For faster services, inquiry about  new assignments submission or  follow ups on your assignments please text us/call us on +1 (251) 265-5102

WhatsApp Widget

Name: Sergeant Berry SullivanGender: MaleAge: 27 years oldT-98.8 P-86 R 18 B/P 122/7 Ht 5’8 Wt 160lbsBackground: He entered the military just after high school and did three long tours of duty in warzones

Name: Sergeant Berry SullivanGender: MaleAge:  27 years old
T-98.8 P-86 R 18 B/P 122/7  Ht 5’8 Wt 160lbs
Background: He entered the military just after high school and did three long tours of duty in warzones. He separated from active duty in the Marines (MOS 0800 Field Artillery) six months ago  after eight years of service. He is engaged to be married in 8 months and is using his GI Education Bill to attend online college for accounting. He said he grew up poor and would not do much else if he didn’t go into the military. He denies ever using any drugs and avoids alcohol because his father was “abusive when he was drunk.” Father is still alive, unwell (DM, cirrhosis, HTN), still drinking. Paternal grandfather was also a veteran and suffered depression at times though he never told anyone except the patient because of their combat connection. He has one younger brother and one older sister. He lives in a different state, approximately five hours from his parents and siblings. After the military, he and his fiance moved because she got a much better opportunity. They want kids someday. Has service-connected asthma, seasonal allergies; no hx of psychiatric or substance use treatment.

Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide about assessing and diagnosing anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, and trauma- and stressor-related disorders.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.

Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate primary diagnosis.

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.).

NRNP_6635_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6635_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPts

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

WhatsApp
Hello! Need help with your assignments?

For faster services, inquiry about  new assignments submission or  follow ups on your assignments please text us/call us on +1 (251) 265-5102

Submit Your Questions to Writers for FREE!!

X
GET YOUR PAPER DONE