To assess a client's pupillary reaction to accommodation, what action should the nurse take?

Choice A Reason:
White blood cell count (WBC) is inappropriate. White blood cell count is typically monitored to assess for signs of infection or inflammation. While it's important to monitor WBC count in certain situations, such as suspected infection, melena itself is not directly indicative of an increased risk of infection. Therefore, monitoring WBC count may not be the most immediate response to the finding of melena.
Choice B Reason:
Glucose is inappropriate. Glucose monitoring is essential for patients with diabetes or those at risk of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia. However, melena is not directly related to glucose metabolism or regulation. Therefore, monitoring glucose levels would not be the most relevant response to the finding of melena.
Choice C Reason:
Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) is inappropriate. Blood urea nitrogen is often monitored to assess kidney function and hydration status. While severe bleeding can potentially lead to hypovolemia and prerenal azotemia (elevated BUN due to decreased renal perfusion), monitoring BUN would not be the immediate response to the finding of melena. Instead, assessing for signs of hypovolemia and monitoring other markers of blood loss, such as hematocrit, would be more appropriate.
Choice D Reason:
Hematocrit is appropriate. Melena refers to the passage of black, tarry stools containing blood that has been digested. It indicates upper gastrointestinal bleeding, typically from the stomach or upper small intestine. Monitoring the hematocrit level is important because significant bleeding, as indicated by melena, can lead to a decrease in the hematocrit level due to the loss of red blood cells and plasma volume. Monitoring the hematocrit helps assess the severity of the bleeding and guides treatment decisions, such as the need for blood transfusions. Therefore, the nurse should monitor the hematocrit level in response to the finding of melena.

Choice A Reason:
Listening while the client reads items listed on the menu is inappropriate. This approach involves assessing the client's speech while they read items listed on the menu. While reading aloud can provide some insight into speech patterns, it may not fully capture spontaneous speech or natural conversation. Additionally, reading may not necessarily assess other aspects of speech such as articulation, fluency, or coherence. Therefore, while this approach can offer some information, it may not be as comprehensive as observing speech during a natural conversation or interview.
Choice B Reason:
Asking the client to complete a common proverb or saying is inappropriate. Asking the client to complete a common proverb or saying is a task that assesses language comprehension and expression. While this approach may provide some insight into the client's ability to formulate and articulate speech, it may not fully capture spontaneous speech patterns or natural conversation. Additionally, completing proverbs or sayings may require specific cultural knowledge or cognitive abilities that could influence the assessment. Therefore, while this approach can be useful in certain contexts, it may not be as comprehensive as observing speech during a natural conversation or interview.
Choice C Reason:
Noting the client's responses during the initial interview is appropriate. Option C involves observing the client's speech patterns during the initial interview, which provides the nurse with an opportunity to assess spontaneous speech, articulation, fluency, and coherence. During the initial interview, the nurse can assess the client's ability to express thoughts, respond to questions, and engage in conversation, which can reveal any abnormalities or difficulties in speech patterns. This approach allows for a comprehensive assessment of speech without requiring specific tasks or prompts that may be more challenging or unfamiliar to the client.
Choice D Reason:
Having the client repeat a phrase containing alliteration is inappropriate. Asking the client to repeat a phrase containing alliteration is a task that assesses speech articulation and phonological skills. While this approach may provide some information about the client's ability to produce specific sounds or syllables, it may not fully capture spontaneous speech patterns or natural conversation. Additionally, repeating phrases with alliteration may not necessarily assess other aspects of speech such as fluency, coherence, or language comprehension. Therefore, while this approach can be useful for assessing specific speech skills, it may not be as comprehensive as observing speech during a natural conversation or interview.