WEEK 7 ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING AND DIAGNOSING PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA, OTHER PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS, AND MEDICATION-INDUCED MOVEMENT DISORDERS/NRNP 6635

WEEK 7 ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING AND DIAGNOSING PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA, OTHER PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS, AND MEDICATION-INDUCED MOVEMENT DISORDERS/NRNP 6635

WEEK 7 ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING AND DIAGNOSING PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA, OTHER PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS, AND MEDICATION-INDUCED MOVEMENT DISORDERS/NRNP 6635

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.

    ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE WEEK 7 ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING AND DIAGNOSING PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA, OTHER PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS, AND MEDICATION-INDUCED MOVEMENT DISORDERS/NRNP 6635 HERE

    Thanks for stopping by this assessment. We can assist you in completing it and other subsequent ones. Our expert writers will comprehensively review instructions, synthesize external evidence sources, and customize an A-grade paper for YOU!!!

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.).

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.

Week 7 Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders; Medication-
Induced Movement Disorders

Training Title 134
Name: Mrs. Patricia Warren
Gender: female
Age: 42 years old
Background: Patricia was brought in under a emergency evaluation order after her best friend,
Felicia, after the police for Patricia locking herself in a closet and screaming loudly for over an
hour. EMS was able to calm her with a small dose of Ativan enroute to the emergency
department. This is Patricia’s third presentation to the emergency room in 2 weeks. She had one
psychiatric hospitalization around this same last year. No self-harm behaviors but has assaulted
other in the past. No hx of TBI. Sleeps 1–2-hour increments for total of 6 hrs. daily, refuses to
sleep at night. Refused vitals, wt., refuses labs, not cooperative. She obtains SSDI. She lives in
Cameron, Montana. She denies ever using any drugs and drinks one glass wine weekly. She has
a sister who is five years older, both parents deceased in the last three years. She has no children,
her husband is out of town, truck driver. Family history includes that her father had two previous
inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations for paranoia Mother had history of bipolar depression.
Paternal grandmother had “shock therapy”. Denies history of trauma experience, but her friend

reports parents death was extremely difficulty for Patricia. no current legal charges. dropped out
of high school in 11th grade, was pregnant and had abortion. allergies: Clozaril
Symptom Media. (Producer). (2018). Training title 134 [Video].
https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/wa
tch/training-title-134

00:00:00TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEO FILE:

00:00:00__________________________________________________________________

00:00:00BEGIN TRANSCRIPT:

00:00:00DISCLAIMER

00:00:00THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS OF A GENERAL NATURE AND CANNOT SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ADVICE OF A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL. THE CONTENT PROVIDED MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU OR YOUR SYMPTOMS. YOU SHOULD NOT RELY ON THIS INFORMATION AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR, NOR DO THEY REPLACE. PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL ADVICE, DIAGNOSIS OR TREATMENT. IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR HEALTH OR THE CONTENT. YOU SHOULD ALWAYS CONSULT WITH A PHYSICIAN OR OTHER HEALTH-CARE PROFESSIONAL. DO NOT DISREGARD. AVOID OR DELAY OBTAINING MEDICAL OR HEALTH RELATED ADVICE FROM YOUR HEALTH-CARE PROFESSIONAL. THE CONTENT SHOULD NOT BE USED IN PLACE OF A CALL OR VISIT TO A MEDICAL, HEALTH OR OTHER COMPETENT PROFESSIONAL, WHO SHOULD BE CONSULTED BEFORE ADOPTING ANY OF THE SUGGESTIONS IN THE CONTENT OR DRAWING INFERENCES FROM IT.

00:00:00SYMPTOMS MEDIA, LLC DISCLAIMS ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY LIABILITY LOSS OR RISK, PERSONAL OR OTHERWISE, WHICH IS INCURRED AS A CONSEQUENCE, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, OF THE USE AND APPLICATION OF ANY OF THE CONTENT CONTAINED HEREIN.

00:00:10[sil.]

00:00:15UNKNOWN Hi, Mrs. Warren, nice to see you again. How are you doing?

00:00:20WARREN You’re with them.

00:00:20UNKNOWN Pardon me.

00:00:25WARREN I know you are. But you won’t tell me, people like you never do.

00:00:30UNKNOWN I’m not sure that I follow.

00:00:30WARREN Sure. They dumb just like everybody else. We’re on to you.

00:00:40UNKNOWN Who do you mean by we?

00:00:45WARREN Mm-hmm.

00:00:45UNKNOWN You are not going to tell me?

00:00:50WARREN I don’t need to tell you. You have eyes and ears planted everywhere.

00:00:55UNKNOWN Everywhere meaning other places away from the hospital…

00:01:00WARREN Everywhere, enough set.

00:01:00UNKNOWN Let me make sure I understand. Are you saying you feel that I or someone else has been spying on you?

00:01:05WARREN I don’t feel that. I know it. You and your people had… I don’t need to explain it, you already know.

00:01:15UNKNOWN You feel safe here in the emergency department?

00:01:20WARREN There’s nowhere that is safe. Don’t pretend like there is.

00:01:30END TRANSCRIPT

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE WEEK 7 ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING AND DIAGNOSING PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA, OTHER PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS, AND MEDICATION-INDUCED MOVEMENT DISORDERS/NRNP 6635 HERE

NRNP_6635_Week7_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCreate 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 OutcomeIn 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 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-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 OutcomeReflect 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 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).
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 OutcomeWritten 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 OutcomeWritten 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