Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Permalink: https://nursingpapermills.com/examine-case-stu…hought-processes/

Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes. You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the medication to prescribe to this patient. Be sure to consider factors that might impact the patient’s pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic processes. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

At each decision point, you should evaluate all options before selecting your decision and moving throughout the exercise. Before you make your decision, make sure that you have researched each option and that you evaluate the decision that you will select. Be sure to research each option using the primary literature.

Pakistani Female With Delusional Thought Processes

BACKGROUND

The client is a 34-year-old Pakistani female who moved to the United States in her late teens/early 20s. She is currently in an “arranged” marriage (her husband was selected for her when she was 9 years old). She presents following a 21-day hospitalization for what was diagnosed as “brief psychotic disorder.” She was given this diagnosis as her symptoms have persisted for less than 1 month. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Prior to admission, she was reporting visions of Allah, and over the course of a week, she believed that she was the prophet Mohammad. She believed that she would deliver the world from sin. Her husband became concerned about her behavior to the point that he was afraid of leaving their 4 children with her. One evening, she was “out of control,” which resulted in his calling the police and her subsequent admission to an inpatient psych unit.

During today’s assessment, she appears quite calm and insists that the entire incident was “blown out of proportion.” She denies that she believed herself to be the prophet Mohammad and states that her husband was just out to get her because he never loved her and wanted an “American wife” instead of her. She says she knows this because the television is telling her so. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

She currently weighs 140 lbs., and she is 5’ 5.

SUBJECTIVE

Client reports that her mood is “good.” She denies auditory/visual hallucinations but believes that the television talks to her. She believes that Allah sends her messages through the TV. At times throughout the clinical interview, she becomes hostile towards you but then calms down.

A review of her hospital records shows that she received a medical workup from physician, who reported her to be in overall good health. Lab studies were all within normal limits.

Client admits that she stopped taking her Risperdal about a week after she got out of the hospital because she thinks her husband is going to poison her so that he can marry an American woman. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

MENTAL STATUS EXAM

The client is alert and oriented to person, place, time, and event. She is dressed appropriately for the weather and time of year. She demonstrates no noteworthy mannerisms, gestures, or tics. Her speech is slow and, at times, interrupted by periods of silence. Self-reported mood is euthymic. Affect is constricted.

Although the client denies visual or auditory hallucinations, she appears to be “listening” to something. Delusional and paranoid thought processes as described above. Insight and judgment are impaired. She is currently denying suicidal or homicidal ideation. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

You administer the PANSS which reveals the following scores:

-40 for the positive symptoms scale

-20 for the negative symptom scale

-60 for general psychopathology scale

Diagnosis: Schizophrenia, paranoid type

RESOURCES

PANSS Scale. Available at: http://egret.psychol.cam.ac.uk/medicine/scales/PANSS

§ Kay, S. R., Fiszbein, A., & Opler, L. A. (1987). The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 13(2), 261–276. doi:10.1093/schbul/13.2.261 Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

https://www.clozapinerems.com/CpmgClozapineUI/rems/pdf/resources/Clozapine_REMS_A_Guide_for_Healthcare_Providers.pdf

§ Clozapine REMS Program. (n.d.). Clozapine REMS: A guide for healthcare providers. Retrieved September 7, 2016, from https://www.clozapinerems.com/CpmgClozapineUI/rems/pdf/resources/Clozapine_REMS_A_Guide_for_Healthcare_Providers.pdf

http://www.ima.org.il/FilesUpload/IMAJ/0/40/20149.pdf

§ Paz, Z., Nalls, M., and Ziv, E. (2011). The genetics of benign neutropenia. Israel Medical Association Journal, 13(10), 625–629. Retrieved from http://www.ima.org.il/FilesUpload/IMAJ/0/40/20149.pdf

Decision Point One

Select what you should do:
Start Zyprexa (olanzapine) 10 mg orally at BEDTIME
Start Invega Sustenna 234 mg IM X1 followed by 156 mg IM on day 4 and monthly thereafter
Start Abilify (aripiprazole) 10 mg orally at BEDTIME

Introduction to the case (1 page)

  • Briefly explain and summarize the case for this Assignment. Be sure to include the specific patient factors that may impact your decision making when prescribing medication for this patient. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Decision #1 (1 page)

  • Which decision did you select?
  • Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
  • Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
  • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature). Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.
  • Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Decision #2 (1 page)

  • Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
  • Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
  • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).
  • Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Decision #3 (1 page)

  • Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
  • Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
  • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).
  • Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Conclusion (1 page)

  • Summarize your recommendations on the treatment options you selected for this patient. Be sure to justify your recommendations and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.

