Written after the patient had gone home, this NU610 Unit 8 note carries a composite patient's positive FIT to a booked colonoscopy, a tracking reminder and a plan for refusal. Searches like "nu 610 unit 8 assignment example", "nu610 unit 8 sample" and "nu610 unit 8 example" land here.
Results Note: Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test, the Call, the Referral and the Tracking Step That Closes the Loop
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU610: NP III Clinical - Primary Care Focus
Unit 8 Abnormal Result Follow-Up Note
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The patient is composite; dates, intervals and names are bracketed, and the note is written so a covering clinician could act on it without other context.
Results note, not a visit note. [Date], [time].
Result
Fecal immunochemical test: [positive]. Collected [date] as routine colorectal cancer screening; result received [date]. What it means: blood was detected in the stool, which requires a colonoscopy to find the cause. What it does not mean: it is not a diagnosis of cancer; most positive tests are caused by polyps or benign conditions, but only colonoscopy can tell which.
Communication
Called the patient at [time] on his confirmed mobile number; two identifiers checked before any result was shared. Explained the result in the words above. He asked whether it could be hemorrhoids; told that it could, and that the colonoscopy is still needed because the test cannot tell the difference. He said he was worried about the bowel preparation, since a friend described it as "the worst night of his life." Explained that preparations have improved, that the gastroenterology office will go through the options, and that a split dose makes it easier. He agreed to proceed and repeated back the plan. Told him to call sooner for heavy rectal bleeding, black stools, dizziness or abdominal pain.
Actions
1. Referral to gastroenterology for diagnostic colonoscopy, marked [priority]. Placed by: [writer], [date]. Reason on referral: positive FIT on screening.
2. Scheduling confirmation. Owner: [referral coordinator]. Due: booking date confirmed and recorded in the chart within [two weeks]. Status: [date pending].
3. Tracking task. Owner: [writer's clinical team]. Trigger: if no colonoscopy report is in the chart by [a stated interval, for example ninety days] from today, the task alerts the team to call the patient and the gastroenterology office.
4. Patient message with the referral details and the gastroenterology office's number, sent through the portal [today].
Every action carries a named owner and a due date, so the loop cannot stay open without someone being told.
Rationale
An abnormal FIT requires follow-up colonoscopy; a positive result is part of the screening program, not an optional extra step, and repeating the stool test does not replace it (Robertson et al., 2017). Timing matters. In a large cohort of patients with a positive fecal test, colonoscopy performed more than about ten months after the result was associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer and of more advanced stage at diagnosis, compared with colonoscopy within the first month (Corley et al., 2017). The target here is colonoscopy within [weeks, not months]. Because the risk rises with delay rather than at a single cutoff, the tracking interval is set well inside the ten-month mark.
Contingency
If he declines colonoscopy: document an informed refusal, including that he understands a positive test can reflect cancer or precancerous polyps, that delay increases the risk of a later-stage diagnosis, and that no other test replaces colonoscopy after a positive FIT. A repeat FIT is explicitly not offered as a substitute, because a negative repeat does not cancel the first positive result. Book a return conversation in [two weeks], by phone or in person, to address his concerns, including the preparation, and offer the referral again. If he misses the colonoscopy appointment: the tracking task prompts a call within [one week] of the missed date.
If the colonoscopy is completed: the gastroenterology report is reviewed when it arrives, findings are discussed with him, and the surveillance interval is recorded in the chart. His next routine screening decision depends on that report, not on his previous screening schedule (US Preventive Services Task Force, 2021).
References
Corley, D. A., Jensen, C. D., Quinn, V. P., Doubeni, C. A., Zauber, A. G., Lee, J. K., Schottinger, J. E., Marks, A. R., Zhao, W. K., Ghai, N. R., Lee, A. T., Contreras, R., Quesenberry, C. P., Fireman, B. H., & Levin, T. R. (2017). Association between time to colonoscopy after a positive fecal test result and risk of colorectal cancer and cancer stage at diagnosis. JAMA, 317(16), 1631-1641. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.3634
Robertson, D. J., Lee, J. K., Boland, C. R., Dominitz, J. A., Giardiello, F. M., Johnson, D. A., Kaltenbach, T., Lieberman, D., Levin, T. R., & Rex, D. K. (2017). Recommendations on fecal immunochemical testing to screen for colorectal neoplasia: A consensus statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology, 152(5), 1217-1237. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2016.08.053
US Preventive Services Task Force. (2021). Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA, 325(19), 1965-1977. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.6238
How this NU610 Unit 8 example is structured
The note is built so that a covering clinician could pick it up cold. It opens with the result, the test type and the date received, then states in one sentence what the result means and does not mean. The communication section follows, recording how the result reached the patient, what he understood, and the concern he raised. Each step in the action section carries an owner and a date: who placed the referral, who confirms the booking, and what triggers an alert if the loop stays open. The rationale section keeps its citations narrow, one for the required next step and one for why the interval matters. The contingency section covers a patient who declines colonoscopy: documented informed refusal, the risks explained, and a return conversation booked. Repeating the FIT is explicitly ruled out as a substitute, with the reason given.
Get an NU610 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
Share the Unit 8 abnormal result from your NU610 case, the chart format required for results notes, and the rubric. At no charge the first time, the note arrives within 24-48h, recording how the result reached the patient, assigning every follow-up step an owner and a date, and planning for both a missed appointment and an informed refusal. 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.
NU610 Unit 8 questions, answered
Is a results note different from a visit note?
Yes. It documents work done between visits: the result received, how and when the patient was told, what they understood, and the actions set in motion. It has no examination and usually no full history. Many sections grade it on whether a covering clinician could see at a glance where the follow-up stands.
What if the patient cannot be reached?
Document each attempt with the date, time and method, then escalate as your case or policy allows, such as a letter or a portal message. A note that records one unanswered call and nothing further leaves the loop open. Graders look for persistence proportionate to the seriousness of the result.
How specific should the tracking step be?
Specific enough that someone else could run it. Name the system or list used, the date a missing report triggers review, and who receives the alert. A general statement that the result will be followed up describes an intention, not a process, and in a stewardship course that difference is usually graded.