Mr Johnson’s Nutritional Care Plan Assignment
Mr Johnson’s Nutritional Care Plan Assignment
Nutritional Care Plan Assignment – You are expected to develop a care plan for a service user who is obese. This involves critical evaluation of the literature and the following aspects:
- Assessment
- Calculating requirements
- Typical day’s diet and justification incorporating dietary guidelines
- Psychosocial factors, service-user perspectives
- Assessment, monitoring and follow-up required
Nutritional Care Plan Details:
Mr Johnson’s social history:
Mr Johnson is 41 years old. He is married with 2 children, has a sedentary lifestyle other than the short 5 minute walk to and from his work office and enjoys socialising with friends on a weekend. Mr Johnson is keen to improve his health since there is a strong family history of diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
Height = 1.8 m Weight = 115 Kg
Mr Johnson’s current intake:
| Breakfast | 2 Weetabix
100ml semi skimmed milk (no sugar) 2 slices granary toast with thick spread butter 150ml glass fresh orange juice |
| Mid-morning | Apple
Can cola |
| Lunch | In office, a packed lunch from home;
4 slices wholemeal bread with butter; 2 with ham (50g) and 2 with peanut butter (20g) crisps Banana Can of pop |
| mid afternoon | Coffee
Sometimes Mars Bar or similar from vending machine |
| evening meal | pasta & Bolognese
rarely a pudding; sometimes cheese cake (homemade or bought) large glass wine |
| supper | Tea
Biscuits if hungry |
Netwisp dietary analysis of Mr Johnson’s current intake:
Tinuviel Software
Mean Daily Nutrient Intake
Subject ID: 00000006 Record no.: 1 Group code: 1 Survey no.: 01
Date of birth: 02/02/1977 Sex: Male
NUTRIENT PER DAY
—————————————————————————————-
——————————–
| Total Nitrogen (g) | 17.43 | ||
| Protein (g) | 105.3 | ||
| Total Fat (g) | 155.3 | ||
| Carbohydrate (g) | 434.2 | ||
| Energy (kcal) | 3609 | ||
| Energy (MJ) | 15.168 | ||
| Saturates (g) | 75.5 | ||
| Monounsaturates (g) | 51.6 | ||
| Polyunsaturates (g) | 15.5 | ||
| Cholesterol (mg) | 319 | ||
| Sugars (g) | 194.8 | ||
| Starch (g) | 238.9 | ||
| AOAC Fibre (g) | 23.3 | ||
| Englyst Fibre (g) | 26.7 | ||
| Sodium (mg) | 3953 | ||
| Potassium (mg) | 4043 | ||
| Calcium (mg) | 900 | ||
| Magnesium (mg) | 497 | ||
| Phosphorous (mg) | 1790 | ||
| Iron (mg) | 20.4 | ||
| Copper (mg) | 2.25 | ||
| Zinc (mg) | 16.7 | ||
| Chloride (mg) | 6023 | ||
| Manganese (mg) | 6.2 | ||
| Selenium (µg) | 57 | ||
| Iodine (µg) | 115 | ||
| Vitamin A (µg) r.e. | 1238 | ||
| Vitamin D (µg) | 2.07 | ||
| Vitamin E (mg) | 10.23 | ||
| Thiamin (mg) | 1.97 | ||
| Riboflavin (mg) | 1.92 | ||
| Niacin equivalents (mg) | 54.2 | ||
| Vitamin B6 (mg) | 2.48 | ||
| Vitamin B12 (µg) | 4.9 | ||
| Total Folate (µg) | 342 | ||
| Pantothenic Acid (mg) | 5.92 | ||
| Biotin (µg) | 58.5 | ||
| Vitamin C (mg) | 101 | ||
| Alcohol (g) | 24.0 | ||
| P/S ratio | 0.21 | ||
| Fibre/1000kcal | 7.4 | ||
| Percentage of energy from: | |||
| Protein | 11.7% | ||
| Total fat | 38.7% | ||
| Saturates | 18.8% | ||
| Monounsaturates | 12.8% | ||
| Polyunsaturates | 3.9% |
| Carbohydrate | 45.0% | ||
| Sugars | 20.2% | ||
| Starch | 24.8% | ||
| Alcohol | 4.6% |
| Nutritional Care Plan Assessment Criteria: Care Plan | 70-100 | 60-69 | 50-59 | 40-49 | 0-39 |
| Theory and Principles (weighting 40%) Outline the required assessment including: anthropometry, blood tests, diagnostic tests (with reference ranges) for your patient and critically discuss your rationale for selection of these.
