NRNP 6635 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-11)

NRNP 6635 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-11)

NRNP 6635 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-11)

NRNP 6635 Week 1 Discussion: Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

In many realms of medicine, objective diagnoses can be made: A clavicula is broken. An infection is present. TSH levels meet the diagnostic criteria for hypothyroidism. Psychiatry, on the other hand, deals with psychological phenomena and behaviors. Can these, too, be “defined objectively and by scientific criteria (Gergen, 1985), or are they social constructions?” (Boland, Verduin, & Ruiz, 2022).

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NRNP 6635 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-11) HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

Thanks to myriad advances during recent decades, we know that psychopathology is caused by many interacting factors. Theoretical and clinical contributions to the field have come from the neural sciences, genetics, psychology, and social-cultural sciences. How do these factors impact the expression, classification, diagnosis, and prevalence of psychopathology, and why might it be important for a nurse practitioner to take a multidimensional, integrative approach?

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

To Prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources, considering the many interacting factors that contribute to the development of psychopathology.

Consider how theoretical perspective on psychopathology impacts the work of the PMHNP.

By Day 3 of Week 1

Explain the biological (genetic and neuroscientific); psychological (behavioral and cognitive processes, emotional, developmental); and social, cultural, and interpersonal factors that influence the development of psychopathology.

Upload a copy of your discussion writing to the draft Turnitin for plagiarism check. Your faculty holds the academic freedom to not accept your work and grade at a zero if your work is not uploaded as a draft submission to Turnitin as instructed.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses

By Day 6 of Week 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on 2 different days by explaining the implications of why, as an advanced practice nurse, it is important to adopt a multidimensional, integrative model of psychopathology.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link, and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!

NRNP_6635_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s). … Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. … No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. … Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.

39 to >34.0 pts

Good

Responds to most of the discussion question(s). … Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. … Supported by at least 3 credible references.

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair

Responds to some of the discussion question(s). … One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. … Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.

30 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not respond to the discussion question(s). … Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. … Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Contains only 1 or no credible references.

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

Written clearly and concisely. … Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. … Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good

Written concisely. … May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. … Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Written somewhat concisely. … May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Contains some APA formatting errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Not written clearly or concisely. … Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting: Timely and full participation

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Posts main discussion by due date. … Meets requirements for full participation.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Posts main discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Responds to questions posed by faculty. … The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. … Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. … Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. … Few or no credible sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. … Response to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Responds to questions posed by faculty. … The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. … Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. … Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. … Few or no credible sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. … Response to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.

5 pts

Total Points: 100

NRNP 6635 Week 2 Discussion: The Psychiatric Evaluation and Evidence-Based Rating Scales

Assessment tools have two primary purposes: 1) to measure illness and diagnose clients, and 2) to measure a client’s response to treatment. Often, you will find that multiple assessment tools are designed to measure the same condition or response. Not all tools, however, are appropriate for use in all clinical situations. You must consider the strengths and weaknesses of each tool to select the appropriate assessment tool for your client. For this Discussion, as you examine the assessment tool assigned to you by the Course Instructor, consider its use in psychotherapy.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Readings

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Section I: DSM-5 basics. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site.(5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.5555/appi.books.9780890425787.Section_1

Links to an external site.

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Classification. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site.(5th ed., text rev., pp. xiii-xl). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.5555/appi.books.9780890425787.Section_1

Links to an external site.

Review

Carlat, D. J. (2017). The psychiatric interview (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 34, Writing Up the Results of the Interview

Boland, R. & Verduin, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry (12th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 1, “Examination and Diagnosis of the Psychiatric Patient”

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1995). Practice parameters for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents

Links to an external site.. https://www.aacap.org/App_Themes/AACAP/docs/practice_parameters/psychiatric_assessment_practice_parameter.pdf

American Psychiatric Association. (2016). Practice guidelines for the psychiatric evaluation of adults

Links to an external site. (3rd ed.). https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.books.9780890426760

Sadock, B. J., Sadock, V. A., & Ruiz, P. (2017). Classification in psychiatry. In Kaplan and Sadock’s Concise Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry

Links to an external site. (4th ed., pp. 1–8). Wolters Kluwer.

