NUR 636 Module 5 Case Study Example

Reviewed by Delia Ravenscroft, MSN, RN

This NUR 636 Module 5 Case Study sample works through one of the highest-stakes decisions in pediatric primary care: what to do with a young infant who has a fever but looks well. It is written for SNHU NUR 636 (NUR-636), the MSN pediatric primary care course. The composite patient is Sofia, 35 days old, born at term, whose mother measured a rectal temperature of 38.3 degrees Celsius and who is feeding and alert. The case explains why age matters so much in febrile infants and follows the 2021 AAP guideline for well-appearing infants aged 29 to 60 days: a urinalysis, inflammatory markers and a blood culture. It interprets her normal results against the guideline's thresholds and a validated prediction rule. It explains why she needs neither a lumbar puncture nor antibiotics, and it sets out the conditions for home observation and a 24-hour recheck.

CourseNUR 636 Primary Care of Infants, Children and Adolescents
ModuleModule 5
Paper typeCase study applying the febrile infant guideline
LengthAbout 1,040 words, 6 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolSouthern New Hampshire University
ProgramMSN
UpdatedSeptember 2026

Free sample paper for NUR 636 Module 5

1

Case Study: Applying the 2021 AAP Guideline to a Well-Appearing Febrile Infant at 35 Days

[Student Name]

Southern New Hampshire University

NUR 636: Primary Care of Infants, Children and Adolescents

Module Five Case Study

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.

What this page is doingThe title names the guideline, the key clinical feature, a well appearance, and the exact age, since the guideline's recommendations change by age band.
2

Case Study: Applying the 2021 AAP Guideline to a Well-Appearing Febrile Infant at 35 Days

A fever in an infant under two months old used to trigger the same response almost everywhere: blood, urine and spinal fluid tests, antibiotics and hospital admission. Most of those infants turned out to have viral illnesses, and many were exposed to painful procedures, antibiotics and separation from their families for little benefit. Yet a small number have serious bacterial infections that can be devastating if missed. In 2021 the American Academy of Pediatrics published its first guideline for evaluating well-appearing febrile infants aged 8 to 60 days. This case study applies it to a five-week-old seen in primary care and argues that following its age-specific pathway allows a careful clinician to spare a low-risk infant unnecessary procedures without missing the infants who need them.

What this page is doingThe introduction describes the shift in practice and the stakes on both sides, then states the argument.
3

The Case

Sofia is a 35-day-old girl brought to the clinic at 10 a.m. Her mother noticed she felt warm at 7 a.m. and measured a rectal temperature of 38.3 degrees Celsius. She has been breastfeeding every two to three hours as usual, has had six wet diapers since midnight and cried normally during the night. Her four-year-old brother has a cold. She arrived vaginally at 39 weeks' gestation after an uncomplicated pregnancy; her mother's group B streptococcus screen was negative, and neither received antibiotics around delivery. She has never been hospitalized and has received no antibiotics. In the clinic, her rectal temperature is 38.2 degrees Celsius, heart rate 162, respiratory rate 40 and oxygen saturation 98%. She is alert, makes eye contact, feeds vigorously during the visit and is consolable. Her fontanelle is flat, skin is pink without rash or petechiae, capillary refill is under two seconds and the rest of her examination is normal apart from mild nasal congestion.

What this page is doingThe case provides the details the guideline requires: exact age, method of temperature measurement, perinatal history, antibiotic exposure and a documented well appearance.
4

Why Age Matters

Serious bacterial infections in young infants are now mostly urinary tract infections. In a population study of term infants aged one week to three months, urinary tract infections far outnumbered bacteremia and meningitis, Escherichia coli was the leading cause of all three and most bacteremia occurred alongside a urinary infection (Greenhow et al., 2014). The risk of bacteremia and meningitis is highest in the first weeks of life and falls with age, which is why the AAP guideline divides well-appearing febrile infants into three bands, 8 to 21 days, 22 to 28 days and 29 to 60 days, with progressively less invasive evaluation (Pantell et al., 2021). Sofia, at 35 days, falls in the oldest band. The guideline applies only to well-appearing infants born at 37 weeks or later with a documented temperature of 38.0 degrees Celsius or higher, without prior antibiotics, focal bacterial infection or complex medical conditions, and she meets each condition.

