| Course | NU650 AGACNP Introduction to Acute Care Management I |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 4 |
| Paper type | Early warning score exercise |
| Length | About 890 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU650 Unit 4
Five Sets, Nine Hours: A NEWS2 Early Warning Score Exercise for a 68-Year-Old Woman With Diverticulitis, and the Point Where the Score Demanded a Response
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU650: AGACNP Introduction to Acute Care Management I
Unit 4 Early Warning Score Exercise
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The patient is composite; every observation and time is bracketed.
Chart and Scale
The exercise uses the second National Early Warning Score, NEWS2 (Royal College of Physicians, 2017). Scale 1 for oxygen saturation applies, because Mrs. [B.] has no history of hypercapnic respiratory failure; Scale 2 is reserved for patients with a confirmed target range of 88 to 92 percent. Each parameter scores 0 to 3, supplemental oxygen adds 2, and totals fall into bands: 0 to 4 low, any one parameter reaching 3 as a low-to-medium trigger, 5 to 6 medium, which is the key threshold for an urgent response, and 7 or more high, which calls for an emergency response.
Mrs. [B.] is a [68]-year-old woman admitted at [06:30] with left lower quadrant pain and a CT showing uncomplicated sigmoid diverticulitis. She received intravenous fluids at a maintenance rate and oral antibiotics were ordered.
Scores by Time
[08:00]. Respiratory rate [18], 0. Saturation [96] percent, 0. Air, 0. Systolic pressure [132], 0. Pulse [88], 0. Alert, 0. Temperature [38.2] degrees Celsius, 1. Total 1, low.
[11:00]. Respiratory rate [20], 0. Saturation [96], 0. Air, 0. Systolic [124], 0. Pulse [92], 1. Alert, 0. Temperature [38.7], 1. Total 2, low. Acetaminophen [1 g] was given by mouth at [11:30] for the fever.
[13:00]. Respiratory rate [22], 2. Saturation [95], 1. Air, 0. Systolic [108], 1. Pulse [108], 1. Alert, 0. Temperature [37.6], 0. Total 5, medium.
[15:00]. Respiratory rate [22], 2. Saturation [95] with [2] liters of oxygen through a cannula, 1. Oxygen, 2. Systolic [106], 1. Pulse [104], 1. Alert, 0. Temperature [37.9], 0. Total 7, high. Oxygen had been started at [14:40] for a saturation of [92] on air.
[17:00]. Respiratory rate [20], 0. Saturation [95] on [2] liters, 1. Oxygen, 2. Systolic [118], 0. Pulse [96], 1. Alert, 0. Temperature [37.8], 0. Total 4, low band, with oxygen still scoring.
Reading Each Time Point
At [08:00] and [11:00] the totals of 1 and 2 were accurate and low. The fever explained her pulse, and nothing else was moving.
[13:00] is the center of the exercise. The total reached 5, the threshold at which NEWS2 asks for an urgent bedside review by someone skilled in assessing acutely ill adults. Nobody called. The likeliest reason is visible in the temperature row: acetaminophen at [11:30] had brought her temperature from [38.7] to [37.6], so temperature scored 0. The drug removed one point from the total while her breathing, pulse and pressure were each adding points, and the chart looked calmer than she was. Had the fever still scored, her total would have been 6, and the rising pattern across four parameters would have been harder to miss. The lesson is not that antipyretics are wrong but that a treated fever cannot be read as a resolved one.
At [15:00] the total rose to 7, the high band, and the rapid response team was called at [15:10]. The exercise separates physiology from treatment here. Two of the seven points came from the oxygen started at [14:40]; the saturation score fell from what it would have been on air to 1 on oxygen. Her underlying physiology was worse than at [13:00], but the total overstates the change by two points that measure the treatment rather than the patient.
By [17:00], after a [1,000] mL crystalloid bolus, blood cultures and a switch to intravenous antibiotics for suspected perforation or abscess, her total fell to 4. That is response, not resolution. Oxygen still scores 2, and a total of 4 with oxygen is a different patient from a total of 4 on air.
Response Each Band Called For
1. Total 1 to 4: routine observation at the ward's standard frequency, at least every [four] to [six] hours, with the registered nurse deciding whether to increase it.
2. Total 5 to 6: an urgent review by a clinician skilled in acute assessment, with observations at least hourly. This response was due at [13:00] and did not happen.
3. Total 7 or more: an emergency response from a team that includes critical care skills, with continuous monitoring. This response happened at [15:10].
What the Score Can and Cannot Do
NEWS2 is a prompt for attention, not a diagnosis. The original NEWS discriminated well for cardiac arrest, an unplanned move to intensive care and death, each within 24 hours (Smith et al., 2013), and NEWS2 performed similarly for mortality in a large multicenter comparison (Pimentel et al., 2019). Neither study makes the score a substitute for the nurse's concern, which in Mrs. [B.]'s case was charted at [12:45] as "looks unwell, more tired." A score of 5 with a worried nurse should be treated as more urgent than a score of 5 alone.
Two practice points follow for the unit. First, when an antipyretic has been given in the previous [four] hours, the temperature score should be read with that note beside it. Second, when oxygen is started, the next total should be compared with the last total on air, not only with the one before it.