Sadock, B. J., Sadock, V. A., & Ruiz, P. (2017). Psychiatric interview, history, and mental status examination. In Kaplan and Sadock’s Concise Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry

Links to an external site. (4th ed., pp. 39–52). Wolters Kluwer.

Sadock, B. J., Sadock, V. A., & Ruiz, P. (2017). Medical assessment and laboratory testing in psychiatry. In Kaplan and Sadock’s Concise Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry

Links to an external site. (4th ed., pp. 16–21). Wolters Kluwer.

Required Media

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2015). Diagnostic criteria

Links to an external site.[Video]. Walden University.

MedEasy. (2017). Psychiatric history taking and the mental status examination | USMLE & COMLEX

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5KwDgWX8L8

Psychiatry Lectures. (2015). Psychiatry lecture: How to do a psychiatric assessment

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRiCntvec5U

To Pepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and reflect on the insights they provide regarding psychiatric assessment and diagnosis.

Consider the elements of the psychiatric interview, history, and examination.

Consider the assessment tool assigned to you by the Course Instructor.

By Day 3 of Week 2

Post a brief explanation of three important components of the psychiatric interview and why you consider these elements important. Explain the psychometric properties of the rating scale you were assigned. Explain when it is appropriate to use this rating scale with clients during the psychiatric interview and how the scale is helpful to a nurse practitioner’s psychiatric assessment. Support your approach with evidence-based literature.

Upload a copy of your discussion writing to the draft Turnitin for plagiarism check. Your faculty holds the academic freedom to not accept your work and grade at a zero if your work is not uploaded as a draft submission to Turnitin as instructed.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of Week 2

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on 2 different days by comparing your assessment tool to theirs.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link, and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!

NRNP_6635_Week2_Discussion_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week2_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting: Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s). … Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. … No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. … Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.

39 to >34.0 pts

Good

Responds to most of the discussion question(s). … Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. … Supported by at least 3 credible references.

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair

Responds to some of the discussion question(s). … One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. … Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.

30 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not respond to the discussion question(s). … Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. … Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Contains only 1 or no credible references.

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

Written clearly and concisely. … Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. … Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good

Written concisely. … May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. … Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Written somewhat concisely. … May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Contains some APA formatting errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Not written clearly or concisely. … Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting: Timely and full participation
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Posts main discussion by due date. … Meets requirements for full participation.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Posts main discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main discussion by due date.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Responds to questions posed by faculty. … The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. … Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. … Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. … Few or no credible sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. … Response to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Responds to questions posed by faculty. … The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. … Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. … Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. … Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. … Few or no credible sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. … Response to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.
5 pts

Total Points: 100

NRNP 6635 Week 3 Assignment: Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders

Accurately diagnosing depressive disorders can be challenging given their periodic and, at times, cyclic nature. Some of these disorders occur in response to stressors and, depending on the cultural history of the client, may affect their decision to seek treatment. Bipolar disorders can also be difficult to properly diagnose. While clients with a bipolar or related disorder will likely have to contend with the disorder indefinitely, many find that the use of medication and evidence-based treatments have favorable outcomes.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Readings

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Bipolar and related disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x03_Bipolar_and_Related_Disorders

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Depressive disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x04_Depressive_Disorders

Boland, R. & Verduin, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry (12th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 2 -only sections 2.9, “Depressive Disorders and Suicide in Children and Adolescents” 2.10 Early-Onset Bipolar Disorder”, and 2.11 “Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder”

Chapter 6 “Bipolar Disorders”

Chapter 7 “Depressive Disorders”

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Required Media

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2015). Bipolar disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2015). Depressive disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (1992). Mood disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2005). Bipolar disorder in children

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

MedEasy. (2017). Mood disorders (depression, mania/bipolar, everything in between) | USMLE & COMLEX

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59umGpQyaHs

Video Case Selections for Assignment

Select one of the following videos to use for your Assignment this week. Then, access the document “Case History Reports” and review the additional data about the patient in the specific video number you selected.

