Also utilize study questions to develop your understanding of the concepts and topics presented throughout this course. Soriano, R. P. (2026). Bates’ guide to physical examination and history taking(14th ed.). Wolters
·📅·⏱
7 min read
NO AI PREMITTED!!!!
REQUIRED RESOURCES FOR ASSIGNMENT!:
NOTE: Utilize this text as a clinical reference to aid your analysis for the relevant areas noted. Also utilize study questions to develop your understanding of the concepts and topics presented throughout this course.
Soriano, R. P. (2026). Bates’ guide to physical examination and history taking(14th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Health.
Chapter 1, "Foundational Skills Essential to the Clinical Encounter"
Chapter 2, "Interviewing, Communication, and Interpersonal Skills"
Chapter 5, "Clinical Reasoning"
Chapter 6, "Clinical Documentation and Oral Presentation"
Chapter 7, "Health Maintenance and Screening"
Chapter 8, "Evaluating Clinical Evidence"
CARDI-OH. (n.d.). Clinician’s pocket guide on motivational interviewingLinks to an external site.. https://www.cardi-oh.org/files/resources/cardi-oh-clinicians-pocket-guide-on-motivational-interviewing.pdf
Kay, J. M. (2025). The nurse practitioner ethicist: Distinct from a nurse ethicist?Links to an external site. Nursing Ethics, 32(8). https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330251350386
Walden University, LLC. (n.d.). Motivational Interviewing–Style History Interview [Video]. Walden University Canvas. https://waldenu.instructure.com
Watch a video of two providers interviewing a patient.
Video demonstrates example of standard interviewing techniques versus example of motivational interviewing (MI) using The Process of MI framework:
Engage – Build rapport, use open-ended questions, uncover values/hopes, and offer compassionate reflections.
Focus – Bring the discussion to the health concern at hand, eliciting symptoms, concerns, and wellness indicators.
Evoke – Explore reasons for and against change; use readiness rulers, double-sided reflections, and pros/cons.
Plan – Collaboratively set attainable goals and elicit patient commitment to specific next steps.
Assignment (1–2 pages)
Compare the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing in regard to effect on patient behavior. Which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes?
Explain how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing.
Reflect on how you might use MI techniques in your own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
Consider how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.
Use at least 3 scholarly resources that are less than 5 years old. Cite all sources in APA format.
RUBRIC:
NURS_6512_Module1_Assignment1_Rubric
NURS_6512_Module1_Assignment1_Rubric
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompare
the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding
the effect on patient behavior. Which approach is more effective in helping
patients achieve health-related behavioral changes?
20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides
a fully developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to
patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Thoroughly
explains which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve
health-related behavioral changes.
17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides
an adequately developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's
approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior.
Adequately explains which approach is more effective in helping patients
achieve health-related behavioral changes.
15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides
a minimally developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach
to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Minimal or
undeveloped explanation of which approach is more effective in helping
patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.
13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes
not provide a comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to
patient interviewing regarding effect on patient behavior; comparison is
vague, unclear, or inaccurate.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain
how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient
engagement compared to traditional interviewing.
20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides
a fully developed explanation of how motivational interviewing (MI) differs
in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional
interviewing.
17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides
an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in
their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides
a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their
own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes
not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own
advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is
vague, unclear, or inaccurate.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect
on how you might use MI techniques in your own advanced practice role to
promote patient-centered outcomes.
20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides
a fully developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own
advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides
an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in
their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides
a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their
own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes
not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own
advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is
vague, unclear, or inaccurate.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConsider
how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to
patient interviewing and communication practices.
20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides
a fully developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence,
nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication
practices.
17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides
an adequately developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence,
nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication
practices.
15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides
a minimally developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence,
nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication
practices.
13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes
not provide an analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence,
nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication
practices; analysis is vague, unclear, or inadequate.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse
at least 3 scholarly resources that are less than 5 years old.
10 to >8.94 ptsExcellentUses
3 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.
8.94 to >7.94 ptsGoodUses
2 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.
7.94 to >6.94 ptsFairUses
1 peer-reviewed scholarly source published within the last 5 years.
6.94 to >0 ptsPoorDoes
not use peer-reviewed scholarly sources or sources used are older than 5
years.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource
Attribution and APA Formatting
5 to >4.46 ptsExcellentAll
sources are cited in APA format without any errors.
4.46 to >3.96 ptsGoodAll
sources are cited in APA format with some minor errors.
3.96 to >3.46 ptsFairAll
sources are cited with frequent APA formatting errors.
3.46 to >0 ptsPoorMissing
source citations and/or minimal adherence to APA formatting rules.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar,
Mechanics, and Punctuation
5 to >4.46 ptsExcellentUses
correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4.46 to >3.96 ptsGoodUses
correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with few errors.
3.96 to >3.46 ptsFairUses
correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with frequent errors.
3.46 to >0 ptsPoorPost
contains frequent errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that interfere
with comprehension.
