| Course | NU655 AGACNP Acute Care Diagnosis and Management Clinical III |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 6 |
| Paper type | Family meeting summary |
| Length | About 620 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU655 Unit 6
Free Air at 16:20 and a Choice by Evening: A Family Meeting Summary for the Daughters of an 89-Year-Old Man With Dementia
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU655: AGACNP Acute Care Diagnosis and Management Clinical III
Unit 6 Family Meeting Summary
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The patient and family are composite; times are bracketed, and the surgeon's words are quoted as spoken.
Meeting Details
Date and time: [Day 0], [18:40] to [19:25]. Present: [Anne], older daughter and health care agent; [Clare], younger daughter; the general surgeon; the hospitalist; the bedside nurse; the AGACNP student, who wrote this summary. Mr. [H.] was present at the start but could not follow the discussion.
What the Family Believed on Arrival
Both daughters arrived believing their father had a stomach virus. He had been vomiting since the morning at his memory care residence, and the staff had said a virus was going around.
What the Surgeon Said
In the surgeon's words: "There is a hole somewhere in his bowel, and the contents are leaking into his belly. An operation is the only way to close it for certain. At his age, and with his strokes and his memory, I think there is a real chance he would not survive the operation or the weeks after it, and if he did, he would likely not return to how he was this morning." The distance between a stomach virus and the possibility of death this week is what the meeting had to cross, and the summary records both so that anyone reading it understands why it took forty-five minutes.
The Choices
The surgeon described three options, each with a best case and a worst case, a format developed to help surgeons explain high-risk decisions to older patients and families (Taylor et al., 2017).
1. Emergency operation tonight. Best case: he survives the operation and returns to his residence after several weeks, with more confusion and weakness than before. Worst case: he dies in the operating room or in intensive care on a ventilator in the days after.
2. Treatment without an operation: antibiotics, nothing by mouth and fluids, hoping the hole seals. Best case: it seals, and he returns to his residence in about [one] week. Worst case: the infection spreads and he becomes sicker over [two to three] days.
3. Comfort-focused care: treatment of pain and nausea only, without antibiotics or tests. Best case: he dies peacefully within days, with his daughters present. Worst case: he has symptoms that take time to control.
How the Decision Was Reached
The hospitalist asked the daughters what their father would say if he could join the conversation, the standard of substituted judgment (Torke et al., 2008). [Anne] said he had told her after his second stroke, "Don't let them cut me open again; I've had enough." [Clare] said he enjoyed his lunches and the music hour at the residence and would want a chance to get back to them.
The Decision
[Anne], as health care agent and with [Clare]'s agreement, chose option 2, treatment without an operation, as a time-limited trial for [72] hours. If he worsens despite antibiotics, the plan changes to comfort-focused care, not to surgery. Code status: do not attempt resuscitation, no intubation.
Next Steps
1. Intravenous antibiotics and fluids started at [19:40]; nothing by mouth; pain and nausea treated.
2. Surgery will review him each morning; no operation is planned.
3. Palliative care will see him tomorrow.
4. The hospitalist will call [Anne] at [10:00] tomorrow, or sooner if he worsens.
5. The daughters may visit at any time.
The conversation followed a structured approach that explores understanding and values before offering a recommendation (Bernacki & Block, 2014).
References
Bernacki, R. E., & Block, S. D. (2014). Communication about serious illness care goals: A review and synthesis of best practices. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(12), 1994-2003. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.5271
Taylor, L. J., Nabozny, M. J., Steffens, N. M., Tucholka, J. L., Brasel, K. J., Johnson, S. K., Zelenski, A., Rathouz, P. J., Zhao, Q., Kwekkeboom, K. L., Campbell, T. C., & Schwarze, M. L. (2017). A framework to improve surgeon communication in high-stakes surgical decisions: Best case/worst case. JAMA Surgery, 152(6), 531-538. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.5674
Torke, A. M., Alexander, G. C., & Lantos, J. (2008). Substituted judgment: The limitations of autonomy in surrogate decision making. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(9), 1514-1517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0688-8
What the NU655 Unit 6 assignment asks for
The Unit 6 assignment asks you to summarize a family meeting about a high-stakes decision for a patient who cannot decide for himself. You record who attended and who holds decision-making authority, what the family believed beforehand, what they were told in the clinicians' own words, the options presented, how the decision was reached and what happens next. Most prompts set two pages. The summary is written for a reader who was not in the room, such as the night team or a consultant, so it records what was actually said. The patient's own previously expressed wishes, as the family reports them, should appear.
