Assignment: Focused SOAP Note for Schizophrenia Spectrum, Other Psychotic, and Medication-Induced Movement Disorders

Psychotic disorders change one’s sense of reality and cause abnormal thinking and perception. Patients presenting with psychotic disorders may suffer from delusions or hallucinations or may display negative symptoms such as lack of emotion or withdraw from social situations or relationships. Symptoms of medication-induced movement disorders can be mild or lethal and can include, for example, tremors, dystonic reactions, or serotonin syndrome.

For this Assignment, you will complete a focused SOAP note for a patient in a case study who has either a schizophrenia spectrum, other psychotic, or medication-induced movement disorder. 

To Prepare

· Review this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the insights they provide about assessing, diagnosing, and treating schizophrenia spectrum, other psychotic, and medication-induced movement disorders.

,

Week (enter week #): (Enter assignment title)

Student Name

College of Nursing-PMHNP, Walden University

NRNP 6675: PMHNP Care Across the Lifespan II

Faculty Name

Assignment Due Date

Subjective:

CC (chief complaint):

HPI:

Substance Current Use:

Medical History:

· Current Medications:

· Allergies:

· Reproductive Hx:

ROS:

· GENERAL:

· HEENT:

· SKIN:

· CARDIOVASCULAR:

· RESPIRATORY:

· GASTROINTESTINAL:

· GENITOURINARY:

· NEUROLOGICAL:

· MUSCULOSKELETAL:

· HEMATOLOGIC:

· LYMPHATICS:

· ENDOCRINOLOGIC:

Objective:

Diagnostic results:

Assessment:

Mental Status Examination:

Diagnostic Impression:

Reflections:

Case Formulation and Treatment Plan: 

References

,

Week (enter week #): (Enter assignment title)

Student Name

College of Nursing-PMHNP, Walden University

NRNP 6675: PMHNP Care Across the Lifespan II

Faculty Name

Assignment Due Date

Subjective:

CC (chief complaint):

HPI:

Substance Current Use:

Medical History:

· Current Medications:

· Allergies:

· Reproductive Hx:

ROS:

· GENERAL:

· HEENT:

· SKIN:

· CARDIOVASCULAR:

· RESPIRATORY:

· GASTROINTESTINAL:

· GENITOURINARY:

· NEUROLOGICAL:

· MUSCULOSKELETAL:

· HEMATOLOGIC:

· LYMPHATICS:

· ENDOCRINOLOGIC:

Objective:

Diagnostic results:

Assessment:

Mental Status Examination:

Diagnostic Impression:

Reflections:

Case Formulation and Treatment Plan: 

References

,

Rubric Detail

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

Content

Name: NRNP_6675_Week5_Assignment_Rubric

• Grid View
• List View

	Excellent 90%–100%	Good 80%–89%	Fair 70%–79%	Poor 0%–69%
Create documentation in the Focused SOAP Note Template about your assigned patient. 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	Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) 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 the subjective documentation is missing. Feedback:
In 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	Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient's physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response accurately documents the patient's physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient's physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed. Or the objective documentation is missing. Feedback:
In 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 diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5 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.	Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) 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 vagueness or innacuracy. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or the assessment documentation is missing. Feedback:
In the Plan section, provide: • Your plan for psychotherapy • Your plan for treatment and management, including alternative therapies. Include pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters as well as a rationale for this treatment and management plan. • Incorporate one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy.	Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) The response provides an evidence-based, detailed, and appropriate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides an evidence-based, detailed, and appropriate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. A strong rationale for the plan is provided that demonstrates critical thinking and content understanding. The response includes at least one evidence-based health promotion activity and one evidence-based patient education strategy. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) The response provides an evidence-based and appropriate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides an evidence-based and appropriate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. An adequate rationale for the plan is provided. The response includes at least one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) The response provides a somewhat vague or inaccurate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides a somewhat vague or inaccurate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. The rationale for the plan is weak or general. The response includes one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy, but it may contain some vagueness or innacuracy. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. The rationale for the plan is inaccurate or missing. The health promotion and patient education strategies are incomplete or missing. Feedback:
• Reflect 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!), health promotion, and disease prevention that takes into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Reflections demonstrate critical thinking. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing. Feedback:
Provide 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).	Points: Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) 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. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Three evidence-based resources are provided to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Two or fewer resources are provided to support the assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for parenthetical/in-text citations and reference list.	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains 1-2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3-4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains five or more grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains 1-2 APA format errors Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3-4 APA format errors Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains five or more APA format errors Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Create documentation in the Focused SOAP Note Template about your assigned patient. 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

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) 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. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) 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. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) 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. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) 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 the subjective documentation is missing. Feedback:

In 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

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient's physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response accurately documents the patient's physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) 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. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient's physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed. Or the objective documentation is missing. Feedback:

In 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 diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5 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.

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) 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. Good 80%–89% 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) 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. Fair 70%–79% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) 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 vagueness or innacuracy. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or the assessment documentation is missing. Feedback:

In the Plan section, provide:

• Your plan for psychotherapy

• Your plan for treatment and management, including alternative therapies. Include pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters as well as a rationale for this treatment and management plan.

• Incorporate one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy.

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) The response provides an evidence-based, detailed, and appropriate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides an evidence-based, detailed, and appropriate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. A strong rationale for the plan is provided that demonstrates critical thinking and content understanding. The response includes at least one evidence-based health promotion activity and one evidence-based patient education strategy. Good 80%–89% 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) The response provides an evidence-based and appropriate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides an evidence-based and appropriate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. An adequate rationale for the plan is provided. The response includes at least one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy. Fair 70%–79% 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) The response provides a somewhat vague or inaccurate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides a somewhat vague or inaccurate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. The rationale for the plan is weak or general. The response includes one health promotion activity and one patient education strategy, but it may contain some vagueness or innacuracy. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate plan for psychotherapy for the patient. The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate plan for treatment and management, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, alternative therapies, and follow-up parameters. The rationale for the plan is inaccurate or missing. The health promotion and patient education strategies are incomplete or missing. Feedback:

• Reflect 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!), health promotion, and disease prevention that takes into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking. Good 80%–89% 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Reflections demonstrate critical thinking. Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing. Feedback:

Provide 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).–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) 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. Good 80%–89% 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) 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. Fair 70%–79% 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Three evidence-based resources are provided to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Two or fewer resources are provided to support the assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for parenthetical/in-text citations and reference list.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors Good 80%–89% 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains 1-2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3-4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains five or more grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors Good 80%–89% 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains 1-2 APA format errors Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3-4 APA format errors Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains five or more APA format errors Feedback:

Total Points: 100

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.