A nurse is planning care for a client who is recovering from an acute myocardial infarction that occurred 3 days ago. Which of the following interventions should the nurse include?

Choice A reason: Increased blood pressure is not an effect of furosemide, which reduces fluid volume, lowering pressure. Weight loss indicates efficacy. Assuming increased pressure is correct risks misinterpreting diuresis, potentially delaying further fluid management, critical to avoid in treating fluid volume excess effectively.

Choice B reason: Decreased pain is unrelated to furosemide’s diuretic action, which targets fluid reduction, evidenced by weight loss. Assuming pain reduction is an indicator risks missing fluid status changes, critical to prevent in ensuring accurate assessment of furosemide’s effectiveness in fluid volume excess treatment.

Choice C reason: Decreased inflammation is not a furosemide effect; it promotes diuresis, reducing fluid, shown by weight loss. Assuming inflammation reduction is relevant risks misjudging medication efficacy, potentially overlooking fluid overload signs, critical to avoid in managing fluid volume excess with diuretic therapy.

Choice D reason: Weight loss indicates furosemide’s effectiveness, as it reduces fluid volume excess through diuresis, decreasing edema and body weight. This is critical for assessing therapeutic response, ensuring fluid balance, preventing complications like heart failure, and guiding further treatment in clients with fluid overload.

Choice A reason: Discussing preferences for repositioning schedules is secondary to assessing physical ability in stroke clients, who may have hemiplegia. Evaluating ability ensures safety. Assuming preferences are priority risks unsafe repositioning, potentially causing falls, critical to avoid in ensuring safe mobility and care for stroke patients.

Choice B reason: Evaluating the client’s ability to assist with repositioning is critical post-stroke to assess motor function, ensuring safe technique and preventing injury. This informs whether assistive devices or additional staff are needed, essential for reducing fall risk, promoting recovery, and tailoring care to the client’s physical capacity.

Choice C reason: Repositioning without assistive devices is unsafe for stroke clients with potential weakness or paralysis, risking falls or strain. Evaluating ability is priority. Assuming no devices are needed risks injury, critical to prevent in ensuring safe handling, supporting recovery, and maintaining safety in stroke rehabilitation care.

Choice D reason: Raising side rails ensures safety but is secondary to evaluating the client’s ability to assist, which guides repositioning technique. Assuming rails are the first step risks overlooking physical capacity, potentially leading to unsafe repositioning, critical to avoid in preventing falls and ensuring safe care for stroke clients.