Note: Support your rationale with a minimum of five academic resources. While you may use the course text to support your rationale, it will not count toward the resource requirement. You should be utilizing the primary and secondary literature.

Assignment: Assessing and Treating Patients With Psychosis and Schizophrenia

Psychosis and schizophrenia greatly impact the brain’s normal processes, which interfere with the ability to think clearly. When symptoms of these disorders are uncontrolled, patients may struggle to function in daily life. However, patients often thrive when properly diagnosed and treated under the close supervision of a psychiatric mental health practitioner.

For this Assignment, as you examine the patient case study in this week’s Learning Resources, consider how you might assess and treat patients presenting with psychosis and schizophrenia. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

To prepare for this Assignment:

  • Review this week’s Learning Resources, including the Medication Resources indicated for this week.
  • Reflect on the psychopharmacologic treatments you might recommend for the assessment and treatment of patients with schizophrenia-related psychoses.

Note: To access the following medications, use the IBM Micromedex resource. Type the name of each medication in the keyword search bar. Be sure to read all sections on the left navigation bar related to each medication’s result page, as this information will be helpful for your review in preparation for your Assignments. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

 

  • amisulpride
  • aripiprazole
  • asenapine
  • brexpiprazole
  • cariprazine
  • chlorpromazine
  • clozapine
  • flupenthixol
  • fluphenazine
  • haloperidol
  • iloperidone
  • loxapine
  • lumateperone
  • lurasidone
  • olanzapine
  • paliperidone
  • perphenazine
  • pimavanserin
  • quetiapine
  • risperidone
  • sulpiride
  • thioridazine
  • thiothixene
  • trifluoperazine
  • ziprasidone

Rubric Detail – Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

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

Name: NURS_6630_Week7_Assignment_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent

Point range: 90–100 Good

Point range: 80–89 Fair

Point range: 70–79 Poor

Point range: 0–69
Introduction to the case (1 page)

Briefly explain and summarize the case for this Assignment. Be sure to include the specific patient factors that may impact your decision making when prescribing medication for this patient.
9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
The response accurately, clearly, and fully summarizes in detail the case for the Assignment. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the specific patient factors that impact decision making when prescribing medication for this patient.
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
The response accurately summarizes the case for the Assignment.

The response accurately explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient.
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the case for the Assignment.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient.
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the case for the Assignment, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.
Decision #1 (1–2 pages)

• Which decision did you select?
• Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.
• Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.

• What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).
• Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples.
18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided.
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains the decision selected. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected.

The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response.

The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided.
0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the decision selected.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing.
Decision #2 (1–2 pages)

• Which decision did you select?
• Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
• Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
• What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).
• Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.
18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided.
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains the decision selected.

The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected.

The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response.

The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.
0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains in detail the decision selected. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing.

Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing.
Decision #3 (1–2 pages)

• Which decision did you select?
• Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
• Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
• What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).
• Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.
18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response.

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided.
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains the decision selected.

The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected.

The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response.

The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response.

The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.

Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided.
0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains in detail the decision selected.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing.

Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing.
Conclusion (1 page)

• Summarize your recommendations on the treatment options you selected for this patient. Be sure to justify your recommendations and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient.

The response accurately and clearly explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that fully support the recommendations provided.
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

The response accurately summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient.

The response accurately explains a justification for the recommendation provided, including clinically relevant resources that support the recommendations provided.
11 (11%) – 11 (11%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the recommendations provided.
0 (0%) – 10 (10%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient, or is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that do not support the recommendations provided, 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. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct APA format with no errors.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6630_Week7_Assignment_Rubric. Examine Case Study: Pakistani Woman With Delusional Thought Processes.

× How can I help you?