| Course | NUR-5160 Advanced Health Assessment |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 4 |
| Paper type | Differential diagnosis write-up |
| Length | About 1,019 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Master of Science in Nursing |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 5160 Module 4
A Pounding in the Neck at the Library: Defending a Ranked Differential for Episodic Palpitations From the Recorded Findings
Student Name
Master of Science in Nursing (MSN), Thomas Edison State University
NUR-5160: Advanced Health Assessment
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
A Pounding in the Neck at the Library: Defending a Ranked Differential for Episodic Palpitations From the Recorded Findings
By the fourth module of Advanced Health Assessment, the differential diagnosis carries real weight. The task is not to list every possible cause of a complaint but to rank the likely and the dangerous, and to defend each position on the list from findings actually recorded in the history and examination. This paper does that for a composite patient, a twenty-four-year-old graduate student with episodes of rapid heartbeat. It presents the focused subjective and objective data, a ranked differential with the findings for and against each diagnosis, and a plan that tests the leading possibilities. Identifying details are invented.
Focused Subjective Data
Chief concern: my heart suddenly races and then stops racing. History of present illness: over eight months, the patient has had six episodes of a sudden, very fast and regular heartbeat, each starting abruptly without warning, most often while bending to pick up books or standing up from a library desk. Episodes last ten to forty minutes and end abruptly; twice the patient stopped one by holding their breath and bearing down. During episodes the patient feels a strong, rapid pounding in the neck, light-headedness without fainting, and mild chest tightness, and afterward needs to urinate. Between episodes the patient feels well. Pertinent negatives: no syncope, no exertional chest pain, no irregular or skipped-beat sensation, no weight loss, tremor or heat intolerance, no panic or anxiety symptoms before the episodes, no family history of sudden death, cardiomyopathy or inherited arrhythmia. Medications: none, including no stimulants for attention. Caffeine: two cups of coffee daily, no energy drinks; no alcohol binges; no recreational drugs.
Focused Objective Data
Vital signs between episodes: blood pressure 116 over 72, heart rate 72 and regular, respiratory rate 14, oxygen saturation 99 percent, body mass index 22. General: well, calm. Neck: thyroid not enlarged, no nodules, no bruit; jugular venous pressure not elevated. Cardiovascular: point of maximal impulse not displaced; regular rhythm; normal S1 and S2; no murmur, click, rub or gallop at rest or with standing. Lungs: clear. Extremities: no edema, no tremor. Twelve-lead electrocardiogram today in sinus rhythm at 70 beats per minute: normal PR interval of 160 milliseconds, no delta wave, normal QRS duration, normal corrected QT interval, no ST-T changes, no left ventricular hypertrophy by voltage criteria.
Ranked Differential Diagnosis
One, atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia, the leading diagnosis. Supporting findings: abrupt onset and offset, a regular rapid rhythm, onset with bending or postural change, termination with a Valsalva-type maneuver, and above all the regular rapid pounding sensation in the neck. Pooling studies of bedside findings in people with palpitations, Thavendiranathan et al. (2009) showed that a regular rapid-pounding sensation in the neck greatly increased the likelihood of this specific arrhythmia, with a likelihood ratio of 177, while its absence made the diagnosis much less likely. Post-episode urination is also commonly reported with reentrant tachycardias. Against: no episode has yet been recorded on an electrocardiogram.
Two, atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia using an accessory pathway. Supporting: the same abrupt onset, offset and regularity. Against: the resting electrocardiogram shows no delta wave and a normal PR interval, so there is no visible pre-excitation, although a concealed pathway cannot be excluded without an electrophysiology study. This diagnosis stays on the list because it is clinically indistinguishable from the first by history and because pre-excitation, when present, carries specific risks.
Three, inappropriate or reactive sinus tachycardia related to anxiety, caffeine or stimulants. Supporting: young age and academic stress. Against: sinus tachycardia typically starts and stops gradually rather than abruptly and is not terminated by a single maneuver; the patient reports no stimulant use and modest caffeine, and no anxiety preceding episodes. The same review found that a history of panic disorder or palpitations lasting under five minutes lowered the likelihood of a cardiac arrhythmia, and neither applies here.
Four, hyperthyroidism with paroxysmal tachycardia. Against: no weight loss, tremor, heat intolerance or thyroid enlargement, and a normal resting heart rate; it remains on the list because thyroid testing is simple and a missed diagnosis would change treatment. Five, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation or flutter. Against: the rhythm is described as regular, the patient is young with no structural heart disease, and atrial fibrillation usually feels irregular; atrial flutter with regular conduction is possible but less likely.
The ranking also reflects consequence. A reentrant tachycardia through a nodal circuit is usually benign, while an accessory pathway can, in rare cases, allow a dangerously fast ventricular response if atrial fibrillation develops. That difference is why the second diagnosis stays high on the list despite the normal resting tracing, and why the plan seeks a recording of an episode rather than relying on the history alone.
Plan Built From the Differential
The plan tests the top of the list and closes off the dangerous alternatives. Obtain a thyroid-stimulating hormone level, basic metabolic panel and complete blood count to address thyroid disease and electrolyte or blood count abnormalities. Order an ambulatory patch or event monitor long enough to capture an episode, since episodes occur roughly monthly. Teach a modified Valsalva maneuver for use during episodes and instruct the patient to seek emergency care if an episode is accompanied by fainting, chest pain or does not stop within thirty minutes, and to have an electrocardiogram recorded during any emergency visit. The national guideline for supraventricular tachycardia recommends vagal maneuvers as first-line acute treatment and catheter ablation as an option for recurrent symptomatic reentrant tachycardia (Page et al., 2016), so referral to cardiac electrophysiology is planned once an episode is documented or sooner if symptoms worsen.
