ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH SLEEP/WAKE DISORDERS
Order Instructions
Writer please follow all instructions the case study is in the learning resources under required media.
Decision Tree: Insomnia case
I want you to answer the questions given to you (decision points one, two, and three) before you click on the option. The answers will be based on your decisions made and patient outcomes during the decision tree. I am looking for an essay that is long enough to cover the topic BUT short enough to keep my interest. The course page suggests writing 1 page per decision – my opinion is that it will be very difficult to justify your treatment decisions and provide scientific evidence in 1 page (especially for decision #1). I do not need you to tell me about the patient or the treatment options available to you – I am very familiar with the cases. Your introductory page should be an overview of the disease state you are treating along with a purpose statement for the assignment. Remember this is a Pharmacology class that incorporates Pharmacotherapy and not a class on diagnosing disease. I want you to tell me why you selected an option (why is it the best option- using clinically relevant and patient specific data) AND why you did not choose the other options (with clinically relevant and patient specific data).
Introduction to the case (1 page)
Briefly explain and summarize the disease state you are treating this Assignment. Be sure to include the specific patient factors that may impact your decision making when prescribing medication for this patient.
Decision #1
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. Again, provide STRONG scientific evidence. Clinical studies or treatment guidelines are a good place to start!
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.
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. Again, provide STRONG scientific evidence. Clinical studies or treatment guidelines are a good place to start!
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.
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. Again, provide STRONG scientific evidence. Clinical studies or treatment guidelines are a good place to start!
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.
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.
After writing up your rationale at each decision point, I would ask yourself the following questions:
Have I provided clinical data from a meta-analysis, case report or clinical trial to support the drug I picked being safe, efficacious and the best choice for this patient?
Have I provided clinical data, etc. to support a clear rationale as to why the other treatment options are NOT optimal?
Is the focus of my discussion on mechanism of action and receptors/neurotransmitters that the drug acts on? If the answer is YES, you should consider doing additional research to address the above two questions
Also include how ethical considerations might impact your treatment plan and communication with clients.
The rubric, as I interpret it, suggests 5 references cited with every assignment for full credit on this portion (20 points). References used for your introductory paragraph, ethical considerations or conclusion do not count towards the 5 references required. As a general rule of thumb, I would encourage you to reference AT LEAST two sources (not including the textbook) for each decision point – this will result in 6 references total for your clinical decision making.
ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH SLEEP/WAKE DISORDERS
Sleep disorders are conditions that result in changes in an individual’s pattern of sleep (Mayo Clinic, 2020). Not surprisingly, a sleep disorder can affect an individual’s overall health, safety, and quality of life. Psychiatric nurse practitioners can treat sleep disorders with psychopharmacologic treatments, however, many of these drugs can have negative effects on other aspects of a patient’s health and well-being. Additionally, while psychopharmacologic treatments may be able to address issues with sleep, they can also exert potential challenges with waking patterns. Thus, it is important for the psychiatric nurse practitioner to carefully evaluate the best psychopharmacologic treatments for patients that present with sleep/wake disorders.
Reference: Mayo Clinic. (2020). Sleep disorders. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/sleep-disorders/symptoms-causes/syc-20354018
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
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 sleep/wake disorders.
THE ASSIGNMENT: 5 PAGES
Examine Case Study: Pharmacologic Approaches to the Treatment of Insomnia in a Younger Adult. 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.
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.
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.
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).
Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples.
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.
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.
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.
Reminder : The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632). All papers submitted must use this formattingLinks to an external site..
BY DAY 7
Submit your Assignment.
SUBMISSION INFORMATION
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK8Assgn2_LastName_Firstinitial
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
NURS_6630_Week8_Assignment2_Rubric
NURS_6630_Week8_Assignment2_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction 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.
10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
The response accurately, clearly, and fully summarizes in detail the case for the Assignment…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the specific patient factors that impact decision making when prescribing medication for this patient.
8 to >7.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
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 to >6.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
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.
6 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
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.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDecision #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.• 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.
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
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…. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided.
17 to >15.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
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.
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
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.
13 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
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…. 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.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDecision #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.
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
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…. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided.
