| Course | NURS 3025 Health Assessment |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 3 |
| Paper type | Discussion post with two peer replies |
| Length | About 510 words, 3 pages |
| Format | Discussion post, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 3025 Week 3
Week 3 Discussion: Initial Post
Three Phrases the Next Nurse Cannot Check, Rewritten as Findings
A composite nursing note on a medical unit contains three phrases I see on almost every shift. Each records a conclusion the next reader cannot check. Here is each one, what it concludes, and a rewrite.
"Appears anxious." This concludes an emotional state from something the writer saw but did not record. The next nurse cannot tell whether the patient was pacing, crying, or simply asking many questions. Rewrite: "Speaking rapidly, repeatedly asking when the doctor will come; hands moving constantly on the blanket. States, 'I'm really worried about the biopsy results.'" Now the reader can compare the next assessment against the same features.
"Wound looks infected." This concludes a diagnosis. It hides the features that would let anyone judge whether the wound is getting better or worse. Rewrite: "Abdominal incision 12 cm, edges approximated except a 1 cm gap at the lower end. Surrounding redness extends 2 cm from the incision on both sides, warm to touch. Small amount of cloudy yellow drainage on the dressing, about 2 by 3 cm. No odor." Each feature is recorded separately, so a change in any one of them is visible at the next check (Bickley et al., 2021).
"Tolerated well." This concludes that nothing went wrong, without saying what was measured. Rewrite: "Walked 30 m in hallway with walker and one assist. Heart rate 84 before, 102 after, returned to 86 within 3 minutes. Oxygen saturation 96% before and 94% after on room air. Denied dizziness; rated fatigue 3 out of 10."
The rewrites matter most to the next nurse on shift, who has to decide whether the patient is changing. "Appears anxious" at 08:00 and "appears anxious" at 16:00 tell her nothing about change; two counts of questions and two quoted statements do. A review of nursing documentation describes clear, accurate, and specific records as the basis for continuity of care and communication between clinicians, and vague entries as a barrier to both (Blair & Smith, 2012).
Reply to Danielle
Danielle, your list of vague phrases could extend to abbreviations, which conclude something by hiding it. The Joint Commission keeps an official "Do Not Use" list of abbreviations that have caused errors, such as "U" for units and "QD" for daily, because they are easily misread (The Joint Commission, n.d.). An abbreviation is not a conclusion, but like "tolerated well," it asks the next reader to guess. Do you think abbreviations that are not on the official list, such as "WNL," deserve the same caution?
Reply to Kevin
Kevin, I would add the word "normal" to your examples. "Lungs normal" does not tell the next nurse which areas were listened to, whether the patient took deep breaths, or whether the posterior bases were checked on a patient who could not sit up. "Breath sounds clear in all lobes anteriorly and posteriorly, no crackles or wheezes" says what was examined as well as what was found. What would you write for a patient who could only be examined from the front?
References
Bickley, L. S., Szilagyi, P. G., Hoffman, R. M., & Soriano, R. P. (2021). Bates' guide to physical examination and history taking (13th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
Blair, W., & Smith, B. (2012). Nursing documentation: Frameworks and barriers. Contemporary Nurse, 41(2), 160-168. https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.2012.41.2.160
The Joint Commission. (n.d.). Official "Do Not Use" list. https://www.jointcommission.org/
Reading the NURS 3025 Week 3 instructions
The third NURS 3025 thread often asks how nurses should write assessment findings so others can use them. You select vague phrases, explain what they conclude, rewrite them as observable findings and explain why that matters for safety and handoff. Faculty weigh the initial post for substance and support. Cite at least one source on documentation in APA 7, even if the post mainly rewrites phrases. The initial post goes up midweek, and replies follow later. A reply counts as substantive when it adds a rewrite or a source. The phrases can come from common practice rather than a real record. NURS 3025 faculty want each rewrite to include something measurable or observable, such as a pain score or wound size.
