and I wrote down the finding that would move each one.

1. Community-acquired pneumonia, moderate. It is the reason for admission and the likely trigger for everything else. It moves down if the fever and oxygen need fall within 48 hours.

2. Myasthenia gravis with early worsening. Infection is the commonest trigger of a myasthenic crisis, and the drooping eyelids and new difficulty swallowing are early signs (Gilhus, 2016). It moves up if bedside breathing tests fall.

3. Swallowing difficulty with risk of aspiration, which links the first two.

4. Atrial fibrillation with a fast rate, driven by fever and infection.

5. Hyperglycemia, from infection on top of daily prednisone.

6. Chronic kidney disease, which shapes drug choices and doses.

7. Osteoporosis on alendronate, a carried problem that becomes active because of the swallowing difficulty.

What this page is doingEach problem carries the finding that would move it, so the ranking is a decision that can be revisited rather than a list of diagnoses.
3

Where the Managements Stop Fitting Together

Three points of conflict appeared in the first six hours, and each is described here with the recommendation that created it.

The first is the antibiotic. The joint ATS/IDSA guideline on adult pneumonia recommends, for a patient admitted to a general ward, either a beta-lactam combined with a macrolide or a respiratory fluoroquinolone alone; each is a strong recommendation (Metlay et al., 2019). Both macrolides and fluoroquinolones can worsen neuromuscular transmission in myasthenia, and fluoroquinolones carry a boxed warning for exactly this effect (Sheikh et al., 2021). The guideline itself offers a third route, a beta-lactam with doxycycline, for patients who cannot take either class, though only as a conditional recommendation on low-quality evidence (Metlay et al., 2019). Like every single-disease guideline, it was written for a population that mostly did not have the patient's other conditions (Boyd et al., 2005).

The second conflict is heart rate. The usual first step for a fast rate in atrial fibrillation is a beta blocker, and the patient already takes one. Beta blockers can also deepen myasthenic weakness, which raises the question of whether to give more of the drug or to rely on treating the fever and infection.

The third conflict is how to treat the myasthenic worsening itself. Raising the prednisone dose is the obvious step, but steroid benefit in myasthenia takes weeks to arrive, high starting doses can cause a temporary worsening, and more prednisone would push the glucose higher during an infection (Gilhus, 2016). Intravenous immune globulin or plasma exchange act within days but carry their own costs.

The Arrangement Being Run

After discussion with the attending physician and the neurology consultant, the plan on the first night was as follows.

Antibiotics: ceftriaxone with doxycycline, given through the vein while swallowing was impaired. The urinary antigen for Legionella was sent, because doxycycline is a weaker choice against it than the guideline's preferred drugs, and a positive result would reopen the decision.

Myasthenia: pyridostigmine continued at the home dose, given with the nasogastric route ready if swallowing failed. Bedside respiratory monitoring every four hours: a single-breath count and neck flexion strength, which correlate with formal vital capacity in myasthenia (Elsheikh et al., 2016), and formal forced vital capacity twice a day. Prednisone held at the home dose of 10 mg. Neurology to decide on immune globulin the next morning based on the overnight numbers.

Heart rate: metoprolol continued at the home dose without additional doses; fever control with acetaminophen and fluid to reduce the rate. Apixaban continued.

Glucose: metformin held because of the infection and kidney function; basal and correction insulin to a target below 180 mg/dL, in line with the inpatient hyperglycemia guideline (Umpierrez et al., 2012).

Swallowing: nothing by mouth until a speech-language pathology assessment; alendronate held, because it requires the patient to swallow a full glass of water and stay upright for 30 minutes, which was not safe.

What this page is doingThe arrangement is described as one plan with its compromises named, rather than as seven separate treatment plans laid side by side.
4

What Changed by Day 3

On the morning of day 2 the single-breath count had fallen from 22 to 17 and the vital capacity from 1.9 to 1.5 liters. Neurology started immune globulin at 2 g/kg divided over two days, using a product without sucrose and a slow rate because of the kidney disease. By day 3 the fever had broken, the oxygen was off and the breathing numbers had stabilized. The Legionella antigen was negative, and the antibiotic plan stood.

What this page is doingReporting what changed by day 3, including the test the substitution created, closes the loop on each compromise named earlier in the paper.
5

What This Case Shows About Multimorbidity

In this patient, the conditions were not a list to be worked through one at a time. The pneumonia changed the myasthenia, the myasthenia changed the antibiotic, the antibiotic choice created a new test to send, and the swallowing difficulty reached all the way to an osteoporosis drug that had nothing to do with the admission. The guidelines for each condition were useful, and every one of them had to be qualified before it could be used. The American Geriatrics Society's guiding principles for multimorbidity ask clinicians to weigh the evidence in light of the patient's other conditions and to consider the interactions between treatments, which is what this admission required at almost every step (American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity, 2012).

