Mr. Carter, a 35-year-old male, presents to the clinic with complaints of fatigue, nausea, intermittent abdominal pain, and jaundice. He reports that he recently returned from a week-long trip to a rural area in Southeast Asia, where he ate local food and drank untreated water. He denies any history of alcohol use or intravenous drug use. Laboratory results include:

Test	Result	Normal Range
ALT (Alanine Aminotransferase)	1.200 U/L	7-56 U/L
AST (Aspartate Aminotransferase)	1.000 U/L	10-40 U/L
Total Bilirubin	5.5 mg/dL	0.1-1.2 mg/dL
Hepatitis A IgM	Positive	Negative

Medications: None reported.

Social History: Works as a teacher, lives alone.

Identify the priority nursing interventions for Mr. Carter. (Select all that apply)

Choice A reason: Teaching the spouse how to assist with transfers and mobility is important for long-term care, but it is not the highest priority at this moment. The focus should be on immediate patient care and assessment.
Choice B reason: Collaborating with physical therapy for gait training is essential for improving the patient's mobility and safety, but it can be scheduled after addressing more urgent needs.
Choice C reason: Monitoring for dysphagia during meals is crucial to prevent aspiration, especially in patients with Parkinson's disease. However, this is a part of ongoing care and not necessarily the immediate priority unless the patient is actively eating.
Choice D reason: Assessing the patient's response to Carbidopa-Levodopa is the highest priority because it directly impacts the patient's overall symptom management. Effective control of Parkinson's symptoms can improve mobility, reduce rigidity, and decrease the risk of complications such as falls and dysphagia.
Choice E reason: Encouraging regular high-calorie, nutrient-dense snacks is important for maintaining the patient's nutritional status, but it is not the immediate priority in comparison to evaluating the effectiveness of medication management.

Choice A reason:
Administering furosemide in this scenario would further lower the serum potassium level, as furosemide is a loop diuretic known for causing potassium loss through urine. This action could worsen the patient’s hypokalemia, leading to severe complications such as cardiac arrhythmias. Therefore, administering furosemide in the presence of hypokalemia is inappropriate and could put the patient at significant risk.
Choice B reason:
Administering both spironolactone and furosemide together without addressing the hypokalemia would not be safe. While spironolactone is a potassium-sparing diuretic, combining it with furosemide could negate its potassium-sparing effects. Furthermore, administering furosemide when hypokalemia is present could cause further electrolyte imbalance. Proper evaluation of the patient's condition and selective administration of the medications are crucial in this case.
Choice C reason:
Withholding both medications and attributing the decision to contraindications with hyperkalemia is incorrect because the reported potassium level (3.2 mEq/L) reflects hypokalemia, not hyperkalemia. Misinterpreting the lab result could delay appropriate treatment, such as correcting the potassium level or safely administering a medication that would not exacerbate the hypokalemia. Proper communication with the healthcare provider is necessary for effective patient care.
Choice D reason:
Administering spironolactone is the best action in this scenario because it is a potassium-sparing diuretic. By administering spironolactone, the risk of worsening hypokalemia is minimized. Notifying the healthcare provider about the low potassium level ensures appropriate monitoring and any necessary interventions, such as potassium supplementation. This approach is both safe and effective in managing the patient’s current condition while adhering to standard nursing practices.