NRNP6665 Week 6 Assignment: Assessing, Diagnosing, and Treating Adults With Mood Disorders
Assessing, Diagnosing, and Treating Adults With Mood Disorders
It is important for the PMHNP to have a comprehensive understanding of mood disorders in order to assess and accurately formulate a diagnosis and treatment plan for patients presenting with these disorders. Mood disorders may be diagnosed when a patient’s emotional state meets the diagnostic criteria for severity, functional impact, and length of time. Those with a mood disorder may find that their emotions interfere with work, relationships, or other parts of their lives that impact daily functioning. Mood disorders may also lead to substance abuse or suicidal thoughts or behaviors, and although they are not likely to go away on their own, they can be managed with an effective treatment plan and understanding of how to manage symptoms.
In this Assignment you will assess, diagnose, and devise a treatment plan for a patient in a case study who is presenting with a mood disorder.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
To Prepare
- Review this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the insights they provide about assessing, diagnosing, and treating mood disorders.
- Review the Focused SOAP Note template, which you will use to complete this Assignment. There is also a Focused SOAP Note Exemplar provided as a guide for Assignment expectations.
- Review the video, Case Study: Petunia Park . You will use this case as the basis of this Assignment. In this video, a Walden faculty member is assessing a mock patient. The patient will be represented onscreen as an avatar.
- Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.
- Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.
- Consider patient diagnostics missing from the video:
Provider Review outside of interview:
Temp 98.2 Pulse 90 Respiration 18 B/P 138/88
Laboratory Data Available: Urine drug and alcohol screen negative. CBC within normal ranges, CMP within normal ranges. Lipid panel within normal ranges. Prolactin Level 8; TSH 6.3 (H)
The Assignment
Develop a Focused SOAP Note, 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 symptomatology 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 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.
- Plan: What is your plan for psychotherapy? What is your plan for treatment and management, including alternative therapies? Include pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters as well as a rationale for this treatment and management plan. Also incorporate one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy.
- Reflection notes: 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 that takes into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).
By Day 7 of Week 4
Submit your Focused SOAP Note.
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 WK1Assgn+last name+first initial.
- Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
- Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
NRNP_6665_Week4_Assignment_Rubric
|
NRNP_6665_Week4_Assignment_Rubric |
||
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCreate
documentation in the Focused SOAP Note Template about the patient in the case
study. 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 |
15 to >13.0 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. 13 to >11.0 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. 11 to >10.0 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. 10 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 the subjective documentation is
missing. |
15 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn the
Objective section, provide:• Review of Systems (ROS) documentation and relate
if pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results,
including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the
differential diagnoses |
15 to >13.0 ptsExcellentThe response
thoroughly and accurately documents the patient's ROS for pertinent systems.
Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented. 13 to >11.0 ptsGoodThe response
accurately documents the patient's ROS for pertinent systems. Diagnostic
tests and their results are accurately documented. 11 to >10.0 ptsFairDocumentation of
the patient's ROS is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies.
Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain minor
inaccuracies. 10 to >0 ptsPoorThe response provides
incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient's ROS. Systems may have
been unnecessarily reviewed. Or the objective documentation is missing. |
15 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn 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
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. |
20 to >17.0 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. 17 to >15.0 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. 15 to >13.0 ptsFairThe 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 vagueness or innacuracy. 13 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 the assessment
documentation is missing. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn the Plan
section, provide:• Your plan for psychotherapy• Your plan for treatment and
management, including alternative therapies. Include pharmacologic and
nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters
as well as a rationale for this treatment and management plan. • Incorporate
one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy. |
25 to >22.0 ptsExcellentThe response
provides an evidence-based, detailed, and appropriate plan for psychotherapy
for the patient. The response provides an evidence-based, detailed, and
appropriate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and
nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters.
A strong rationale for the plan is provided that demonstrates critical
thinking and content understanding. ... The response includes at least one
evidence-based health promotion activity and one evidence-based patient
education strategy. 22 to >19.0 ptsGoodThe response
provides an evidence-based and appropriate plan for psychotherapy for the
patient. The response provides an evidence-based and appropriate plan for
treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic
treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. An adequate
rationale for the plan is provided. ... The response includes at least one
health promotion activity and one patient education strategy. 19 to >17.0 ptsFairThe response
provides a somewhat vague or inaccurate plan for psychotherapy for the
patient. The response provides a somewhat vague or inaccurate plan for
treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic
treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. The rationale
for the plan is weak or general. ... The response includes one health
promotion activity and one patient education strategy, but it may contain
some vagueness or innacuracy. 17 to >0 ptsPoorThe response provides
an incomplete or inaccurate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The
response provides an incomplete or inaccurate plan for treatment and
management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments,
alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. The rationale for the plan
is inaccurate or missing. ... The health promotion and patient education strategies
are incomplete or 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 that takes into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic
group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural
background, etc.). |
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentReflections are
thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking. 4 to >3.5 ptsGoodReflections
demonstrate critical thinking. 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairReflections are
somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking. 3 to >0 ptsPoorReflections are
incomplete, inaccurate, or missing. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProvide 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). |
10 to >8.0 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. 8 to >7.0 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. 7 to >6.0 ptsFairThree evidence-based
resources are provided to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient
in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak
justification. 6 to >0 ptsPoorTwo or fewer resources
are provided to support the assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources
may not be current or evidence based. |
10 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten
Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for
parenthetical/in-text citations and reference list. |
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct APA
format with no errors 4 to >3.5 ptsGoodContains a few (one
or two) APA format errors 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several
(three or four) APA format errors 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (five or
more) APA format errors |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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 >3.5 ptsGoodContains a few (one
or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several
(three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (five or
more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the
reader’s understanding |
5 pts |