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 2

Links to an external site.[Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-2

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 8

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-8

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2017). Training title 18

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-18

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 28

Links to an external site.[Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-28

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 3

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-38

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 43

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-43

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 118

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-118

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 144

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-144

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 150

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-150

Document: Case History Reports

Download Case History Reports

To Prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the insights they provide about assessing and diagnosing mood disorders.

Download the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template, which you will use to complete this Assignment. Also review the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar to see an example of a completed evaluation document.

By Day 1 of this week, select a specific video case study to use for this Assignment from the Video Case Selections choices in the Learning Resources. View your assigned video case and review the additional data for the case in the “Case History Reports” document, keeping the requirements of the evaluation template in mind.

Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.

Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.

Identify at least three possible differential diagnoses for the patient.

By Day 7 of Week 3

Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate a primary diagnosis. Incorporate the following into your responses in the template:

Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?

Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment??

Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses with supporting evidence, listed in order from highest priority to lowest priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5 criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this client if you could conduct the session over??Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK3Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week3_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week3_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Create documentation in the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template about the patient you selected. In the Subjective section, provide: • Chief complaint• History of present illness (HPI)• Past psychiatric history• Medication trials and current medications• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis• Pertinent substance use, family psychiatric/substance use, social, and medical history• Allergies• ROS

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response throughly and accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or, subjective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Objective section, provide:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or, objective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Assessment section, provide:• Results of the mental status examination, presented in paragraph form.• At least three differentials with supporting evidence. List them from top priority to least priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the results of the mental status exam. …Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the disorders selected.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the results of the mental status exam. … Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides an accurate justification for each of the disorders selected.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response documents the results of the mental status exam with some vagueness or inaccuracy. … Response lists at least three different possible disorders for a differential diagnosis of the patient and provides a justification for each, but may contain some vagueness or inaccuracy.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or, assessment documentation is missing.
25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Reflect on this case. Discuss what you learned and what you might do differently. Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), social determinates of health, health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Reflections demonstrate critical thinking.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Provide at least three evidence-based, peer-reviewed journal articles or evidenced-based guidelines that relate to this case to support your diagnostics and differential diagnoses. Be sure they are current (no more than 5 years old).

15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study. The resources reflect the latest clinical guidelines and provide strong justification for decision making.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature that appropriately support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair

Three evidence-based resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Two or fewer resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based.
15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph development and organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding
5 pts

Total Points: 100

NRNP 6635 Week 4 Assignment: Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Anxiety Disorders, PTSD, and OCD

“Fear,” according to the DSM-5-TR, “is the emotional response to real or perceived imminent threat, whereas anxiety is anticipation of future threat” (APA, 2022). All anxiety disorders contain some degree of fear or anxiety symptoms (often in combination with avoidant behaviors), although their causes and severity differ. Trauma-related disorders may also, but not necessarily, contain fear and anxiety symptoms, but their primary distinguishing criterion is exposure to a traumatic event. Trauma can occur at any point in life. It might not surprise you to discover that traumatic events are likely to have a greater effect on children than on adults. Early-life traumatic experiences, such as childhood sexual abuse, may influence the physiology of the developing brain. Later in life, there is a chronic hyperarousal of the stress response, making the individual vulnerable to further stress and stress-related disease.

For this Assignment, you practice assessing and diagnosing patients with anxiety disorders, PTSD, and OCD. Review the DSM-5-TR criteria for the disorders within these classifications before you get started, as you will be asked to justify your differential diagnosis with DSM-5-TR criteria.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Readings

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Anxiety disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x05_Anxiety_Disorders

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Obsessive compulsive and related disorders In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x06_Obsessive_Compulsive_and_Related_Disorders

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Trauma- and stressor-related disorders.. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x07_Trauma_and_Stressor_Related_Disorders

Boland, R. & Verduin, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry (12th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 8, “Anxiety Disorders”

Chapter 9, “Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders”

Chapter 10, “Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders”

