Posting a shoulder-pain presentation with two precise requests for critique, the NU573 board author then reviews two classmates' drafts with the same three tests applied to each. Searches like "nu 573 unit 3 assignment example", "nu573 unit 3 sample" and "nu573 unit 3 example" land here.
Please Fix My Draft: A 230-Word Shoulder Presentation and Two Questions for the Thread
NU573 · Unit 3 Discussion
Posted by [Student Name]
The patient is a composite; no real person is described.
Initial Post
I am presenting this patient to my preceptor next week and would like help tightening it. The draft is below, then two questions.
Draft: Mr. [T.] is a 39-year-old long-haul truck driver with three months of right lateral shoulder pain, worse reaching overhead and at night. He reaches for a high shelf in his cab many times a day. No trauma, no neck pain, no numbness or weakness in the hand. He has taken ibuprofen occasionally with some relief. On exam, he has a painful arc between 60 and 120 degrees of abduction, positive Hawkins and Neer signs, full passive range of motion and preserved strength on the empty can test, with no drop arm sign. Neck exam is normal. My assessment is rotator cuff tendinopathy with subacromial pain, without a full-thickness tear. Plan: [naproxen] for two weeks, avoiding repeated overhead reaching where he can, and a referral to physical therapy for a rotator cuff and scapular strengthening program, with a recheck in six weeks.
Question 1. Should the one-liner mention his occupation, or save it for the history?
Question 2. Does the night pain belong at all? It worries me as a sign of something more serious, but I am not sure it changes my assessment.
A note on my exam choices: a painful arc, a positive Hawkins sign and a positive Neer sign together make subacromial pain more likely, while preserved strength and a negative drop arm argue against a large tear (Hermans et al., 2013). I put the tear-excluding findings last because they are the ones that make my plan safe.
Reply to Rosa
Rosa, your one-liner for the woman with knee pain says who and why in eleven words: well done. One change: you list her exam findings in the order you did them; try grouping them by what they suggest, the ligament tests together and the joint line tests together. A question to prepare for: your preceptor may ask why you did not order an X-ray, and your answer is in the Ottawa knee rule, so have it ready.
Reply to Kwame
Kwame, your assessment commits to plantar fasciitis without hedging: good. One change: your first sentence is about his weight, not his heel; try "a 52-year-old postal carrier with six weeks of morning heel pain." A question to prepare for: how will you know the stretching program is working, and when would you change the plan?
Edit, After the Thread
I adopted the suggestion two classmates made: occupation now goes in the one-liner, because it explains the mechanism. I kept the night pain in the history but moved it after the tear-excluding findings, since night pain is common in rotator cuff tendinopathy and does not by itself suggest a tear (Hegedus et al., 2012).
References
Hegedus, E. J., Goode, A. P., Cook, C. E., Michener, L., Myer, C. A., Myer, D. M., & Wright, A. A. (2012). Which physical examination tests provide clinicians with the most value when examining the shoulder? Update of a systematic review with meta-analysis of individual tests. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 46(14), 964-978. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2012-091066
Hermans, J., Luime, J. J., Meuffels, D. E., Reijman, M., Simel, D. L., & Bierma-Zeinstra, S. M. A. (2013). Does this patient with shoulder pain have rotator cuff disease? The Rational Clinical Examination systematic review. JAMA, 310(8), 837-847. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.276187
How this NU573 Unit 3 example is structured
Every part of the post is designed to make critique easy. The draft sits in its own block so a classmate can quote lines back, and its sentences are short enough to annotate. The two questions are narrow, which steers responses toward decisions rather than praise; asking whether the draft is good would invite a thumbs-up. The replies apply one framework to both peers: does the first sentence say who and why, are findings grouped by what they suggest, and does the assessment commit. That consistency lets a reader compare feedback across the thread. Each reply names one strength with a quoted line, one change with a rewritten line, and one question the classmate may want to prepare for. A final line in the original post, added later as an edit, records which suggestion the author adopted.
Get an NU573 Unit 3 example written to your instructions
Both halves of the board can be modeled for NU573: a presentation draft on a patient invented to fit the prompt, and replies that apply your section's critique criteria. Send the prompt with any classmate drafts to answer, names stripped, and say how many replies are due. Nothing is charged for the first request, delivered in 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
NU573 Unit 3 questions, answered
What makes feedback on a presentation draft useful?
Specificity. Quoting the line in question, saying what it does or fails to do, and offering a rewritten version gives the classmate something to act on. Using the same few criteria for every draft, such as the one-liner, the order of findings and the assessment, keeps the critique consistent and easier to trust.
Should the posted draft be polished or rough?
Close to final, but open about its uncertainties. A draft with obvious gaps invites feedback on basics, while a polished one with two stated questions draws deeper critique. Naming the questions directly under the draft focuses replies where the author actually needs help, which is the point of posting it.
Can the draft come from a real clinic patient?
Yes, provided every identifier is stripped and the course's privacy rules are followed, though many prompts favor a composite. Age, occupation and dates can identify someone in a small community, so they are often changed. Every detail in the sample belongs to an invented patient, which avoids the question entirely and keeps attention on the structure of the draft.