Review the interactive media piece assigned by your Instructor.
Reflect on the patients symptoms and aspects of the disorder presented in the interactive media piece.
Consider how you might assess and treat patients presenting with the symptoms of the patient case study you were assigned.
You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the diagnosis and treatment for this patient. Reflect on potential co-morbid physical as well as patient factors that might impact the patients diagnosis and treatment.
By Day 7 of Week 8
Write a 1- to 2-page summary paper that addresses the following:
Briefly summarize the patient case study you were assigned, including each of the three decisions you took for the patient presented.
Based on the decisions you recommended for the patient case study, explain whether you believe the decisions provided were supported by the evidence-based literature. Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.
What were you hoping to achieve with the decisions you recommended for the patient case study you were assigned? Support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.
Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decision in the exercise. Describe whether they were different. Be specific and provide examples.
You will submit this Assignment in Week 8.
RUBRIC
Briefly summarize the patient case study you were assigned, including each of the three decisions you took for the patient presented. Be specific.–
Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and thoroughly summarizes in detail the patient case study assigned, including specific and complete details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented.
Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented.
Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented.
Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented, or is missing.
Based on the decisions you recommended for the patient case study, explain whether you believe the decisions provided were supported by the evidence-based literature. Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.–
Excellent 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)
The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature.
The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided.
Good 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)
The response accurately explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature.
The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate.
Fair 18 (18%) – 19 (19%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature.
The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided.
Poor 0 (0%) – 17 (17%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature, or is missing.
The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing.
What were you hoping to achieve with the decisions you recommended for the patient case study you were assigned? Support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.–
Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and thorough explains in detail what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommend for the patient case study assigned.
The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided.
Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned.
The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate.
Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned.
The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided.
Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned, or is missing.
The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing.
Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. Describe whether they were different. Be specific and provide examples.–
Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise.
The response provides specific, accurate, and relevant examples that fully support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise.
Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise.
The response provides accurate examples that support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise.
Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise.
The response provides inaccurate or vague examples that may or may not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise.
Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
vaguely explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise, or is missing.
The response provides inaccurate and vague examples that do not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise, or is missing.
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.–
Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%79% of the time.
Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation–
Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors
Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (12) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (34) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many ( 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the readers understanding
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–
Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors
Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (12) APA format errors
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (34) APA format errors
Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many ( 5) APA format errors
http://cdnfiles.laureate.net/2dett4d/Walden/NURS/6521/05/mm/decision_trees/week_10/index.html
BACKGROUND
Mr. Akkad is a 76 year old Iranian male who is brought to your office by his eldest son for strange behavior. Mr. Akkad was seen by his family physician who ruled out any organic basis for Mr. Akkads behavior. All laboratory and diagnostic imaging tests (including CT-scan of the head) were normal.
According to his son, he has been demonstrating some strange thoughts and behaviors for the past two years, but things seem to be getting worse. Per the clients son, the family noticed that Mr. Akkads personality began to change a few years ago. He began to lose interest in religious activities with the family and became more critical of everyone. They also noticed that things he used to take seriously had become a source of amusement and ridicule.
Over the course of the past two years, the family has noticed that Mr. Akkad has been forgetting things. His son also reports that sometimes he has difficult finding the right words in a conversation and then will shift to an entirely different line of conversation.
SUBJECTIVE
During the clinical interview, Mr. Akkad is pleasant, cooperative and seems to enjoy speaking with you. You notice some confabulation during various aspects of memory testing, so you perform a Mini-Mental State Exam. Mr. Akkad scores 18 out of 30 with primary deficits in orientation, registration, attention & calculation, and recall. The score suggests moderate dementia.
MENTAL STATUS EXAM
Mr. Akkad is 76 year old Iranian male who is cooperative with todays clinical interview. His eye contact is poor. Speech is clear, coherent, but tangential at times. He makes no unusual motor movements and demonstrates no tic. Self-reported mood is euthymic. Affect however is restricted. He denies visual or auditory hallucinations. No delusional or paranoid thought processes noted. He is alert and oriented to person, partially oriented to place, but is disoriented to time and event [he reports that he thought he was coming to lunch but wound up here- referring to your office, at which point he begins to laugh]. Insight and judgment are impaired. Impulse control is also impaired as evidenced by Mr. Akkads standing up during the clinical interview and walking towards the door. When you asked where he was going, he stated that he did not know. Mr. Akkad denies suicidal or homicidal ideation.
Diagnosis: Major neurocognitivSe disorder due to Alzheimers disease (presumptive)
RESOURCES
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (2002). Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Third option: A – H – this group will select Razadyne 4 mg PO BID
SINCE MY LAST NAME STARTS WITH H
Decision Point One
Begin Razadyne (galantamine) 4 mg orally BID
RESULTS OF DECISION POINT ONE
Client returns to clinic in four weeks
The client is accompanied by his son who reports that his father is no better from this medication
He reports that his father is still disinterested in attending religious services/activities, and continues to exhibit disinhibited behaviors
You continue to note confabulation and decide to administer the MMSE again. Mr. Akkad again scores 18 out of 30 with primary deficits in orientation, registration, attention & calculation, and recall
Decision Point Two
Discontinue Razadyne and begin Exelon (rivastigmine) 1.5 mg orally BID
RESULTS OF DECISION POINT TWO
Client returns to clinic in four weeks
Clients son reports that the client is tolerating the medication well, but is still concerned that his father is no better
He states that his father is still not interested in attending religious services with the family, and he is still concerned that his father is still easily amused by things he once found serious
Decision Point Three
Continue current dose of Exelon and reevaluate at next office visit
Guidance to Student
Cholinesterase inhibitors can take months to demonstrate any stabilization in the degenerative course of Alzheimers disease. Since the client has had no side effects, it would be prudent to consider increasing the Exelon dose to 3 mg orally BID. Recall that the target dose of Exelon is 12 mg orally daily in divided doses, or a transdermal patch delivering 9.5 mg daily could be used. Slow titration of the drug toward a therapeutic dose will decrease the risk of side effects. These should be teaching points directed toward the client and his son.
You could maintain the current dose of Exelon and reevaluate at the next office visit, but since the client is having no side effects and the client has been on the current dose for at least 4 weeks, it would probably be advisable to increase at this time to facilitate the goal of arriving at a therapeutic dose of the medication.
It may be early to augment with Namenda. Maximization of the Exelon dose should first occur, then augmentation with an NMDA receptor antagonist would be appropriate, but Namenda should be started at 5 mg orally daily, and then titrated up to a maximum dose of 10 mg orally BID. Doses over 5 mg orally daily should be divided into two doses, or the drug can be switch to an extended release preparation.
Finally, it is important to note that changes in the MMSE should be evaluated over the course of months, not weeks. The absence of change in the MMSE after 4 weeks of treatment should not be a source of concern.
these are the decisions I choose
Please make sure to include dosing and side effects in your assignment.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|