Chapter 2- only sections 2.13, “Anxiety Disorders of Infancy, Childhood, and Adolescence: Separation Anxiety Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Social Anxiety Disorder (Social Phobia)”; 2.14 “Selective Mutism” and 2.15 “Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder in Children and Adolescence”

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Required Media

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2015). Anxiety disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2012). The neurobiology of anxiety

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2015). Obsessive-compulsive disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2015). Trauma, PTSD, and Trauma-Informed Care

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

MedEasy. (2017). Anxiety, OCD, PTSD and related psychiatric disorders | USMLE & COMLEX

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BwzQF9DTlY

Video Case Selections for Assignment

Select one of the following videos to use for your Assignment this week. Then, access the document “Case History Reports” and review the additional data about the patient in the specific video number you selected.

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2017). Training title 15

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-15

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 21

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-21

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 37

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-37

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 40

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-40

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2017). Training title 55

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-55

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2017). Training title 85

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-85

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 95

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-95

Document: Case History Reports

Download Case History Reports

To Prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide about assessing and diagnosing anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, and trauma- and stressor-related disorders.

Download the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template, which you will use to complete this Assignment. Also review the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar to see an example of a completed evaluation document.

By Day 1 of this week, select a specific video case study to use for this Assignment from the Video Case Selections choices in the Learning Resources. View your assigned video case and review the additional data for the case in the “Case History Reports” document, keeping the requirements of the evaluation template in mind.

Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.

Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.

Identify at least three possible differential diagnoses for the patient.

By Day 7 of Week 4

Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate primary diagnosis.

Incorporate the following into your responses in the template:

Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?

Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment??

Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses with supporting evidence, listed in order from highest priority to lowest priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this client if you could conduct the session over??Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK4Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Create documentation in the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template about the patient you selected. In the Subjective section, provide: • Chief complaint• History of present illness (HPI)• Past psychiatric history• Medication trials and current medications• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis• Pertinent substance use, family psychiatric/substance use, social, and medical history• Allergies• ROS

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response throughly and accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or, subjective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Objective section, provide:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or, objective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Assessment section, provide:• Results of the mental status examination, presented in paragraph form.• At least three differentials with supporting evidence. List them from top priority to least priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the disorders selected.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides an accurate justification for each of the disorders selected.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response documents the results of the mental status exam with some vagueness or innacuracy…. Response lists at least three different possible disorders for a differential diagnosis of the patient and provides a justification for each, but may contain some vaguess or innacuracy.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or, assessment documentation is missing.
25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Reflect on this case. Discuss what you learned and what you might do differently. Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), social determinates of health, health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Reflections demonstrate critical thinking.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Provide at least three evidence-based, peer-reviewed journal articles or evidenced-based guidelines that relate to this case to support your diagnostics and differential diagnoses. Be sure they are current (no more than 5 years old).

15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study. The resources reflect the latest clinical guidelines and provide strong justification for decision making.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature that appropriately support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair

Three evidence-based resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Two or fewer resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph development and organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding
5 pts

Total Points: 100

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NRNP 6635 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-11) HERE

NRNP 6635 Week 6: Midterm Exam

Midterm Exam
This exam will cover the following topics relevant to assessment and diagnosis across the lifespan:

History and theories of psychopathology
The psychiatric interview, history, and examination
Rating scales
Mood disorders
Anxiety disorders, PTSD, OCD
Disruptive, impulse-control, and conduct disorders
Eating, sleeping, and elimination disorders
Prior to starting the exam, you should review all of your materials. There is a 2.5-hour time limit to complete this 100-question exam. You may only attempt this exam once. Once you being the exam, you must complete it in one sitting.

This exam is a test of your knowledge in preparation for your certification exam. No outside resources—including books, notes, websites, or any other type of resource—are to be used to complete this exam. You are expected to comply with Walden University’s Code of Conduct.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

By Day 7 of Week 6
Complete your exam.

