Description
After studying Module 5: Lecture Materials & Resources, discuss the following:
Case Study Jill, a 24 y/o Hispanic female arrives in the emergency room where her parents brought her for evaluation. They are worried because she is giving away all of her possessions and says she is planning to move to the South Pole so she can “save the world.” Her parents say that she has hardly been sleeping at all for the last 7 days, but she seems very energetic. They say she has appeared to be “in a frenzy” lately. When you interview Jill you notice that she speaks very rapidly and is laughing uncontrollably. It is hard to get her to be quiet long enough for you to ask questions. She seems agitated and has difficulty sitting still.
Questions: Remember to answer these questions from your textbooks and clinical guidelines to create your evidence-based treatment plan. At all times, explain your answers.
Summarize the clinical case including the significant subjective and objective data.
Generate a primary and two differential diagnoses. Use the DSM5 to support the assessment. Include the DSM5 and ICD 10 codes.
Discuss a pharmacological treatment would you prescribe? Use the clinical guidelines to support the rationale for this treatment.
Discuss non-pharmacological treatment would you prescribe? Use the clinical guidelines to support the rationale for this treatment.
Describe a health promotion intervention that would be appropriate for this patient.
Submission Instructions:
Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted, and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources. Your initial post is worth 8 points.
You should respond to at least two of your peers by extending, refuting/correcting, or adding additional nuance to their posts. Your reply posts are worth 2 points (1 point per response.)
All replies must be constructive and use literature where possible.
Grading Rubric
Your assignment will be graded according to the grading rubric.
Discussion Rubric
Criteria Ratings Points
Identification of Main Issues, Problems, and Concepts Distinguished – 4 points
Post is substantively accurate. Identifies and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. Provides exceptional and thought-provoking analysis that directly addresses details and/or examples of the main topic. Excellent – 3 points
Post is mostly related to the topic. Demonstrates understanding of most of the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. It provides some supporting details and/or examples. Analyses not as clear as they could be. Fair – 1-2 points
Demonstrates limited understanding of most of the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. No details and/or examples are given. Poor – 0 points
Post is off-topic, incorrect and/or irrelevant to the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. Analyses are not well organized or clear. 4 points
APA Formatting Guidelines Distinguished – 2 points
The reference page contains at least the required current scholarly academic reference and text reference. Follows APA guidelines of components: double space, 12 pt. font, abstract, level headings, hanging indent, and in-text citations. Excellent – 1 point
The reference page contains one current scholarly academic resource and text reference. Follows most APA guidelines of components: double space, 12 pt. font, abstract, level headings, hanging indent, and in-text citations. Fair – 0.5 points
The reference page contains one current or outdated scholarly academic resource. Many errors of APA guidelines: double space, 12 pt. font, abstract, level headings, hanging indent, and in-text citations. Poor – 0 points
The reference page contains no current scholarly academic resources, only internet web pages, or no reference page. Lack of APA guidelines for references provided or in-text citations. 2 points
Writing Mechanics Distinguished – 2 points
Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are followed; spelling is correct. Excellent – 1 point
Few grammatical errors, but sentences could be clearer and more precise. Fair – 0.5 points
The paper contains a few grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors. Poor – 0 points
The paper contains numerous grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors. 2 points
Response to Posts of Peers Distinguished – 2 points
Constructively responded to two other posts and either extended, expanded, or provided a rebuttal to each. Fair – 1 point
Constructively responded to one other post and either extended, expanded, or provided a rebuttal. Poor – 0 points
Provided no response to a peer’s post.
2 points
Total Points 10