How this NURS 3025 Week 3 example is built
At just under five hundred words, the initial post is laid out as three short before-and-after pairs. Each pair quotes the original phrase, names what it concludes, and supplies the rewrite: 'appears anxious' becomes a description of speech rate, hand movement and the patient's own statement about worry; 'wound looks infected' becomes size, color, drainage and odor recorded separately; 'tolerated well' becomes what was measured before and after. A closing paragraph argues why the rewrites matter to the next nurse on shift, with one scholarly source on documentation quality cited inside the argument. The two replies, each near two hundred words, extend the comparison to abbreviations and to the word 'normal', citing The Joint Commission's list of abbreviations barred from clinical records.
NURS 3025 Week 3 rubric: what earns full marks
NURS 3025 discussion rubrics weigh the first post for substance and support, then score replies and mechanics on their own lines. Substance here means the post does something with the findings language rather than describing it, and the before-and-after pairs are where that shows. Support is a separate line and is lost in two familiar ways: no citation at all, on the assumption that a charting topic needs none, or a citation attached to a sentence that needed none. Replies earn their share only when they carry new material, and a reply limited to approval of a classmate's rewrites typically sits at the floor. APA formatting in the post and its reference list usually carries only a few points, and it is marked every discussion week regardless of topic.
Common NURS 3025 Week 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Findings posts lose credit when they criticize vague charting without rewriting it. Give the before and after for each phrase. Another common gap is rewrites that are still judgments, such as wound healing well. Include measurements and descriptions. Writers also forget to explain the risk of the original phrase. Say what the next nurse could miss. Avoid using real charts. Cite a documentation source. In replies, rewrite a phrase the classmate used. Close with one phrase you will stop using. Writers also forget that a vague phrase can hide a change, such as a wound that is worsening. Give an example. Another frequent slip is a rewrite too long to chart quickly. Keep it brief.
Get a NURS 3025 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Paste the Week 3 discussion prompt, the rubric, and any charting excerpt or finding set your section supplies. The initial post comes back built around those exact phrases, with two replies aimed at plausible classmate positions and a cited source you can check. The first custom sample is free, with delivery inside 24-48 hours.
More NURS 3025 papers and BSN samples
- NURS 3025 Week 1: Documentation Exercise
- NURS 3025 Week 2: Health History
- NURS 3025 Week 4: Integumentary Write-Up
- NURS 3025 Week 5: Cardiopulmonary Documentation
- NURS 3025 Week 6: Abnormal Findings Post
- NURS 3025 Week 7: Abdominal and MSK Write-Up
- NURS 3025 Week 8: Neurological Assessment Note
- NURS 3025 Week 9: Pediatric Focused Note
- NURS 3025 Week 10: Head-to-Toe Write-Up
- NURS 3025 Week 11: Documentation Reflection
- NURS 3030 Week 3: Cultural Humility Thread
- NURS 3021 Week 3: Change Agent Goal Statement
- NURS 3111 Week 3: Charting Workflow Critique
- NURS 4300 Week 3: Capstone Search Strategy
NURS 3025 Week 3 questions, answered
Does a findings language post need a citation if it only rewrites phrases?
In most sections, yes. The rewrites need no source, but a post that argues why precise language matters is making a claim about safety and communication, and that claim is what the support line scores. The example carries one scholarly source on documentation quality in its closing paragraph and one in a reply, which covers the usual minimum without attaching references to lines that are simply descriptive.
Are the charting phrases from a real record?
They are stock phrases of the kind any nurse has read, placed in a composite note drafted for the page. No patient sits behind them. If your prompt hands you its own excerpt, the post is rebuilt around that text instead, and anything from your workplace stays at your workplace, since a discussion board is no place for a real chart.
What makes a reply count as substantive here?
New material. The example's replies each bring something the initial post lacked, one on abbreviations and one on the phrase 'within normal limits', and each ends by pressing the classmate on a specific term. Agreement, restated summaries and general encouragement are the patterns graders tend to score at the minimum, however well written they are.
Where can I find a free NURS 3025 Week 3 sample paper?
The three-phrases post is shown here with each vague phrase, what it concludes, the rewrite as a finding and replies to Danielle and Kevin.
Which phrases are rewritten in NURS 3025 Week 3?
Patient resting comfortably, wound looks good and tolerated diet, each turned into findings the next nurse can check.