NRNP 6635 Week 7 Assignment: Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Schizophrenia, Other Psychotic Disorders, and Medication-Induced Movement Disorders

Psychotic disorders and schizophrenia are some of the most complicated and challenging diagnoses in the DSM. The symptoms of psychotic disorders may appear quite vivid in some patients; with others, symptoms may be barely observable. Additionally, symptoms may overlap among disorders. For example, specific symptoms, such as neurocognitive impairments, social problems, and illusions may exist in patients with schizophrenia but are also contributing symptoms for other psychotic disorders.

For this Assignment, you will analyze a case study related to schizophrenia, another psychotic disorder, or a medication-induced movement disorder.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Readings

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Medication-induced movement disorders and other adverse effects of medication. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.Medication_Induced_Movement_Disorders

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x02_Schizophrenia_Spectrum

Boland, R. & Verduin, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry (12th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 5, “Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders”

Chapter 2 only section 2.14, “Early-Onset Schizophrenia”

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Document: NRNP 6635 Final Study Guide

Download NRNP 6635 Final Study Guide

Required Media

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2016). Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

MedEasy. (2017). Psychotic disorders | USMLE & COMLEX

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdB6MgWAP1k

Video Case Selections for Assignment

Select one of the following videos to use for your Assignment this week. Then, access the document “Case History Reports” and review the additional data about the patient in the specific video number you selected.

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 9

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-9

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 24

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-24

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2016). Training title 29

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-29

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 134

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-134

Document: Case History Reports

Download Case History Reports

To Prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide about assessing and diagnosing psychotic disorders. Consider whether experiences of psychosis-related symptoms are always indicative of a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Think about alternative diagnoses for psychosis-related symptoms.

Download the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template, which you will use to complete this Assignment. Also review the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar to see an example of a completed evaluation document.

By Day 1 of this week, select a specific video case study to use for this Assignment from the Video Case Selections choices in the Learning Resources. View your assigned video case and review the additional data for the case in the “Case History Reports” document, keeping the requirements of the evaluation template in mind.

Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.

Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.

Identify at least three possible differential diagnoses for the patient.

By Day 7 of Week 7

Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate primary diagnosis.

Incorporate the following into your responses in the template:

Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?

Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment??

Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses with supporting evidence, listed in order from highest priority to lowest priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this client if you could conduct the session over??Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK7Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week7_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week7_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Create documentation in the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template about the patient you selected. In the Subjective section, provide: • Chief complaint• History of present illness (HPI)• Past psychiatric history• Medication trials and current medications• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis• Pertinent substance use, family psychiatric/substance use, social, and medical history• Allergies• ROS
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response throughly and accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or, subjective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Objective section, provide:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or, objective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Assessment section, provide:• Results of the mental status examination, presented in paragraph form.• At least three differentials with supporting evidence. List them from top priority to least priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the disorders selected.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides an accurate justification for each of the disorders selected.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response documents the results of the mental status exam with some vagueness or innacuracy…. Response lists at least three different possible disorders for a differential diagnosis of the patient and provides a justification for each, but may contain some vaguess or innacuracy.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or, assessment documentation is missing.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Reflect on this case. Discuss what you learned and what you might do differently. Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), social determinates of health, health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Reflections demonstrate critical thinking.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Provide at least three evidence-based, peer-reviewed journal articles or evidenced-based guidelines that relate to this case to support your diagnostics and differential diagnoses. Be sure they are current (no more than 5 years old).

15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study. The resources reflect the latest clinical guidelines and provide strong justification for decision making.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature that appropriately support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair

Three evidence-based resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Two or fewer resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph development and organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding

5 pts

Total Points: 100

NRNP 6635 Week 8 Assignment: Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders

An important consideration when working with patients is their cultural background. Understanding an individual’s culture and personal experiences provides insight into who the person is and where he or she may progress in the future. Culture helps to establish a sense of identity, as well as to set values, behaviors, and purpose for individuals within a society. Culture may also contribute to a divide between specific interpretations of cultural behavior and societal norms. What one culture may deem as appropriate another culture may find inappropriate. As a result, it is important for advanced practice nurses to remain aware of cultural considerations and interpretations of behavior for diagnosis, especially with reference to substance-related disorders. At the same time, PMHNPs must balance their professional and legal responsibilities for assessment and diagnosis with such cultural considerations and interpretations.