17 to >15.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
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.
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
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.
13 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
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…. 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.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDecision #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.
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
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…. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided.
17 to >15.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
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.
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
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.
13 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
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…. 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.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion (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.
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
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.
13 to >11.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
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 to >10.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
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.
10 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
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.
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 Point range: 90–100
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity…. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.
4 to >3.5 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time….Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive.
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
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.
3 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 to >3.5 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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 to >4.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
4 to >3.5 pts
Good Point range: 80–89
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.
3 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts
Total Points: 100
LEARNING RESOURCES
Required Readings
Stahl, S. M. (2021). Stahl’s essential psychopharmacology: Neuroscientific basis and practical applications (5th Ed.) Cambridge University Press.
Chapter 10, “Disorders of Sleep and Wakefulness and Their Treatment: Neurotransmitter Networks for Histamine and Orexin” (pp. 401-448)
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disordersLinks to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/book/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787
Fernandez-Mendoza, J., & Vgontzas, A. N. (2013). Insomnia and its impact on physical and mental health.
Current Psychiatry ReportsLinks to an external site., 15(12), 418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-012-0418-8
Levenson, J. C., Kay, D. B., & Buysse, D. J. (2015). The pathophysiology of insomnia. ChestLinks to an external site., 147(4), 1179–1192. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4388122/
Morgenthaler, T. I., Kapur, V. K., Brown, T. M., Swick, T. J., Alessi, C., Aurora, R. N., Boehlecke, B., Chesson, A. L., Friedman, L., Maganti, R., Owens, J., Pancer, J., & Zak, R. (2007). Practice parameters for the treatment of narcolepsy and other hypersomnias of central origin. SLEEPLinks to an external site., 30(12), 1705–1711. https://j2vjt3dnbra3ps7ll1clb4q2-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/PP_Narcolepsy.pdf
Morgenthaler, T. I., Owens, J., Alessi, C., Boehlecke, B, Brown, T. M., Coleman, J., Friedman, L., Kapur, V. K., Lee-Chiong, T., Pancer, J., & Swick, T. J. (2006). Practice parameters for behavioral treatment of bedtime problems and night wakings in infants and young children. SLEEPLinks to an external site., 29(1), 1277–1281. https://j2vjt3dnbra3ps7ll1clb4q2-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/PP_NightWakingsChildren.pdf
Sateia, M. J., Buysse, D. J., Krystal, A. D., Neubauer, D. N., & Heald, J. L. (2017). Clinical practice guideline for the pharmacologic treatment of chronic insomnia in adults: An American Academy of Sleep Medicine clinical practice guideline. Journal of Clinical Sleep MedicineLinks to an external site., 13(2), 307–349. https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/pdf/10.5664/jcsm.6470
Winkleman, J. W. (2015). Insomnia disorder. The New England Journal of MedicineLinks to an external site., 373(15), 1437–1444. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1412740
Medication Resources
U.S. Food & Drug Administration. (n.d.). Drugs@FDA: FDA-approved drugsLinks to an external site.. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm
Links to an external site.
Note: To access the following medications, use the Drugs@FDA resource. Type the name of each medication in the keyword search bar. Select the hyperlink related to the medication name you searched. Review the supplements provided and select the package label resource file associated with the medication you searched. If a label is not available, you may need to conduct a general search outside of this resource provided. Be sure to review the label information for each medication as this information will be helpful for your review in preparation for your Assignments.
alprazolam
amitriptyline
amoxapine
amphetamine
desipramine
diazepam
doxepin
eszopiclone
flunitrazepam
flurazepam
hydroxyzine
imipramine
lemborexant
lorazepam
melatonin
methylphenedate
modafinil
armodafinil
carnitine
clomipramine
clonazepam
nortriptyline
pitolisant
ramelteon
sodium oxybate
solriamfetol
SSRI’s
temazepam
trazodone
triazolam
trimipramine
wellbutrin
zaleplon
zolpidem
Required Media
Case study: Pharmacologic approaches to the treatment of insomnia in a younger adultLinks to an external site.
Note: This case study will serve as the foundation for this week’s Assignment.
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.