What this page is doingThe section explains the epidemiology behind age-based management and confirms that the patient fits the guideline's inclusion criteria.
5

Applying the Guideline

For well-appearing infants 29 to 60 days old, the guideline directs clinicians to obtain a urinalysis, a blood culture and inflammatory markers, with procalcitonin preferred, and to use the results to decide whether lumbar puncture and antibiotics are needed (Pantell et al., 2021). Sofia's catheterized urinalysis showed no leukocyte esterase, no nitrites and fewer than five white cells per high-power field; urine was sent for culture. Her procalcitonin was 0.18 ng/mL, her C-reactive protein 6 mg/L, her absolute neutrophil count 3,200 per microliter and her temperature never exceeded 38.5 degrees Celsius. All fall within the ranges the guideline treats as reassuring. A blood culture was drawn.

A validated prediction rule supports the same conclusion. In a multicenter study of febrile infants 60 days or younger, a rule combining a negative urinalysis, an absolute neutrophil count of 4,090 per microliter or less and a procalcitonin of 1.71 ng/mL or less identified infants at low risk of serious bacterial infection with very high sensitivity in both derivation and validation sets (Kuppermann et al., 2019). Sofia meets all three low-risk criteria.

What this page is doingThe guideline's steps for the age band are applied with the patient's actual results, and a prediction rule provides independent support.
6

What Is Not Done and Why

For an infant in this age band with a negative urinalysis and reassuring inflammatory markers, the guideline indicates that a lumbar puncture need not be performed and that antibiotics need not be started, because the probability of meningitis is very low. Avoiding the lumbar puncture spares Sofia a painful procedure that sometimes requires several attempts, and avoiding empiric antibiotics prevents unnecessary exposure and the admission that often accompanies it. Viral testing for her congestion could be considered but would not change management, since a positive viral test does not remove the need to assess bacterial risk in this age group.

What this page is doingThe section explains the decisions not to perform certain interventions, with their rationale, which is as important as what is done.
7

Home Observation Plan

Infants in this age band with reassuring results may be observed at home if the family can reliably monitor the infant and return, with follow-up within 24 to 36 hours (Pantell et al., 2021). Sofia's mother has a working phone and a car, lives 15 minutes from the clinic and understands the plan, so home observation is appropriate. The plan includes checking the blood and urine cultures at 24 and 36 hours, with the clinic calling the family immediately if either grows bacteria; a clinic recheck tomorrow morning; and clear instructions to return at once or call 911 if Sofia becomes difficult to wake, feeds poorly or refuses two feedings, has fewer than four wet diapers in 24 hours, develops a rash that does not blanch, breathes fast or with effort or has a temperature of 38.5 degrees Celsius or higher. Acetaminophen was not recommended before the recheck, so that fever trends remain visible.

What this page is doingThe home plan specifies the conditions that make observation safe, culture follow-up, a recheck and concrete return precautions, reflecting the guideline's requirements.
8

Communicating With the Family

Sofia's mother was frightened when told that fever in young infants is taken seriously. The explanation focused on what the tests showed: her urine was clear, the blood markers of infection were low and a well-validated set of criteria placed Sofia at very low risk. She was told honestly that the cultures take time and that the plan depends on her watching closely and bringing Sofia back if anything changes. She repeated the return precautions back correctly.

What this page is doingThe communication section shows how to explain risk honestly and confirm understanding, which is essential to safe home observation.
9

Conclusion

Sofia is a well-appearing, term, 35-day-old infant with fever, a negative urinalysis and reassuring inflammatory markers. Applying the 2021 AAP guideline for her age band, supported by a validated prediction rule, allows her to avoid a lumbar puncture, antibiotics and admission, while cultures, a recheck and specific return precautions guard against the rare infection that could still emerge.

What this page is doingThe conclusion restates the key findings and how the guideline shaped a safe, less invasive plan.
10

References

Greenhow, T. L., Hung, Y.-Y., Herz, A. M., Losada, E., & Pantell, R. H. (2014). The changing epidemiology of serious bacterial infections in young infants. Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 33(6), 595-599. https://doi.org/10.1097/INF.0000000000000225

Kuppermann, N., Dayan, P. S., Levine, D. A., Vitale, M., Tzimenatos, L., Tunik, M. G., Saunders, M., Ruddy, R. M., Roosevelt, G., Rogers, A. J., Powell, E. C., Nigrovic, L. E., Muenzer, J., Linakis, J. G., Grisanti, K., Jaffe, D. M., Hoyle, J. D., Greenberg, R., Gattu, R., . . . Mahajan, P. (2019). A clinical prediction rule to identify febrile infants 60 days and younger at low risk for serious bacterial infections. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(4), 342-351. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.5501

