Skip to main content
sign in
Username
Password
forgot?
Sign up
Share
help_outline
help
Pricing
Request Info
Please enable JavaScript on your web browser
menu
iRubric: Decision Making (Injury Assessment) worksheet rubric
find rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Decision Making (Injury Assessment) worksheet
Decision Making (Injury Assessment) worksheet
This is a rubric to use to assist students in building skills as they relate to Athletic Training injury/illness assessment. Additionally, the purpose is to build students' ability to navigate an injury/illness assessment while also developing a strong different assessment rationale.
Rubric Code:
P947CW
By
rehberg
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject:
Health
Type:
Assignment
Grade Levels:
Undergraduate
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
AREAS
Consider Remediation
0 pts
Unacceptable
1 pts
Satisfactory
2 pts
Good
3 pts
History
3 points
Consider Remediation
A "0" will be awarded when information is grossly void and no attempt at integration is identified.
Unacceptable
History is scant. The majority of vital information to the chief complaint is missing.
One or more of the following are missing: MOI, location of pain, previous injury, systemic profile, weak integration of rationale for asking the questions
Satisfactory
History is age and gender appropriate and contains pertinent information. However, it is missing some vital points relating to the chief complaint.
Pertinent HX questions are noted but may not be complete/some pertinent information are missing. Integration of the information is satisfactory but not complete.
Good
History is complete and age and gender appropriate. It is written in logical format and strong rationale is given for the information attained.
There is complete list of pertinent Hx questions. There integration into the evaluation is well documented and articulated. A clear and deliberate retrospective is provided.
Observation
Consider Remediation
0 pts
Unacceptable
1 pts
Satisfactory
2 pts
Good
3 pts
Observation
3 points
Consider Remediation
A "0" will be awarded when information is grossly void and no attempt at integration is identified.
Unacceptable
Observation is scant. The majority of vital information to the observation is missing.
One or more of the following are missing: postural evaluation, girth, limb length, local, regional etc.. Weak integration of rationale for the observation aspects.
Satisfactory
Observation is situation appropriate and contains pertinent information. However, it is missing some vital points relating to the the condition.
Pertinent areas of observation are noted but may not be complete/some pertinent information are missing. Integration of the information is satisfactory but not complete.
Good
Observation is complete and condition appropriate. It is written in logical format and strong rationale is given for the information attained.
There is complete list of pertinent observation structures etc. There integration into the evaluation is well documented and articulated. A clear and deliberate retrospective is provided.
Palpation
Consider Remediation
0 pts
Unacceptable
1 pts
Satisfactory
2 pts
Good
3 pts
Palpation
3 pts
Consider Remediation
A "0" will be awarded when information is grossly void and no attempt at integration is identified.
Unacceptable
Palpation is scant. The majority of vital information to the observation is missing.
One or more of the following are missing: anatomical structures, swelling, limb symmetry, deformity etc. Weak integration of rationale for the palpation aspects.
Satisfactory
Palpation is situation appropriate and contains pertinent information. However, it is missing some vital points relating to the the condition.
Pertinent areas of palpation are noted but may not be complete/some pertinent information are missing. Integration of the information is satisfactory but not complete.
Good
Palpation is complete and condition appropriate. It is written in logical format and strong rationale is given for the information attained.
There is complete list of pertinent palpation structures etc. There integration into the evaluation is well documented and articulated. A clear and deliberate retrospective is provided.
Range of Motion
Consider Remediation
0 pts
Unacceptable
1 pts
Satisfactory
2 pts
Good
3 pts
ROM
3 pts.
Consider Remediation
A "0" will be awarded when information is grossly void and no attempt at integration is identified.
Unacceptable
ROM is scant. The majority of vital information to the ROM is missing.
One or more of the following are missing: Active, Passive, Resistive, Con, Ecc, MMT, BT. Weak integration of rationale for the ROM aspects.
Satisfactory
ROM is situation appropriate and contains pertinent information. However, it is missing some vital points relating to the the condition.
Pertinent areas of ROM are noted but may not be complete/some pertinent information are missing. Integration of the information is satisfactory but not complete.
Good
ROM is complete and condition appropriate. It is written in logical format and strong rationale is given for the information attained.
There is complete list of ROM actions etc. There integration into the evaluation is well documented and articulated. A clear and deliberate retrospective is provided.
Special Tests
Consider Remediation
0 pts
Unacceptable
1 pts
Satisfactory
2 pts
Good
3 pts
Special Tests
3 pts
Consider Remediation
A "0" will be awarded when information is grossly void and no attempt at integration is identified.
Unacceptable
ST are scant. The majority of vital information to the condition is missing.
One or more of the following are missing: Stress tests, labs, xray, MRI/CT. Weak integration of rationale for the ST aspects.
Satisfactory
ST are situation appropriate and contains pertinent information. However, it is missing some vital points relating to the the condition.
Pertinent areas of ST are noted but may not be complete/some pertinent information are missing. Integration of the information is satisfactory but not complete.
Good
ST is complete and condition appropriate. It is written in logical format and strong rationale is given for the information attained.
There is complete list of ST actions/results etc. There integration into the evaluation is well documented and articulated. A clear and deliberate retrospective is provided.
Diagnosis
Consider Remediation
0 pts
Unacceptable
3 pts
Satisfactory
5 pts
Good
7 pts
Diagnosis/Differential Dx.
Consider Remediation
A "0" will be awarded when information is grossly void and no attempt at integration is identified.
Unacceptable
Inclusion of differential assessment is weak and little rationale is provided. Defining factors are weak and need to be more clearly identified. A retrospective is not articulated clearly or is omitted.
Satisfactory
Appropriate differential conditions are included. Appropriate information to rule out the condition may be weak or need improvement. Defining factors and retrospective is provided but needs to be improved.
Good
Diagnosis and Differential assessment is complete and appropriate. It is written in a logical format and strong rationale is given for the information. Defining factors are clearly and thoroughly shared as is the retrospective.
VI. Style
Consider Remediation
0 pts
Unacceptable
1 pts
Satisfactory
2 pts
Exceptional
3 pts
VI. Style
10 points
Consider Remediation
Faculty may assign "0" points when work in the category is far below what is expected from a student in this program
Unacceptable
*The paper does not relay adequate information on the subject, is disorganized and difficult to follow.
*The paper has numerous errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, and pagination.
*There is inappropriate use of medical terminology.
Satisfactory
*The paper relays information but is slightly disorganized.
*The content has several mistakes in spelling, grammar, punctuation, and/or pagination.
*Medical terminology is used appropriately most of the time
Exceptional
*The paper is well-written in a logical organized manner.
*The paper has appropriate spelling, grammar, punctuation, and pagination.
*There is consistent and appropriate use of medical terminology
Keywords:
Medical
Subjects:
Health
Types:
Assignment
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More Health rubrics
More Assignment rubrics
Do more with this rubric:
Preview
Preview this rubric.
Edit
Modify this rubric.
Copy
Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.
Print
Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize
Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark
Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run
Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade
Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate
Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish
Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email
Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss
Discuss this rubric with other members.
Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.
Only with iRubric
tm
.
Copyright © 2024
Reazon Systems, Inc.
All rights reserved.
n202
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.