For this Assignment, you will practice assessing and diagnosing a patient in a case study who is experiencing a substance-related or addictive disorder. With this and all cases, remember to consider the patient’s cultural background.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Readings

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Substance related and addictive disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x16_Substance_Related_Disorders

Boland, R. & Verduin, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry (12th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 4, “Substance Use and Addictive Disorders”

Chapter 2 only section 2.17, “Adolescent Substance Abuse”

Chapter 27 “Ethics and Professionalism”

Chapter 28 “Forensic and Legal Issues”

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Required Media

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2016). Addictive disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Complex Care Consulting. (2018, April 4). Addiction neuroscience 101

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwZcPwlRRcc

Video Case Selections for Assignment

Select one of the following videos to use for your Assignment this week. Then, access the document “Case History Reports” and review the additional data about the patient in the specific video number you selected.

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2017). Training title 82

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-82

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 114-2

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-114-2

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 151

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-151

Document: Case History Reports

Download Case History Reports

To Prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide.

Review the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation template, which you will use to complete this Assignment.

By Day 1 of this week, select a specific video case study to use for this Assignment from the Video Case Selections choices in the Learning Resources. View your assigned video case and review the additional data for the case in the “Case History Reports” document, keeping the requirements of the evaluation template in mind.

Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.

Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.

Identify at least three possible differential diagnoses for the patient.

By Day 7 of Week 8

Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate primary diagnosis.

Incorporate the following into your responses in the template:

Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?

Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment??

Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses with supporting evidence, listed in order from highest priority to lowest priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this client if you could conduct the session over??Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK8Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week8_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Create documentation in the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template about the patient you selected. In the Subjective section, provide: • Chief complaint• History of present illness (HPI)• Past psychiatric history• Medication trials and current medications• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis• Pertinent substance use, family psychiatric/substance use, social, and medical history• Allergies• ROS
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response throughly and accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or, subjective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Objective section, provide:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or, objective documentation is missing.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Assessment section, provide:• Results of the mental status examination, presented in paragraph form.• At least three differentials with supporting evidence. List them from top priority to least priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the disorders selected.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides an accurate justification for each of the disorders selected.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response documents the results of the mental status exam with some vagueness or innacuracy…. Response lists at least three different possible disorders for a differential diagnosis of the patient and provides a justification for each, but may contain some vaguess or innacuracy.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or, assessment documentation is missing.
25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Reflect on this case. Discuss what you learned and what you might do differently. Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), social determinates of health, health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Reflections demonstrate critical thinking.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Provide at least three evidence-based, peer-reviewed journal articles or evidenced-based guidelines that relate to this case to support your diagnostics and differential diagnoses. Be sure they are current (no more than 5 years old).
15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study. The resources reflect the latest clinical guidelines and provide strong justification for decision making.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature that appropriately support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair

Three evidence-based resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Two or fewer resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph development and organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. …Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. … Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding

5 pts

Total Points: 100

NRNP 6635 Week 10 Assignment: Neurodevelopmental Disorders

Neurodevelopmental disorders begin in the developmental period of childhood and may continue through adulthood. They may range from the very specific to a general or global impairment, and often co-occur (APA, 2022). They include specific learning and language disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorders, and intellectual disabilities. Neurocognitive disorders, on the other hand, represent a decline in one or more areas of prior mental function that is significant enough to impact independent functioning. They may occur at any time in life and be caused by factors such brain injury; diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, or Huntington’s; infection; or stroke, among others.

