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

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

Training Title 118
Name: Mr. Connor Walsh
Gender: male
Age: 57 years old
T- 97.2 P- 94 R 20 156/88 Ht 5’8 Wt 163lbs
Background: Born and raised in Peru Indiana Is staying at a shelter after being homeless in MacArthur Park for 1 year in Los Angeles. He lost his apartment and his job working part-time at Home Depot. Enjoys playing music. He has long hx of mental health treatment since age 19. Previous medication trials include lithium (was effective), Depakote (gastric upset), aripiprazole (akathisia), risperidone (hyperprolactinemia), haloperidol (dystonia), quetiapine (didn’t give a fair trial), Poor historian. divorced once, reports being gay, no children; estranged from only living sister, parents deceased. He is not sure of his family mental health or substance use history but feels like he is most like his aunt, she has history of mental health treatment “but I’m not sure for what.” States that he got a master’s degree in music theory at Stanford. Admits to 3-6 drinks of alcohol when “playing music in the clubs”, denied illicit drugs, has history of intentional drug overdose at age 22, history of 8 inpatient psychiatric hospitalization, most recent
was 8 months ago. hx of one detox admission 15 years ago Allergies: bee stings Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 118 [Video]. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/training-title-118

 

Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week3_Assignment_Rubric
NRNP_6635_Week3_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

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 ptsExcellentThe 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 ptsGoodThe 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 ptsFairThe 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 ptsPoorThe 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

In the Objective section, provide:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, validated rating scales, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses and include rationale for why these diagnostics are recommended. If no physical exam is formally completed in the video, you must include objective observation from the video and/or describe what the clinician should physically assess based on the case study. Additionally, if diagnostic information is not provided to you, you must describe what diagnostics the clinician should include based on the case study.

20 to >17.0 ptsExcellentThe 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 ptsGoodThe response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented.
15 to >13.0 ptsFairDocumentation 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 ptsPoorThe 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

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 Walden university NRNP 6635 Week 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders. 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 ptsExcellentThe 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 ptsGoodThe 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 ptsFairThe 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 ptsPoorThe 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

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 ptsExcellentReflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking.
8 to >7.0 ptsGoodReflections demonstrate critical thinking.
7 to >6.0 ptsFairReflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking.
6 to >0 ptsPoorReflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing.
10 pts

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

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 ptsExcellentA 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 ptsGoodPurpose, 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 ptsFairPurpose, 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 ptsPoorNo 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

Written Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors
4 to >3.0 ptsGoodContains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
3 to >2.0 ptsFairContains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
2 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding
5 pts