References
Pimentel, M. A. F., Redfern, O. C., Gerry, S., Collins, G. S., Malycha, J., Prytherch, D., Schmidt, P. E., Smith, G. B., & Watkinson, P. J. (2019). A comparison of the ability of the National Early Warning Score and the National Early Warning Score 2 to identify patients at risk of in-hospital mortality: A multi-centre database study. Resuscitation, 134, 147-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.09.026
Royal College of Physicians. (2017). National Early Warning Score (NEWS) 2: Standardising the assessment of acute-illness severity in the NHS. Updated report of a working party. https://www.rcp.ac.uk/resources/national-early-warning-score-news-2/
Smith, G. B., Prytherch, D. R., Meredith, P., Schmidt, P. E., & Featherstone, P. I. (2013). The ability of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) to discriminate patients at risk of early cardiac arrest, unanticipated intensive care unit admission, and death. Resuscitation, 84(4), 465-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.12.016
NU650 Unit 4 instructions, in plain terms
The Unit 4 exercise gives you a series of vital sign sets for a hospitalized patient and asks you to score each with a named early warning system, identify when the score called for action, compare that with what happened and explain the response each band requires. The chart and scale must be stated, since NEWS2 has two oxygen saturation scales and the points change with the choice. Most prompts also ask you to comment on what the score can and cannot tell a clinician. The format is short, often two pages plus a table, but every score must be shown with its raw value so it can be checked. Current sources on the score's validation are expected.
How the NU 650 Unit 4 example is put together
The example names NEWS2 and Scale 1 at the start and explains why Scale 1 applies to this patient. Each time point then lists every parameter with its value and points, followed by a total and its band. The discussion that follows is short for the quiet hours and longer at 13:00 and 15:00, where the argument sits. At 13:00 the paper shows what the total would have been without the antipyretic. At 15:00 it separates the two points added by oxygen from the change in her condition. A short section lists the response each band calls for, and a closing section cites two validation studies and the nurse's charted concern.
NU650 Unit 4 rubric: what earns full points
Points in the Unit 4 rubric go to scoring accuracy, identification of the trigger point, interpretation, the escalation response and use of evidence. Accuracy is checked cell by cell, so a single misread band, such as a pulse of 108 scored as 2, costs points. Identifying the correct trigger time earns substantial credit, and the rubric rewards explaining why it was missed. Interpretation earns full points when treatment effects, such as antipyretics and oxygen, are separated from physiology. The escalation criterion is met when the response for each band is stated as the scoring system describes it. Evidence counts when validation studies are cited for what they actually tested.
NU650 Unit 4 help from the desk
The commonest mistake is scoring the saturation on the wrong scale, or forgetting that supplemental oxygen adds two points. Students also miss that a treated fever can lower the total while the patient worsens. Many exercises report the totals without the individual parameter scores, which leaves nothing for the grader to check. Some treat a high score after oxygen is started as proof of deterioration without noting that part of it reflects the treatment. Others describe the escalation response vaguely rather than by band. Finally, avoid presenting the score as a diagnosis; it tells you when to look closely, not what is wrong.
Get an NU650 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Whichever scoring system the NU650 Unit 4 prompt names, NEWS2 or another, the model follows it; the observation chart and rubric are all it needs. Delivery takes 24-48h and a first request is free, with a table checked against the published chart, the threshold hour argued in prose and treatment points separated from physiology. 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.
More NU650 papers and MSN samples
- NU650 Unit 1: Sepsis Acuity Discussion Post
- NU650 Unit 2: Admission H&P, Rhabdomyolysis Case
- NU650 Unit 3: Level of Care, Alcohol Withdrawal
- NU650 Unit 5: Seminar Reflection
- NU650 Unit 6: Admission Orders Rationale
- NU650 Unit 7: Chest Pain Workup
- NU650 Unit 8: Diabetic Ketoacidosis Protocol
- NU650 Unit 9: Code Status Summary
- NU650 Unit 10: Discharge Summary
- NU648 Unit 4: Perioperative Medication Plan
- NU610 Unit 4: Diagnostic Reasoning Memo
- NU605 Unit 4: Coding and Billing Exercise
- NU603 Unit 4: Descriptive Data Analysis
NU650 Unit 4 questions, answered
What if my section uses MEWS or a hospital's own score?
The sample applies whichever system the prompt names. MEWS, NEWS2 and locally modified charts share the logic of turning vital signs into banded points with a set response, but their thresholds and parameters differ, so the table is rebuilt for the chosen tool and its source is cited. The reasoning about trends and masked values carries over unchanged.
Why does oxygen add points when saturation looks fine?
Because needing oxygen to keep saturation normal is itself a sign of illness. NEWS2 adds points for any supplemental oxygen, so a patient at 96 percent on 2 liters scores higher than one at 96 percent on room air. The sample makes this point at 15:00, where part of the rising total reflects the treatment just started.
Is the patient in the exercise real?
No. She is a composite assembled to teach one pattern: a slow drift, a masked temperature and a late call. Every value is invented and bracketed. Observation charts and patients from a student's own clinical placement stay with the student, and nothing a preceptor signs is ever produced as part of a sample.
Where can I find a free NU650 Unit 4 sample paper?
The full NU650 Unit 4 early warning score exercise is on this page, with all five observation sets scored parameter by parameter and the trigger point explained. A free sample using your own chart or scoring system can be requested.
Does oxygen add points in NEWS2 for NU650 Unit 4?
Yes. Any supplemental oxygen adds 2 points, so a patient on oxygen scores higher than one with the same saturation on air. The sample shows this at 15:00, where two of the seven points come from oxygen started that hour.