Bickley et al. (2021) describe clinical reasoning as moving from the patient's data to a limited set of explanatory hypotheses and then testing them; the plan above follows that sequence. Each test has a reason in the differential, and each diagnosis on the list has a test or a recorded finding that addresses it.
Results will be reviewed with the patient by phone, and the event monitor report will be read for both rhythm and the timing of symptoms.
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.
Page, R. L., Joglar, J. A., Caldwell, M. A., Calkins, H., Conti, J. B., Deal, B. J., Estes, N. A. M., III, Field, M. E., Goldberger, Z. D., Hammill, S. C., Indik, J. H., Lindsay, B. D., Olshansky, B., Russo, A. M., Shen, W.-K., Tracy, C. M., & Al-Khatib, S. M. (2016). 2015 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the management of adult patients with supraventricular tachycardia. Circulation, 133(14), e506-e574. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000310
Thavendiranathan, P., Bagai, A., Khoo, C., Dorian, P., & Choudhry, N. K. (2009). Does this patient with palpitations have a cardiac arrhythmia? JAMA, 302(19), 2135-2143. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1673
Reading the NUR 5160 Module 4 assignment instructions
The fourth module of NUR-5160 typically asks for a focused history and physical with a differential diagnosis. Directions in many sections ask you to document the subjective and objective data for a problem-focused visit, list three to five differential diagnoses in order of likelihood, support or refute each with findings from your write-up and evidence from the literature, and propose a plan for diagnostic testing. Some sections specify a template or require a minimum number of scholarly sources. Check the TESU classroom for whether the leading diagnosis must be stated as a working diagnosis, whether tests must be justified individually, and whether treatment should be included or limited to evaluation. Ranking by danger as well as likelihood is usually expected.
Inside the NUR 5160 Module 4 example
The example begins by explaining what a defended differential is. A focused subjective section characterizes the episodes and lists the negatives that matter, including medications, caffeine and family history. The objective section includes vital signs between episodes, a targeted examination and a resting electrocardiogram reported interval by interval. The ranked differential follows, with findings for and against each of five diagnoses and a likelihood ratio from a systematic review supporting the leading one. The plan addresses each diagnosis with a test or a finding and uses the national guideline for acute management and referral. A closing paragraph links the method to the course text's description of clinical reasoning. Electrocardiogram intervals are reported individually so the differential can cite them.
Where the marks sit in the NUR 5160 Module 4 rubric
A differential paper is marked first on the focused history and examination, the ranking of the differential, support for each diagnosis from recorded findings, use of evidence, the diagnostic plan, and writing. The heaviest weighting usually falls on how well each diagnosis is defended or refuted by data in the write-up; a list without supporting findings scores poorly. Ranking should reflect both likelihood and the danger of missing a condition. Evidence such as likelihood ratios or guideline recommendations strengthens the reasoning. The plan should follow from the differential, with each test justified. Precise documentation of negative findings, such as electrocardiogram intervals, often makes the difference. Diagnoses kept on the list need a stated reason for staying there.
NUR 5160 Module 4 help from the desk
The weakest differential sections list diagnoses with textbook descriptions rather than findings from the patient. For each diagnosis, write what in your history and examination supports it and what argues against it. Another frequent error is ordering tests that do not correspond to any diagnosis on the list, or omitting tests for a dangerous possibility. Keep dangerous diagnoses on the list until a finding or test addresses them, and say why. Use evidence about diagnostic accuracy where available. Make sure your objective data include the negatives you later cite. The desk can draft a defended differential from the case details you send. State plainly which finding moved each diagnosis up or down.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More NUR 5160 and Master of Science in Nursing sample papers
- NUR 5160 Module 1: Baseline Comprehensive Write-Up
- NUR 5160 Module 2: Subjective History Write-Up
- NUR 5160 Module 3: Regional Elbow Examination
- NUR 5160 Module 5: Special Population Write-Up
- NUR 5160 Module 6: Comprehensive Encounter Write-Up
- NUR 5820 Module 1: Budget Vocabulary Paper
- NUR 5300 Module 2: Evidence Search Strategy
- NUR 6410 Module 4: Pharmacogenomics Case: CYP2C19 and Clopidogrel After a Stent
- NUR 5290 Module 4: Global Health System Comparison
NUR 5160 Module 4 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 5160 Module 4 sample paper?
You can read the whole palpitations write-up here, with its ranked list and notes in the margin. Use the for-and-against layout with the case your mentor assigns.
How many differential diagnoses should I include in NUR-5160?
Three to five is typical. Include the most likely diagnoses and any dangerous ones that cannot yet be excluded, ranked, with supporting and refuting findings for each.
What is a likelihood ratio and why use one?
A likelihood ratio describes how much a finding changes the probability of a diagnosis. Ratios well above one raise the probability and ratios well below one lower it. Citing them shows that your ranking rests on evidence rather than impression.
Should the plan include treatment?
Follow your directions. Many differential modules focus on evaluation, with brief notes on acute management and referral. Make sure each test or step corresponds to a diagnosis on your list.
How do I show that a diagnosis is less likely?
Point to specific findings that argue against it, such as a normal electrocardiogram interval or the absence of a key symptom, and explain why that finding matters. Keep the diagnosis on the list if it cannot yet be excluded and is serious.