Pantell, R. H., Roberts, K. B., Adams, W. G., Dreyer, B. P., Kuppermann, N., O'Leary, S. T., Okechukwu, K., Woods, C. R., Byington, C. L., Lavelle, J. M., Lye, P. S., Macy, M. L., Munoz, F. M., Nelson, C. E., Pearson, S. J., Powell, K. R., & Teichman, J. S. (2021). Evaluation and management of well-appearing febrile infants 8 to 60 days old. Pediatrics, 148(2), Article e2021052228. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-052228

What the NUR 636 Module 5 instructions ask for

The NUR 636 case study for this module usually presents a high-risk pediatric presentation, such as a febrile young infant, and asks you to analyze it against current guidelines, justify the workup and disposition and address family communication. Expect three to five pages in APA 7 with the relevant AAP guideline and supporting research. Confirm that the child meets the guideline's inclusion criteria before applying it, follow the pathway for the correct age band, interpret each result against the stated thresholds, explain what you deliberately did not do and why and specify the conditions for safe discharge, because NUR 636 graders focus on whether the reasoning would keep a real infant safe.

How this NUR 636 Module 5 case study example is built

This case follows a composite 35-day-old term girl with a rectal temperature of 38.3 degrees who is feeding and alert. Greenhow's population data explain why urinary tract infections dominate and why age bands matter, and the child is checked against each of the Pantell AAP guideline's inclusion criteria. For the 29 to 60 day band, a catheterized urinalysis, blood culture and inflammatory markers are obtained, and her normal results are read against the guideline and the Kuppermann PECARN rule. The case explains why no lumbar puncture or antibiotics are needed, sets conditions and follow-up for home observation, lists return precautions and describes how risk was explained to her mother.

Where the NUR 636 Module 5 rubric puts the points

Case study rubrics in NUR 636 generally weigh the accuracy of guideline application, interpretation of laboratory results, justification of decisions including what is withheld, safety planning, family communication and APA 7 writing. The strongest papers confirm guideline eligibility, apply the correct age-band pathway and interpret results against stated thresholds rather than calling them normal. Graders reward explicit reasoning about avoided procedures and treatments, home observation plans that name the conditions required and culture follow-up with clear responsibility. Honest, understandable communication of risk to a frightened parent shows the family-centered practice this course emphasizes. Documenting who will check the cultures, when and how the family will be reached closes the most common safety gap in these plans, and graders often look for it specifically.

NUR 636 Module 5 help: the mistakes that cost points

Febrile infant case studies lose points when they apply the wrong age band, skip the guideline's inclusion criteria, call results normal without thresholds, order a lumbar puncture or antibiotics without justification or send an infant home without culture follow-up or specific return precautions. A common gap is ignoring whether the family can actually observe and return. Confirm eligibility, follow the age-specific pathway, interpret each marker, explain what is not done, set conditions for home observation, assign culture follow-up and give measurable return precautions. If your case is a febrile infant in a younger band or an ill-appearing child, send the scenario and rubric for an analysis built on that pathway.

Get NUR 636 Module 5 written to your instructions

Send the pediatric case, your prompt and the rubric for NUR 636. The case study you receive will confirm guideline eligibility, follow the correct age-band pathway, interpret each result against its threshold and set safe discharge conditions, within 24 to 48 hours, free the first time. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.

More NUR 636 papers and related MSN samples

NUR 636 Module 5 questions, answered

Where can I find a free NUR 636 Module 5 Case Study sample?

The complete case study is published here: a well-appearing febrile 35-day-old evaluated with the 2021 AAP guideline, inflammatory markers, a prediction rule and a home observation plan.

What does the 2021 AAP febrile infant guideline cover?

The evaluation and management of well-appearing, term infants aged 8 to 60 days with a temperature of 38.0 degrees Celsius or higher, divided into three age bands with different pathways.

Does every febrile infant under 60 days need a lumbar puncture?

No. Under the guideline, well-appearing infants aged 29 to 60 days with a negative urinalysis and reassuring inflammatory markers generally do not need a lumbar puncture.

What is the most common serious bacterial infection in young febrile infants?

Urinary tract infection, most often caused by Escherichia coli, which is why a urinalysis is central to the evaluation.

When can a febrile young infant be observed at home?

When the infant is in an age band and risk category that allow it, has reassuring results and the family can reliably monitor, return and be reached, with follow-up within 24 to 36 hours.