DNP 825 Rio Grande Mother Newborn Skin To Skin Contact & Breastfeeding Epidemiology

User Generated

Axrpuv123

Health Medical

DNP 825

University of Rio Grande

DNP

Description

Descriptive Epidemiology

The epidemiology paper is a practice immersion assignment designed to be completed in three sections. This is part two of the assignment. Learners are required to identify an at-risk population, how the health risk for this population can be affected by nursing science, and the potential obstacles that may hinder implementation of health prevention and promotion activities for this particular population.

(Topic: Mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact within first twenty-four hours of birth and breastfeeding initiation rates)

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

  • This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments.
  • This assignment requires that support your position by referencing eight to ten scholarly resources. At least three of your supporting references must be from scholarly sources other than the assigned readings.

.

Directions:

This assignment comprises the second part of the epidemiology paper. Consult the "Data and Statistics" and Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) pages on the CDC website for current information on population health. Use this information to guide your research for this paper, although you may need to supplement your findings with additional resources.

Write a 2,000-3,000-word paper that provides the following:

  • Identify an existing at-risk population. Provide biostatistical, epidemiological, or environmental data to substantiate why this population is at risk.
  • Using analyzed population data, identify a health risk within your selected at-risk population that nursing science can impact. Describe specific variables that the data are measuring and explain how the variables correlate the at-risk population to the identified health risk.
  • Identify potential barriers that may hinder the implementation of disease-prevention and health-promotion activities. Explain why these barriers may slow or impede strategies to reduce the effects of the health risk on the at-risk population.
  • Identify stakeholders and agencies with whom you may need to collaborate to implement health risk reduction strategies. Explain why you selected these collaborators and how they will contribute to your disease prevention and health promotion plan.

Explanation & Answer length: 2000 words

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Course Code DNP-825 Class Code DNP-825-O500 Criteria Content Percentage 75.0% Identification of At-Risk Population With Data to Substantiate Why the Population Is At-Risk 15.0% Identification of Health Risk Based on Population Data Analysis 15.0% Potential Barriers to Implementation of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Activities 15.0% Collaborators for Implementing Risk Reduction Strategies 15.0% Completed Changes and Corrected Errors to Previous Paper Including Transitions for a Scholarly Paper 15.0% Organization and Effectiveness 15.0% Thesis Development and Purpose 5.0% Argument Logic and Construction 5.0% Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Format 10.0% Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Total Weightage 100% Assignment Title Epidemiology Paper - Part Two: Analysis and Application 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Paper does not identify an existing at-risk population. Paper does not demonstrate an analysis of population data to identify a health risk facing an at-risk population. Paper does not identify potential barriers to implementation of disease prevention and health promotion activities. No collaborators are identified. Previous paper is not attached. Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Sources are not documented. Total Points 120.0 2: Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%) Paper identifies an existing at-risk population but does not provide data to substantiate why the population is at-risk. Population analysis is only partially based on data, and though a health facing an at-risk population is identified, no specific variables are described. Paper identifies some potential barriers to implementation of disease prevention and health promotion activities but does not explain why these barriers may slow the progress of health promotion efforts. Some collaborators are identified, but there is little connection between the stakeholders mentioned and the risk reduction strategies to be implemented. Previous paper is attached, but no changes are indicated. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. 3: Satisfactory (88.00%) Paper identifies an existing at-risk population but provides only limited data to substantiate why the population is atrisk. Population analysis is flawed or incomplete, with only a weak correlation between the health risk identified and the variables being measured. Paper identifies potential barriers to implementation of disease prevention and health promotion activities explanation of why these barriers may slow the progress of health promotion efforts is weak and unsupported. Potential collaborators are identified, but connection to risk reduction implementation plan is vague and missing key elements. N/A Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. 4: Good (92.00%) Paper identifies an existing at-risk population and provides supportive data to substantiate why the population is at-risk. Population analysis is clear and demonstrates a correlation between the health risk identified and contributing variables being measured. Paper identifies potential barriers to implementation of disease prevention and health promotion activities and provides adequate support to explain why these barriers may slow the progress of health promotion efforts. Potential collaborators are identified, and support for their selection aligns with the intentions of the risk reduction implementation plan. Previous paper is attached, and changes are indicated. Logical transitions are needed to better connect ideas between the papers. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. 5: Excellent (100.00%) Paper identifies an existing at-risk population and provides strong, reliable data to substantiate why the population is atrisk. Population analysis logically and accurately demonstrates a strong correlation between the identified health risk and contributing variables being measured. Variables are identified, thoroughly explored, and well supported by data. Paper clearly identifies potential barriers to implementation of disease prevention and health promotion activities and provides strong and insightful support to explain why these barriers may slow the progress of health promotion efforts. Potential realistic collaborators are identified, and support for their selection clearly explains how each stakeholder will contribute to the risk reduction implementation plan. Previous paper is attached, and changes are indicated. Logical transitions connect ideas to create a cohesive scholarly paper. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. Comments Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. All format elements are correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. Points Earned
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached. Please let me know if you have any questions or need revisions.