Inside the NU655 Unit 6 example
The example names the health care agent in its first lines and lists everyone present. The family's starting belief comes before the prognosis, because the distance between them explains the meeting, and a highlighted sentence says so. The surgeon's words are quoted. Three options follow, each with a best and worst case, using a framework designed for high-risk surgical decisions in older adults. The decision section records the patient's own reported words from each daughter and the standard of substituted judgment. The decision includes a time limit and what happens if it fails. Next steps give times and names by role. Names appear only by role or first initial.
Where the points sit in the NU655 Unit 6 rubric
The Unit 6 rubric generally scores accuracy of the record, representation of the patient's values, clarity of options, clarity of the decision and next steps. Accuracy earns full credit when prognosis is recorded in the clinicians' own words. Representation counts when the patient's previously expressed wishes appear, attributed to the family member who reported them. Options are judged on whether each is described realistically. The decision should include code status, a time limit where relevant and what would change it. Next steps should have times and owners, including when the family will next be called. Recording the patient's own reported words, attributed to the daughter who reported them, often decides the representation score.
NU655 Unit 6 help: mistakes that cost points
The most common mistake is summarizing what the clinicians meant instead of what they said, which is what the family actually heard. Another is recording the family's decision without the patient's own previously stated wishes. Students often present surgery and no surgery as the only options, leaving out comfort-focused care. Decisions are sometimes recorded without a time limit or a plan if they fail. Code status may be left out. And a summary that does not say when the family will be called next leaves them waiting by the phone. Also record who was present at the start and who left, since the patient's presence matters. Finally, write the time of the next call so the family can plan their evening.
Get an NU655 Unit 6 example written to your instructions
The meeting you attended, and the family in it, stay yours; a sample can only show the shape of one, using a composite family and a different patient. Outline the situation, who took part and the decision, all de-identified, then send the rubric. The first summary is free, ready in 24-48h, with prognosis kept in the words spoken at the table. 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 NU655 papers and MSN samples
- NU655 Unit 1: Salicylate Toxicity Discussion Post
- NU655 Unit 2: Integrated Presentation, Myxedema Coma
- NU655 Unit 3: Priority Defense, Rib Fractures
- NU655 Unit 4: Escalation Handoff, Threatened Airway
- NU655 Unit 5: Seminar Reflection, Massive Hemoptysis
- NU655 Unit 7: Code Debrief
- NU655 Unit 8: Transfer Summary
- NU655 Unit 9: End-of-life Reflection
- NU655 Unit 10: Acute Care Synthesis Paper
- NU654 Unit 6: Integrated Plan, Endocarditis
- NU653 Unit 6: Family Update, Stroke Mimic
- NU652 Unit 6: Consultation Letter to Radiology
- NU651 Unit 6: Minor Stroke DAPT Case Write-Up
NU655 Unit 6 questions, answered
Should the summary use the surgeon's exact words?
As closely as the notes allow. What makes the summary useful is a record of what the family actually heard, so prognosis is recorded in the plain sentences used, with clinical terms or calculator estimates added in brackets afterward. Rubrics often mark down summaries that translate the conversation into terms nobody used with the family.
Who makes the decision if the patient has dementia?
Usually a surrogate: an agent the patient appointed while able, or a relative recognized under state law. The summary names who holds that authority in one line and notes that the daughters were asked what their father would choose. It also records statements he made before his dementia progressed, since those carry weight.
Can the summary describe a meeting I attended?
Your own summary should reflect the meeting you took part in, with names and identifying details removed. The sample is a composite and cannot stand in for that record. What your preceptor observed, and anything signed on your clinical days, remains your own, as do the hours and logs behind it.
Where can I find a free NU655 Unit 6 sample paper?
The complete NU655 Unit 6 family meeting summary is on this page, with the family's starting belief, the surgeon's words, three options and the decision. If your family meeting faced a different choice, a free summary can be drafted from your notes.
What is the best case/worst case format in NU655 Unit 6?
A way of describing each treatment option by what the best realistic outcome and the worst realistic outcome would look like, developed to help surgeons discuss high-risk decisions with older patients and families. The sample uses it for all three options.