PLEASE RESPONSE TO THIS 3 OQUSTIONS SEPARETELY AND I NEED TWO REFERECES FOR EACH ONE OF THEM

PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTION BELOW, ZERO PLAGIARISM, TWO SEPARETE REFERENCES LESS THAN FIVE YEAR FOR EACH QUESTIONS, 7TH APA FORMAT

Questions to the audience

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
PLEASE RESPONSE TO THIS 3 OQUSTIONS SEPARETELY AND I NEED TWO REFERECES FOR EACH ONE OF THEM
Just from $8/Page
Order Essay
  1. Given your clinical experience, was the assessment comprehensive?
  2. Did the subjective and objective assessment support the diagnosis?
  3. What should I improve in my presentations?

NRNP/PRAC 6665 & 6675 Comprehensive Focused SOAP Psychiatric Evaluation Template

Week 7 Assignment: Grand Rounds Discussion: Complex Case Study Presentation

Chidi Oriaku

College of Nursing-PMHNP, Walden University

PRAC 6675-17: PMHNP Care Across the Lifespan II Practicum

Dr. Nataliya Ishkova

Due: 7/13/2022

Objectives

· Present a psychiatric complex case

· Present subjective assessment

· Present objective assessment

· Provide a differential diagnosis and the supporting evidence

· Provide and treatment plan

Subjective:

CC (chief complaint): “I think he needs more medication”

HPI: TF is a 16-year-old Caucasian American who presented for a follow-up assessment with his mother for substance drug-induced psychosis. His mother notes that TF medication, Abilify, is not working for him at the current 10mg and requests an increase in dosing. TF had been involuntarily hospitalized five weeks ago after he became overly paranoid over a gang following. He also heard people knocking on his bedroom window, which prompted his mother to take him to the emergency department after she noted it was all in his head; no gang or people was knocking on his bedroom window. TF admitted using ecstasy and marijuana on and off over the past two years. He was diagnosed with drug-induced psychosis, medically stabilized during the 5-day admission, and discharged on Abilify. TF notes he is fine, but his mother notes TF sometime appears to be listening to something and answers questions from unseen people. She wants an increase in dose to improve the management, given they had been told there might be dose adjustments depending on his response. They report no side effects. TF denies audio and visual hallucinations, suicidal and homicidal ideation

Substance Current Use: Admits use of ecstasy (molly), three tabs weekly over the past two years; admits using twice over the past four weeks; Admits use of marijuana over the past two years; admits use once a week over the past four weeks. He notes he felt too low. Denies use of alcohol, vaping, tobacco, or other illicit substances

Medical History:

· Current Medications: Abilify 10mg PO at bedtime for drug-induced psychosis

· Allergies: No known medication, food or environmental allergies

· Reproductive Hx: Heterosexual male, not currently sexually active, no reproductive health concerns

ROS:

· GENERAL: No changes in weight or appetite. No chills or fever

· HEENT: No head trauma, no changes in vision, yellowing or reddening. No nasal discharge, drainage, or congestion. No sore throat

· SKIN: No itching, dryness, or lumps

· CARDIOVASCULAR: No palpitations, chest tightness, or congestion, No peripheral edema

· RESPIRATORY: No difficulty in breathing or shortness of breath

· GASTROINTESTINAL: No changes in appetite, vomiting, diarrhea, or constipation

· GENITOURINARY: No increased urinary frequency or urgency. No pain or irritation, or urination

· NEUROLOGICAL: No dizziness, headaches, numbness, or tingling sensations

· MUSCULOSKELETAL: No joint or back pain. No difficulty in movement or fatigue

· HEMATOLOGIC: No unusual or unexplained bruising or bleeding

· LYMPHATICS: No enlarged lymph nodes

· ENDOCRINOLOGIC: No increased thirst, fluid intake, or urination

Objective:

Diagnostic results:

1. Urine cannabis test- positive

2. MDMA (Ecstasy/Molly) Urine Drug Test- positive

3. Clinician-Rated Dimensions of Psychosis Symptom Severity- Positive for hallucinations (3), delusion (3) and impaired cognition (2)

4. Previous lab findings ruled out an organic basis of psychotic symptoms (CBC, Thyroid-stimulating hormone, CBC, liver function test, lumbar puncture and vitamin B12 test

Assessment:

Mental Status Examination:

A 16-year-old Caucasian male who looks older than the stated age. He is cooperative. He appears well developed, well-nourished, and well-groomed. He is alert and oriented x 3. His mood and affect are congruent. His speech is clear and coherent. His judgment and insight are somewhat impaired. He denies audio and vision hallucination but endorses the presence of unseen people often following him. There is an indication of delusions He denied suicidal and homicidal ideation.