Discuss the biological and psychosocial factors that contribute to the development and maintenance of obesity. |
Demonstrates a deep understanding & mastery of the knowledge base from a comprehensive range of theoretical & practice approaches & at the higher range of marks
does this consistently with originality. |
Demonstrates an understanding of a wide and relevant range of theoretical & practical approaches by utilising them effectively. | Demonstrates a good but incomplete range of the relevant theoretical & practical approaches. | Demonstrates awareness of a limited range of theory & practice knowledge. | Fails to demonstrate awareness or understanding and/or inappropriate use of theory & practice knowledge. |
| Analysis and Interpretation (weighting 20%)*
Critically evaluate your patient’s typical day’s intake in relation to current dietary recommendations/ guidelines for obesity. Focus your discussion on three key priority areas for change. |
Deep, detailed & critical analysis & interpretation of the material resulting in illuminating conclusions which serve to extend the sum of knowledge in the area. Creatively demonstrates new concepts, ideas or theories through analysis. | Clear evidence of critical analysis & interpretation. Good & appropriate analysis of the material resulting in clear conclusions which serve to add to the sum of knowledge in the area. | Evidence of critical analysis. Adequate & appropriate analysis of the material results in generally clear conclusions which serve to substantiate but offer little extension of the sum of knowledge in the area. | Generally adequate & appropriate analysis of the material that results in some illuminating conclusions but does not expand upon the sum of knowledge in the area. | Analysis of the material is incomplete & superficial. Little or no conclusions. The sum of knowledge is not expanded, challenged or extended. |
| Application (weighting 10%)* Considering your three key priorities for change, with reference to: dietary guidelines/the evidence base in relation to obesity; social factors; barriers to change, suggest three initial dietary goals working towards a stepped approach to change. | Demonstrates excellent application of conceptual frameworks, principals & theories & showing critical appreciation, originality and vision in the generation of new insights to apply to/inform practice. | Demonstrates good use of conceptual frameworks, principals and theories, showing good ability in the generation of new insights to apply to/inform practice. | Demonstrates appropriate use of relevant conceptual frameworks, principals & theories. Ability to generate new insights to apply to/inform practice. | Demonstrates awareness of conceptual frameworks, principals & theories. Some ability to apply new insights to inform practice. | Demonstrates unsatisfactory & inadequate application of conceptual frameworks, principals and theories to practice. Displays unsafe practice in written work. |
| Synthesis and Evaluation (Weighting 10%)* | Demonstrates originality, independent thought, syntheses of | Elements of originality. Good work showing independent thought, | Limited evidence of originality.
Demonstration of |
Contains some independent thinking. Beginning to synthesise | No synthesis of ideas of others views to create a |
| Suggest a “model” sample day’s diet to work to in the long term. This should consider long term: sustainability; practicalities and; lifestyle factors and, include the food list e.g. food portions and appropriate dietary analysis (ie MyFood24, Netwisp etc). | ideas from credible sources & the generation of innovative views. | synthesis of ideas & critical engagement with alternative views. | evidence of independent thought with some synthesis of ideas & critical engagement with alternative views. | ideas & engage with alternative views. | new perspective or the topic. |
| Creativity (Weighting 10%)
Select one specific perspective on the aetiology or management of obesity and critically evaluate strengths and weaknesses of this perspective. |
Highly accomplished original arguments are presented making creative use of a mode of argument &/or theoretical model/s to provide an intelligent structure. | Arguments clear & coherent & logically constructed. Uses an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical model/s. There are elements of
originality in the arguments presented. |
Arguments generally clear although lacking logic & coherence at times. Uses an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical model. | Arguments lack logic & coherence at times.
Generally uses an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical model/s. |
Very limited coherence & logic.
Arguments lack clarity. There is no evidence of attempts to use appropriate model/mode of arguments. |
| (Weighting 10%) in a fluent academic style and which demonstrates academic integrity in the use of others ideas and publications. | Communicates in a creative way. Fluent academic writing style with accurate spelling & grammar. Thoughts & ideas expressed clearly. Appropriate & complete references from a range of diverse sources. | Communicates in a logical and structured way. Very well written with correct spelling & grammar. Style is lucid with appropriate format. Appropriate complete & consistent references which may contain
minor errors. |
Communicates satisfactorily & meaning apparent but language not always fluent.
Spelling & grammar satisfactory. Some inconsistencies in referencing but generally acceptable. |
Communicates logically but has minor lapses from the standard spelling & grammar.
Generally lucid. Acceptable format but some inconsistencies in referencing but generally acceptable. |
very disorganised. Very poorly written with significant deficiencies in expression and format. Significant errors in referencing which is incomplete & unacceptable. |