References

American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity. (2012). Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: An approach for clinicians. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60(10), E1-E25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.04188.x

Boyd, C. M., Darer, J., Boult, C., Fried, L. P., Boult, L., & Wu, A. W. (2005). Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: Implications for pay for performance. JAMA, 294(6), 716-724. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.294.6.716

Elsheikh, B., Arnold, W. D., Gharibshahi, S., Reynolds, J., Freimer, M., & Kissel, J. T. (2016). Correlation of single-breath count test and neck flexor muscle strength with spirometry in myasthenia gravis. Muscle & Nerve, 53(1), 134-136. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.24929

Gilhus, N. E. (2016). Myasthenia gravis. New England Journal of Medicine, 375(26), 2570-2581. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1602678

Metlay, J. P., Waterer, G. W., Long, A. C., Anzueto, A., Brozek, J., Crothers, K., Cooley, L. A., Dean, N. C., Fine, M. J., Flanders, S. A., Griffin, M. R., Metersky, M. L., Musher, D. M., Restrepo, M. I., & Whitney, C. G. (2019). Diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia: An official clinical practice guideline of the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 200(7), e45-e67. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201908-1581ST

Sheikh, S., Alvi, U., Soliven, B., & Rezania, K. (2021). Drugs that induce or cause deterioration of myasthenia gravis: An update. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10(7), Article 1537. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10071537

Umpierrez, G. E., Hellman, R., Korytkowski, M. T., Kosiborod, M., Maynard, G. A., Montori, V. M., Seley, J. J., & Van den Berghe, G. (2012). Management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients in non-critical care setting: An Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 97(1), 16-38. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-2098

What the NR 571 Week 2 assignment asks for

The Week 2 case paper usually asks for several pages under APA headings on one patient with interacting conditions. Name the headings after decisions rather than body systems, so the reader moves from ranked problems to the points where managements stop fitting together and then to the plan actually used. Numbers belong next to the decision they support, not in a table at the end. Single-disease recommendations should be cited by organization and year and then qualified, because each was written for patients without the others. Expect to describe the plan as one arrangement with its compromises, and many prompts ask for an account of what changed afterward.

How this NR 571 Week 2 example is built

The example introduces a retired dental hygienist with myasthenia, atrial fibrillation, diabetes, kidney disease and osteoporosis, and the details the spouse supplied about drooping eyelids. A ranked list of seven problems follows, each with the finding that would move it. The conflict section sets out three collisions, each with its guideline: antibiotics, heart rate and steroid dose. The arrangement section gives the plan for each area as part of one whole, including bedside breathing tests and a held bone drug. A short section reports the overnight decline, immune globulin and the negative Legionella test. The paper ends on what the case shows about guidelines.

Reading the NR 571 Week 2 grading rubric

Points cluster on the conflict section, which a strong paper names and sources. Headings named after systems lose credit, while headings named after decisions show the reasoning, as in this sample. Ranking with a reason for each problem satisfies the prioritization criterion. Citing a guideline and then explaining why it needs qualification for this patient fills the evidence row better than citing it alone. The arrangement earns marks when it reads as one plan with stated compromises. A short update showing what changed and why demonstrates follow-through, and a closing on multimorbidity as a pattern earns the synthesis points. Margin notes in the sample point to the exact places where each criterion is earned, which is a useful check against your own draft.

Common NR 571 Week 2 mistakes, and how to avoid them

Weak NR 571 Week 2 papers march through organ systems, giving each condition its own plan with no mention of how they interact. Others cite guidelines without noting that they were written for different patients. Numbers are often dumped into a lab table that nothing refers to. Some papers name a conflict but never say how it was settled. Many end at admission without reporting what happened next. If your patient has a different set of conditions, send the problem list and the treatments involved; a case paper can be organized around the decisions your patient's conditions forced. Keep background on each disease short, since the rubric rewards decisions, not descriptions. Name every conflict you resolved and the source behind the choice.

Get a NR 571 Week 2 example written to your instructions

Your placement records are your own work: the hours, the encounter entries and every form an institution puts its name to come from you, not from us. What we write is the paper built on top of them. Send the assignment file and any template your section supplies, and a custom example is written to it and returned inside 24-48h, the first one free.

More NR 571 papers and AGACNP samples

NR 571 Week 2 questions, answered

How many problems should the case carry?

Where the assignment sets a number, that is the number. Where it leaves it open, three tends to work best. Two rarely generates a real ordering argument, and four or more turns the paper into an inventory where every section gets a paragraph and none of them gets an argument. Pick three that genuinely interfere with each other.

Do I have to use the patient I saw on placement?

Follow the assignment on that point, since some sections require it and others supply a case. Either way the paper is written about a pattern of problems rather than about an identifiable person, and a sample is built from the shape you describe. Names, dates and anything that would identify a site stay out of the document.

What makes this different from a standard case study?

A standard case study can be right about one condition and finish. This one cannot, because the assignment supplies a person carrying several and marks the relationship between them. The test a marker applies is simple: remove any one problem section and see whether the other two still make sense. If they do, the paper was three case studies.

Where can I find a free NR 571 Week 2 sample paper?

Read the full multisystem case paper on pneumonia in a patient with myasthenia gravis on this page, with its ranked problems and three named conflicts.

Why is doxycycline used in the NR 571 Week 2 case paper?

Macrolides and fluoroquinolones can worsen myasthenic weakness, and the pneumonia guideline allows a beta-lactam with doxycycline when both are unsuitable.