NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Walden University NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder-Step-By-Step Guide
This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Walden University NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.
How to Research and Prepare for NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Walden University NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.
After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.
How to Write the Introduction for NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
The introduction for the Walden University NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.
How to Write the Body for NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
After the introduction, move into the main part of the NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.
Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.
How to Write the Conclusion for NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.
How to Format the References List for NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.
Stuck? Let Us Help You
Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease.
Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW.
NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
It is estimated that more than 6% of the U.S. population will experience posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in their lifetime (National Center for PTSD, 2010). This debilitating disorder often interferes with an individual’s ability to function in daily life. Common symptoms of anxiousness and depression frequently lead to substance abuse issues and even physical ailments. For this Discussion, as you examine the Thompson Family Case Study in this week’s Learning Resources, consider how you might assess and treat clients presenting with PTSD.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
- Assess clients presenting with posttraumatic stress disorder
- Analyze therapeutic approaches for treating clients presenting with posttraumatic stress disorder
- Evaluate outcomes for clients with posttraumatic stress disorder
To prepare:
- Review this week’s Learning Resources and reflect on the insights they provide.
- View the media Academic Year in Residence: Thompson Family Case Study, and assess the client in the case study.
- For guidance on assessing the client, refer to pages 137–142 of the Wheeler text in this week’s Learning Resources.
Note: To complete this Discussion, you must assess the client, but you are not required to submit a formal Comprehensive Client Assessment.
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking Submit!
By Day 3
Post on or before Day 3 an explanation of your observations of the client William in Thompson Family Case Study, including behaviors that align to the PTSD criteria in DSM-5. Then, explain therapeutic approaches you might use with this client, including psychotropic medications if appropriate. Finally, explain expected outcomes for the client based on these therapeutic approaches. Support your approach with evidence-based literature.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues by providing one alternative therapeutic approach. Explain why you suggest this alternative and support your suggestion with evidence-based literature and/or your own experiences with clients.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 5 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 5 Discussion
Read Also: NRNP 6640 Week 4 Assignment: Cognitive Behavioral Theory Versus Rational Emotive Behavioral Theory
Week in Review
Now that you have:
- Assessed clients presenting with posttraumatic stress disorder
NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion Posttraumatic Stress Disorder - Analyzed therapeutic approaches for treating clients presenting with posttraumatic stress disorder
- Evaluated outcomes for clients with posttraumatic stress disorder
Next week, you will:
- Assess clients presenting with addictive disorders
- Analyze therapeutic approaches for treating clients with addictive disorders
- Evaluate outcomes for clients with addictive disorders
- Assess knowledge of concepts and principles related to the psychotherapy of individuals
Sample Answer for NRNP 6640 Week 5 Discussion: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Explanation of my Observation of William
William, a war veteran previously based in Iraq, is a 38-year-old African American male who became homeless after failure to pay his mortgage. He lives with his wife and works as a lawyer with a specialty in finance law. However, his career is in a jeopardy due to his habit of alcohol consumption, which he uses as a survival mechanism from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
From my analysis of the client, he is experiencing stressful events based on the evaluation using the Diagnostics and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fifth edition (DSM-5) tool (Moskowitz et al., 2019). William exhibits re-occurring symptoms of irritability, concentration problems as well as sleep disturbances, which arise from nightmares, flashbacks, and hallucinations. These are exacerbated by thoughts about the traumatic experiences he encountered as an American soldier in Iraq. Even though William’s depression and PTSD scores reveal a low level of distress, his current life experiences affect how he functions at work (Sareen, 2014). Mainly, he reports intense fear, horror, and sometimes helplessness, which makes him self-medicate with alcohol. However, William is consistently connected to his wife and closest friends, which is mainly achieved through texting rather than direct communication. This is an indication of avoidant coping indicating that he prefers to manage his affairs in isolation.
As I use the PTSD explorer to examine William, his mood and energy keep on fluctuating from moderate status to worst condition. He is mainly stressed about his previous encounters in the military environment (Zamorski et al., 2015). The client is mainly concerned about the nature of his work as a lawyer in which in some instances, he handles customers whose reprimanding demands reminds him about the nature of the military encounters in Iraq. His mood scores fluctuate and this calls for the need for medications to manage such dilapidating mood disorder.
Therapeutic Approaches for the Client
Due to anxiety, I will administer Klonopin 0.25mg PO x 2 daily (Moskowitz et al., 2019). The patient will be expected to take the medication for one month until panic stops. However, I might increase the dosage of 0.125mg to the 0.25mg of Klonopin every three days to ensure that anxiety and panic are under control. I will also prescribe Ziprasidone 40mg PO BID for the client. This medication will be used in a combination with Lorazepam 1mg PO BID to address hallucinations and nightmares that occur to the patient due to a flashback about the experiences of the military environment (Moskowitz et al., 2019). However, in the event the patient does not realize improvement in perceptual disturbances, I will increase Ziprasidone gradually up to 80mg PO BID within three days of medication. I will also administer Duloxetine 60mg PO x 1 daily to restore positive mood in the patient.
Expected Outcomes
I will expect William to adhere to the prescribed medication regimen for him to realize a positive change in his psychotic disorder. Upon completion of the drugs, I anticipate to observe a remarkable improvement in the patient particularly in how he relates with the family and friends (Sareen, 2014). This means that his habit of isolation will reduce. I also expect William’s mood to change and his anxiety to drop following the use of the medication after one month. This will mean that his depression will drop based on the analysis using the depression survey score tool (Zamorski et al., 2015). A positive outcome from the psychotropic medication suggests that patient is responding well to the therapy and this provides a valuable understanding of the character dynamics for these clients which guide the decision on medication adjustment or withdrawal.
References
Moskowitz, A., Dorahy, M. J., & Schäfer, I. (Eds.). (2019). Psychosis, Trauma, and Dissociation: Evolving Perspectives on Severe Psychopathology. New Jersey, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Sareen, J. (2014). Posttraumatic stress disorder in adults: impact, comorbidity, risk factors, and treatment. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 59(9), 460-467. Doi: 10.1177/070674371405900902
Zamorski, M. A., Rolland-Harris, E., Jetly, R., Downes, A., Whitehead, J., Thompson, J., & Pedlar, D. (2015). Military deployments, posttraumatic stress disorder, and suicide risk in Canadian Armed Forces personnel and veterans. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 60(4), 200-200.doi:10.1177/070674371506000407
Name: Discussion Rubric
| Excellent
90–100 |
Good
80–89 |
Fair
70–79 |
Poor
0–69 |
|||
| Main Posting:
Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current credible sources. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible references. |
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Cited with fewer than two credible references. |
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible references. |
||
| Main Posting:
Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
||
| Main Posting:
Timely and full participation |
9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main Discussion by due date. |
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Meets requirements for full participation. Posts main Discussion by due date. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main Discussion by due date. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main Discussion by due date. |
||
| First Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. |
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. |
||
| First Response:
Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
||
| First Response:
Timely and full participation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
||
| Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. |
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. |
||
| Second Response: Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
||
| Second Response: Timely and full participation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
||
| Total Points: 100 | ||||||
Name: Discussion Rubric