Interpersonal Psychotherapy

  • In one page, discuss interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) for depression: what it is, who get depressed, what it does, assessment phase, end stage, and how it help patient, why is recommended. give 3 references. APA format

It is estimated that more almost 7% of the U.S. population will experience posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in their lifetime (National Institute of Mental Health, 2017). This debilitating disorder often interferes with an individual’s ability to function in daily life. Common symptoms of anxiousness and depression frequently lead to behavioral issues, adolescent substance abuse issues, and even physical ailments. For this Assignment, you examine a PTSD video case study and consider how you might assess and treat clients presenting with PTSD.

Assignment: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

 

 

It is estimated that more almost 7% of the U.S. population will experience posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in their lifetime (National Institute of Mental Health, 2017). This debilitating disorder often interferes with an individual’s ability to function in daily life. Common symptoms of anxiousness and depression frequently lead to behavioral issues, adolescent substance abuse issues, and even physical ailments. For this Assignment, you examine a PTSD video case study and consider how you might assess and treat clients presenting with PTSD.

 

To prepare:

· Review this week’s Learning Resources and reflect on the insights they provide about diagnosing and treating PTSD.

· View the media Presentation Example: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and assess the client in the case study.

· For guidance on assessing the client, refer to Chapter 3 of the Wheeler text.

 

Note:  To complete this Assignment, you must assess the client, but you are not required to submit a formal comprehensive client assessment.

 

The Assignment

 

Succinctly, in 1–2 pages, address the following:

 

· Briefly explain the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness.

· Discuss the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and relate these criteria to the symptomology presented in the case study. Does the video case presentation provide sufficient information to derive a PTSD diagnosis? Justify your reasoning. Do you agree with the other diagnoses in the case presentation? Why or why not?

· Discuss one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. Explain whether your treatment option is considered a “gold standard treatment” from a clinical practice guideline perspective, and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners.

·

Support your Assignment with specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources. Explain why each of your supporting sources is considered scholarly. Attach the PDFs of your sources.

Rubric Detail

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

Content

Name: NRNP_6645_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

 

Excellent 90%–100% Good 80%–89% Fair 70%–79% Poor 0%–69%
Succinctly, in 1–2 pages, address the following: • Briefly explain the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response includes an accurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Or, response is missing. Feedback:
• Discuss the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and relate these criteria to the symptomology presented in the case study. Does the video case presentation provide sufficient information to derive a PTSD diagnosis? Justify your reasoning. Do you agree with the other diagnoses in the case presentation? Why or why not? Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) The response includes an accurate and concise description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and an accurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. The response includes a concise explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates strong diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) The response includes an accurate description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and an adequate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. The response includes an explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates adequate diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates somewhat inadequate diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and a vague or inaccurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. Or, response is missing. The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates poor diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Or, response is missing. Feedback:
• Discuss one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. Explain whether your treatment option is considered a “gold standard” treatment from a clinical practice guideline perspective, and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners. Points: Points Range: 27 (27%) – 30 (30%) The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. The response clearly and concisely explains whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 24 (24%) – 26 (26%) The response includes an accurate explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. The response adequately explains whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 21 (21%) – 23 (23%) The response includes a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. The response provides a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 20 (20%) The response includes a vague and inaccurate explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study, or the treatment option is innappropriate. Or, response is missing. The response provides a vague or incomplete explanation of whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Or, response is missing. Feedback:
·   Support your approach with specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources. PDFs are attached. Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response is supported by specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature that provide strong support for the rationale provided. PDFs are attached. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response is supported by examples from this week’s media and three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature that provide appropriate support for the rationale provided. PDFs are attached. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response is supported by examples from this week’s media and two or three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature. Examples and resources selected may provide only weak support for the rationale provided. PDFs may not be attached. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response is supported by vague or inaccurate examples from the week’s media and/or evidence from the literature, or is missing. Feedback:
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 is provided which delineates all required criteria. Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineates all required criteria. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) 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 are brief and not descriptive. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 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 are vague or off topic. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 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. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper 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 or 2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3 or 4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback:
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. Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains 1 or 2 APA format errors. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3 or 4 APA format errors. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Succinctly, in 1–2 pages, address the following: • Briefly explain the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response includes an accurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Or, response is missing. Feedback:

• Discuss the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and relate these criteria to the symptomology presented in the case study. Does the video case presentation provide sufficient information to derive a PTSD diagnosis? Justify your reasoning. Do you agree with the other diagnoses in the case presentation? Why or why not?–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) The response includes an accurate and concise description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and an accurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. The response includes a concise explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates strong diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Good 80%–89% 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) The response includes an accurate description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and an adequate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. The response includes an explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates adequate diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Fair 70%–79% 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates somewhat inadequate diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate description of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD and a vague or inaccurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. Or, response is missing. The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates poor diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Or, response is missing. Feedback:

• Discuss one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. Explain whether your treatment option is considered a “gold standard” treatment from a clinical practice guideline perspective, and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 27 (27%) – 30 (30%) The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. The response clearly and concisely explains whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Good 80%–89% 24 (24%) – 26 (26%) The response includes an accurate explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. The response adequately explains whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Fair 70%–79% 21 (21%) – 23 (23%) The response includes a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. The response provides a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 20 (20%) The response includes a vague and inaccurate explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study, or the treatment option is innappropriate. Or, response is missing. The response provides a vague or incomplete explanation of whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Or, response is missing. Feedback:

·   Support your approach with specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources. PDFs are attached.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response is supported by specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature that provide strong support for the rationale provided. PDFs are attached. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response is supported by examples from this week’s media and three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature that provide appropriate support for the rationale provided. PDFs are attached. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response is supported by examples from this week’s media and two or three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature. Examples and resources selected may provide only weak support for the rationale provided. PDFs may not be attached. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response is supported by vague or inaccurate examples from the week’s media and/or evidence from the literature, or is missing. Feedback:

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 is provided which delineates all required criteria.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineates all required criteria. Good 80%–89% 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) 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 are brief and not descriptive. Fair 70%–79% 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 are vague or off topic. Poor 0%–69% 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. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper 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 or 2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3 or 4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback:

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.–

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 or 2 APA format errors. Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3 or 4 APA format errors. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Total Points: 100

Name: NRNP_6645_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

What Students Are Saying About Us

.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but splendidwritings.com proved they are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"

.......... Customer ID: 14***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"The company has some nice prices and good content. I ordered a term paper here and got a very good one. I'll keep ordering from this website."

"Order a Custom Paper on Similar Assignment! No Plagiarism! Enjoy 20% Discount"