Recurrent ischemia, bleeding at the wrist and antiplatelet adherence, ranked in that order: the NU142 Unit 4 care plan for a composite patient one day after a coronary stent. Searches like "nu 142 unit 4 assignment example", "nu142 unit 4 sample" and "nu142 unit 4 example" land here.
What a finished NU142 Unit 4 care plan looks like
A short assessment block sits above the plan and holds only what the diagnoses will use. Chest pain that began at 7 out of 10 last night is now 0. Troponin has peaked and is falling, the monitor shows sinus rhythm with occasional early beats, and the compression band at the right wrist came off overnight, leaving a small bruise, a strong radial pulse and a warm hand. His medication list now carries aspirin, a second antiplatelet agent, a high-intensity statin and a beta blocker. Beneath that, a five-column table works three diagnoses: risk for decreased cardiac tissue perfusion, risk for bleeding, and ineffective health self-management around the two antiplatelet drugs. Each row ends in an evaluation line written with a measured finding rather than a verdict.
How a NU142 Unit 4 example is structured
Care plans in NU142 are usually graded against a column template, and the sample keeps the common five: assessment data, nursing diagnosis, goal, interventions with rationale, and evaluation. Ranking is stated before the table in two sentences, so the grader need not infer it from row order. Each diagnosis is written in three parts, problem, related factor and evidence, with risk diagnoses carrying risk factors instead, since nothing has happened yet. Goals carry a time frame and a measurable finding, such as no chest pain and no new ST change through discharge. Interventions run in the order a shift would perform them and cite the course text or a current cardiology guideline for the less obvious ones. Evaluation reads as if written at the shift's end, with data, and one row is marked partly met to show revision.
Why a risk diagnosis ranks first
Nothing is wrong with his heart this morning, yet recurrent ischemia outranks everything, because a clot in a new stent is the event that could kill him today. The plan says why a risk problem can sit above an actual one.
The wrist and the hand beyond it
Bleeding checks at a radial site include more than the dressing. The plan pairs the puncture check with color, warmth, pulse and movement of the hand, since reduced flow in the artery threatens the fingers rather than the wrist.
Two antiplatelets, two reasons
Aspirin and the second agent act on different pathways, and stopping either early raises the risk of stent thrombosis. The teaching row asks the patient to explain that in his own words before discharge and records what he says.
Beta blocker parameters in the rationale
Holding a beta blocker for a slow heart rate or low pressure is written into the intervention with the parameters left to the order, and the rationale explains why the drug is continued after a heart attack at all.
A goal marked partly met
Evaluation does not declare every goal met. The self-management row is partly met, since he could name both drugs but not why neither may stop, and the plan adds a second teaching session with his wife present.
Where marks go in NU142 Unit 4
The plan loses most when its ranking follows the textbook rather than this patient: pain first because pain is listed first, when his pain is gone and his risk has moved elsewhere. Writing bleeding as an actual problem, with no bleeding in the data, costs accuracy points, as does any risk diagnosis given 'as evidenced by' findings that have not occurred. Goals without a time frame or a measurable result, 'patient will understand medications,' cannot be evaluated and are marked down. Radial checks that stop at the dressing miss the hand. Interventions with no rationale, or rationales that repeat the action, lose the reasoning marks. Evaluation lines reading simply 'met' draw comments in most sections, and a plan with no revision anywhere suggests the evaluation was never really done.
Get a NU142 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Heart failure, a stent, a clot in the leg or a new rhythm: name the condition behind the Unit 4 care plan in your section. Along with the case, attach the column template, the approved diagnosis list if there is one, and the rubric. What returns is ranked to that case's data. Free as a first custom sample; ready in 24-48h.
NU142 Unit 4 questions, answered
Can a risk diagnosis be the top priority?
Yes, when the risk is serious and near. The usual rule favors actual problems over potential ones, but a potential problem that could cause death or lasting harm today can outrank a mild actual one. The plan has to say why. In this case the argument rests on how soon after placement stent clots tend to occur and what they cause.
How many interventions should each diagnosis carry?
Most sections expect four to six per diagnosis, though quality counts more than number. Each should be specific to this patient, carry a rationale that explains rather than restates, and appear in the order it would be done. An intervention that could appear unchanged on any cardiac plan, such as monitor vital signs, earns little unless it names what is being watched for.
Should the care plan include discharge teaching?
In most Unit 4 prompts, yes, usually as its own diagnosis or as interventions under self-management. After a stent the teaching that carries the most weight concerns the antiplatelet drugs, chest pain that returns, and the referral to cardiac rehabilitation. Teaching attached at the end as a general list, rather than tied to a diagnosis with a goal, tends to lose points.