Every order is original, expert-done, and screened for AI — full report on request.See how it works

Assignment questions
NursingDiscussion postPatient education

HLT 306 Topic 1 DQ 1: Alma Faulkenberger case plan

Using the topic materials, develop a plan to help Alma Faulkenberger comply with her invasive pelvic procedure and post-treatment medication, and describe the approach you would take to patient education in a case where staff repeatedly got her name wrong.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 13, 2026

01

The barrier is the interaction, not the information

Read what actually happened before planning anything. An 85-year-old woman waiting for an invasive pelvic procedure was addressed by her first name alone by a stranger, then by a mangled surname, then shouted at on the assumption she was deaf — and her reply shows she is fully oriented, articulate and entirely aware of how she has been treated. She is not non-compliant and there is no evidence of cognitive impairment or hearing loss. What exists is a damaged therapeutic relationship, created in the waiting room, plus the ageist assumption that produced it. Any plan that opens by assessing her health literacy or her understanding of the procedure has misread the case, because it treats her as the problem. The plan opens with repair: approach her properly, address her as Ms. Faulkenberger unless she invites otherwise, apologise for the earlier exchange without excusing it, and confirm her identity using two identifiers as policy requires.

Only then does assessment make sense, and it should be genuine rather than pro- forma: what she already understands about the procedure, what concerns her, what will happen at home afterwards, whether anything practical stands between her and taking the medication as prescribed. Compliance with post-treatment medication in an 85-year-old commonly turns on cost, regimen complexity, side effects, dexterity, vision and whether anyone is at home, so ask rather than assume. The education approach the second question asks about should be adult-learner shaped — she is a capable adult with her own reasons, so involve her in setting the goals, present information in plain language without shouting or infantilising, allow for slower processing without assuming impairment, offer written material in a legible format, and verify understanding with teach-back rather than by asking whether she has any questions, since a patient who has just been shouted at is the last person who will volunteer that she did not follow something.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

  • 01
    Distinguish a communication failure from patient non-compliance.
  • 02
    Recognise ageist assumptions in clinical interaction and their consequences.
  • 03
    Apply therapeutic communication to repair a damaged encounter.
  • 04
    Identify practical barriers to medication adherence in an older adult.
  • 05
    Verify patient understanding using teach-back rather than closed questioning.
Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

HLT 306 Topic 1 DQ 1 Alma Faulkenberger is an 85-year-old female outpatient sitting in the waiting room awaiting an invasive pelvic procedure. The health care professional who will assist in her procedure enters the room and calls “Alma.” There is no reply so the professional retreats to the work area. Fifteen minutes later the professional returns and calls “Alma Frankenberg.” Still no reply, so he leaves again. Another 15 minutes pass and the professional approaches Alma and shouts in her ear, “Are you Alma Frankenberg?” She replies, “No I am not, and I am not deaf either, and when you get my name correct I will answer you.” Using the topic 1 materials, develop a plan to help Alma be compliant with the procedure and post-treatment medication. Also, describe the approach you would take to patient education in this case.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS Discussion Questions (DQ) Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses. Weekly Participation Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week. APA Format and Writing Quality Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. HLT 306 Topic 1 DQ 1 I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition. Use of Direct Quotes I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. LopesWrite Policy For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. Late Policy The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading. Communication Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01
    A plan to help Alma comply with the procedure.
  2. 02
    A plan addressing compliance with post-treatment medication.
  3. 03
    An identification of the barriers actually present in this scenario.
  4. 04
    A described approach to patient education for this case.
  5. 05
    A method for verifying that education has been understood.
03

Repair, assess, plan, teach, verify

01

What went wrong in the waiting room

The three failed approaches and the assumption behind the third.

02

Repairing the encounter

Correct name, appropriate approach, acknowledgement, and two-identifier verification.

03

Assessing the real barriers

Understanding, concerns, home circumstances and practical obstacles to the medication.

04

The compliance plan

Concrete steps for the procedure and for the post-treatment regimen.

05

The education approach

Adult learning principles, plain language, appropriate materials and pacing.

06

Verifying understanding

Teach-back as the check, with a plan for what to do if it fails.

04

Therapeutic communication and teach-back

Recommended databases

  • StatPearls via NCBI Bookshelf
  • MedlinePlus
  • AHRQ health literacy resources
  • Course topic 1 materials
  • PubMed

Search sequence

  1. 1.
    Read the topic 1 materials the prompt directs you to use.
  2. 2.
    Read on therapeutic communication and its role in adherence.
  3. 3.
    Read on ageism in health care encounters and its measured effects.
  4. 4.
    List the practical determinants of medication adherence in older adults.
  5. 5.
    Read the teach-back method and how it differs from asking for questions.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

  1. 01

    Therapeutic Communication

    StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024

    The communication techniques the repair section of the plan depends on.

  2. 02

    Evaluating Internet Health Information

    MedlinePlus, National Library of Medicine · 2024

    What written material given to a patient has to satisfy before it supports rather than confuses teaching.

  3. 03

    Talking With Your Doctor

    MedlinePlus, National Library of Medicine · 2024

    The patient-side view of a clinical encounter, useful for framing the education approach.

  4. 04

    Older Adult Health

    MedlinePlus, National Library of Medicine · 2024

    Age-specific factors that determine whether a post-treatment regimen is actually taken.

06

Review before submission

Common mistakes

  • Treating Alma as non-compliant when nothing in the scenario suggests she is.
  • Assuming hearing loss or cognitive impairment that the scenario explicitly contradicts.
  • Beginning the plan with education rather than with repairing the interaction.
  • Listing generic adherence strategies without connecting them to this patient.
  • Describing patient education as giving information rather than as a two-way process.
  • Checking understanding by asking whether she has questions instead of using teach-back.

Submission checklist

  • The actual barrier is correctly identified as the interaction.
  • The plan opens with repairing the relationship and using her correct name.
  • Identity is confirmed using two identifiers.
  • Practical barriers to medication adherence are assessed rather than assumed.
  • The education approach treats her as a capable adult learner.
  • Understanding is verified by teach-back.

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order