MOTHER-NEWBORN SKIN-TO-SKIN CONTACT WITHIN FIRST TWENTY-FOUR HOURS OF BIRTH AND
BREASTFEEDING INITIATION RATES

Student Name
Institute Name

MOTHER-NEWBORN SKIN-TO-SKIN CONTACT WITHIN FIRST TWENTY-FOUR HOURS OF BIRTH AND
BREASTFEEDING INITIATION RATES

MOTHER-NEWBORN SKIN-TO-SKIN CONTACT WITHIN FIRST TWENTYFOUR HOURS OF BIRTH AND BREASTFEEDING INITIATION RATES

According to a scientific study, when the baby is born, it is shown that within 24 hours, the skinto-skin mother and baby contact is very much important for the healthy life of the baby. The
particular fragrance of the mother's colostrum helps enhance the amount of oxygenated
hemoglobin of the baby; it also increases the newborn baby's sensitivity when he smells the breast
milk of the mother. Not only this but during this period, the mother is also attracted to the particular
smell of the baby. With this, a beautiful symbiotic relationship is developed between them. This
interfered 24 hours contact of skin to skin helps in familiarization of the baby to the mother; this
then allows the baby to get used to the mother's breast milk by sucking the nipple and areola. The
total time limit of this period is from 20 minutes and onwards. Also, when a baby is licking the
breast or massaging them, it increases the mother's oxytocin level and helps the breast get in shape.
Because of the reasons mentioned above, it is essential not to interfere in this contact by
introducing unfamiliar hands or odors. This 20-minute touch we can say is more comforting to the
baby and makes him realize that he is not alone anymore, and for this purpose, the best person he
has is his mother.
As we have discussed the benefits of the 24 hours contact so according to the studies, this
population, either it is the mother or the children, is existing at-risk population, especially the baby,
if the contact is not being given to him. This is because it will cause the baby to remain unfamiliar
with his mother or adapt to the environment's foreign odors. Also, there are many factors; for
example, it is ironic that millions and trillions of deaths of newborns occur for many preventable
reasons. It is studied that every year out of 8 million babies, 4 million are stillborn, and other four
million experience death before reaching the first month of life.98% of the newborn's death occurs
in developing countries (Rujumba et al., 2020).

MOTHER-NEWBORN SKIN-TO-SKIN CONTACT WITHIN FIRST TWENTY-FOUR HOURS OF BIRTH AND
BREASTFEEDING INITIATION RATES

But nowadays the percentage of death is reducing. As a result, among all of the death, 40% of
deaths are associated with th4e children having five years of age. To meet UNITED NATIONS
MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS requirements, the policies have to emphasize the
proven and cost-effective measures to save the life of the mother and the newborn. According to a
study, making motherhood safer is more complicated than saving any baby. Research says that
newborns' deaths can be prevented by taking exemplary preventive measures during pregnancy,
delivery, and the postpartum period. When the mother is weak, malnourished, or sick, or has
insufficient parenteral care, there is a chance of the baby getting sick or experiencing premature
death. The regions where the rate of maternal deaths is high experience neonates' death (Hubbard
et al., 2017).
According to data:
LIFETIME RISK TO MOTHERS:

Lifetime risk

Lifetime risk

That a woman That a woman
Will lose a

Will die of maternal

newborn

causes

Asia

1 in 11

1 in 132

Latin America

1 in 21

1 in 188

Africa

1 in 5

1 in 9

More developed countries 1 in 125

1 in 2,976

MOTHER-NEWBORN SKIN-TO-SKIN CONTACT WITHIN FIRST TWENTY-FOUR HOURS OF BIRTH AND
BREASTFEEDING INITIATION RATES

This data is related to the death of the babies within the 1st and 28th day of birth. This data has been
extracted from the current rates from SAVE THE BABY (newborns and mortality),
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU (total fertility rate), and UNICEF (maternal mortality
ratio) (Rujumba et al., 2020).
First of all, the wellbeing of the baby is highly influenced by the frequency and the time of
conception. For illustration, women who are too young or are too old or having other disease risk
put themselves and their babies at higher risk of mortality and complications if survive. It is shown
that the other baby who is born within the 24 months of the older sibling tends to die early than a
baby who is born after 3 years of the older one. Effective use of fa...


Anonymous
Great content here. Definitely a returning customer.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4