Diagnostic Impression:

1. Drug-induced psychosis

2. Schizophrenia

3. Brief psychotic disorder

The patient had been previously diagnosed with drug-induced psychosis, stabilized, and started on Abilify 10mg. Still, his current symptoms, reported by his mother, hallucination are consistent with the American Psychiatric Association (APA) (2013) DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Substance-Induced Psychotic Disorder. TF has been using ecstasy and marijuana with subsequent visual and audio hallucinations.

According to the APA (2013) DSM-5, the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia consider the presence of hallucinations. However, in this case, they are attributable to drug use. Still, the diagnostic criteria for brief psychotic disorder think the presence of hallucinations, with the disturbance lasting at least one day but less than one month. The patient’s symptoms have been present for at least five weeks; hence, it is not a likely diagnosis.

Reflections: One of the things I would have done differently is inquiring more about drug use, given the relapsing episode. While the client admitted to cannabis and ecstasy since discharge, he seemed to hesitate, revealing the frequency of use. Notably, continued substance abuse would jeopardize clinical outcomes despite increasing the dose.

Case Formulation and Treatment Plan:

Pharmacologic

· Abilify 15mg PO daily (Stahl, 2017)

· Patient education on possible side effects and the importance of adherence

Psychotherapy

· Continue drug group program for teenagers

· Initiate individual Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for substance abuse (Kiluk 2019).

· Provided with emergency contact

· Review weekly

Questions to the audience

1. Given your clinical experience, was the assessment comprehensive?

2. Did the subjective and objective assessment support the diagnosis?

3. What should I improve in my presentations?

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: Author.

Kiluk B. D. (2019). Computerized Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Substance Use Disorders: A Summary of the Evidence and Potential Mechanisms of Behavior Change. Perspectives on behavior science, 42(3), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-019-00205-2

Stahl, S. M. (2017). Prescriber’s Guide: Stahl’s Essential psychopharmacology. Cambridge University Press

© 2021 Walden University Page 3 of 5

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name: PRAC_6675_Week7_Discussion_Participant_Rubric

 

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Responses Points: Points Range: 77 (77%) – 85 (85%) Responses exhibit synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Responses demonstrate synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are thoroughly addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 68 (68%) – 76 (76%) Responses exhibit critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by 2 or more credible sources. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 60 (60%) – 67 (67%) Responses are on topic and may have some depth. Responses may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and only one or no credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are inadequately addressed. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 59 (59%) Responses may not be on topic and lack depth. No credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to colleagues’ prompts/questions are missing. Feedback:
Participation Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Responses are carried out over multiple days between Days 4 and 7. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, over at least 2 days. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) Participants respond at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, but responses may occur all in 1 day. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) Does not meet requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Responses–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 77 (77%) – 85 (85%) Responses exhibit synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Responses demonstrate synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are thoroughly addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Good 68 (68%) – 76 (76%) Responses exhibit critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by 2 or more credible sources. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Fair 60 (60%) – 67 (67%) Responses are on topic and may have some depth. Responses may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and only one or no credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are inadequately addressed. Poor 0 (0%) – 59 (59%) Responses may not be on topic and lack depth. No credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to colleagues’ prompts/questions are missing. Feedback:

Participation–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Responses are carried out over multiple days between Days 4 and 7. Good 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, over at least 2 days. Fair 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) Participants respond at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, but responses may occur all in 1 day. Poor 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) Does not meet requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Feedback:

Total Points: 100

Name: PRAC_6675_Week7_Discussion_Participant_Rubric