For this Assignment, you will assess a patient in a case study who presents with a neurocognitive or neurodevelopmental disorder.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Readings

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Neurocognitive disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x17_Neurocognitive_Disorders

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Neurodevelopmental disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url= https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x01_Neurodevelopmental_Disorders

Boland, R. & Verduin, M. L. & Ruiz, P. (2022). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry (12th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 3, “Neurocognitive Disorders”

Chapter 2- sections 2.1 “Intellectual Disability”, 2.2 “Communication Disorders”, 2.3 Autism Spectrum Disorder, 2.4 Attention-Deficit Disorder, 2.5 “Specific Learning Disorder”, 2.6 “Motor Disorders”

Chapter 26 “Level of Care”

Chapter 29 “End-of-Life Issues and Palliative Care

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Document: Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Download Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar

Required Media

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2016). Neurocognitive disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

Classroom Productions. (Producer). (2016). Neurodevelopmental disorders

Links to an external site. [Video]. Walden University.

MedEasy. (2016). Progressive neurocognitive disorders. | USMLE & COMLEX

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdcjyHvaAuQ

Video Case Selections for Assignment

Select one of the following videos to use for your Assignment this week. Then, access the document “Case History Reports” and review the additional data about the patient in the specific video number you selected.

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2017). Training title 48

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-48

Symptom Media. (Producer). (2017). Training title 50

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-50

Document: Case History Reports

Download Case History Reports

To Prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide. Consider how neurocognitive impairments may have similar presentations to other psychological disorders.

Review the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation template, which you will use to complete this Assignment.

By Day 1 of this week, select a specific video case study to use for this Assignment from the Video Case Selections choices in the Learning Resources. View your assigned video case and review the additional data for the case in the “Case History Reports” document, keeping the requirements of the evaluation template in mind.

Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.

Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.

Identify at least three possible differential diagnoses for the patient.

By Day 7 of Week 10

Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate primary diagnosis.

Incorporate the following into your responses in the template:

Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?

Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment? 

Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses with supporting evidence, listed in order from highest priority to lowest priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this client if you could conduct the session over? Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK10Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week10_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week10_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Create documentation in the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template about the patient you selected. In the Subjective section, provide: • Chief complaint• History of present illness (HPI)• Past psychiatric history• Medication trials and current medications• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis• Pertinent substance use, family psychiatric/substance use, social, and medical history• Allergies• ROS

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response throughly and accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or, subjective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Objective section, provide:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain minor innacuracies.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or, objective documentation is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome In the Assessment section, provide: • Results of the mental status examination, presented in paragraph form. • At least three differentials with supporting evidence. List them from top priority to least priority. Compare the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5-TR criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.

25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

The response thoroughly and accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the disorders selected.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides an accurate justification for each of the disorders selected.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response documents the results of the mental status exam with some vagueness or innacuracy…. Response lists at least three different possible disorders for a differential diagnosis of the patient and provides a justification for each, but may contain some vaguess or innacuracy.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or, assessment documentation is missing.
25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Reflect on this case. Discuss what you learned and what you might do differently. Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), social determinates of health, health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

Reflections demonstrate critical thinking.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Provide at least three evidence-based, peer-reviewed journal articles or evidenced-based guidelines that relate to this case to support your diagnostics and differential diagnoses. Be sure they are current (no more than 5 years old).
15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study. The resources reflect the latest clinical guidelines and provide strong justification for decision making.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good

The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature that appropriately support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair

Three evidence-based resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Two or fewer resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph development and organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding
5 pts

Total Points: 100

 NRNP 6635 week 11 Final Exam: Psychopathology

Final Exam
This exam will cover assessment and diagnosis of the following across the lifespan:

Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders
Medication-induced movement disorders
Substance related disorders
Personality disorders
Dissociative and somatic symptom-related disorders
Paraphilic disorders
Neurocognitive and neurodevelopmental disorders
Sexuality and gender identity disorders
Psychiatric emergencies

Photo Credit: [Vergeles_Andrey]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images

Prior to starting the exam, you should review all of your materials. There is a 2.5-hour time limit to complete this 100-question exam. You may only attempt this exam once.

This exam is a test of your knowledge in preparation for your certification exam. No outside resources—including books, notes, websites, or any other type of resource—are to be used to complete this exam. You are expected to comply with Walden University’s Code of Conduct.

By Day 7 of Week 11
Complete your exam.

Submission and Grading Information