Learning Resources
Camprodon, J. A., & Roffman, J. L. (2016). Psychiatric neuroscience: Incorporating pathophysiology into clinical case formulation. In T. A. Stern, M. Favo, T. E. Wilens, & J. F. Rosenbaum. (Eds.), Massachusetts General Hospital psychopharmacology and neurotherapeutics (pp. 1–19). Elsevier.
http://neuroanatomy.ca/videos.html
Pathopharmacology: Disorders of the Nervous System: Exploring the Human Brain
Dr. Norbert Myslinski reviews the structure and function of the human brain. Using human brains, he examines and illustrates the development of the brain and areas impacted by disorders associated with the brain. (15m)
Introduction to Advanced Pharmacology
In this media presentation, Dr. Terry Buttaro, associate professor of practice at Simmons School of Nursing and Health Sciences, discusses the importance of pharmacology for the advanced practice nurse. (6m)
As a psychiatric nurse practitioner, it is essential for you to have a strong background in foundational neuroscience. In order to diagnose and treat patients, you must not only understand the pathophysiology of psychiatric disorders but also how medications for these disorders impact the central nervous system. These concepts of foundational neuroscience can be challenging to understand. Therefore, this Discussion is designed to encourage you to think through these concepts, develop a rationale for your thinking, and deepen your understanding by interacting with your colleagues.
Photo Credit: Getty Images/Cultura RF
For this Discussion, review the Learning Resources and reflect on the concepts of foundational neuroscience as they might apply to your role as the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner in prescribing medications for patients.
Post a response to each of the following:
- Explain the agonist-to-antagonist spectrum of action of psychopharmacologic agents, including how partial and inverse agonist functionality may impact the efficacy of psychopharmacologic treatments.
- Compare and contrast the actions of g couple proteins and ion gated channels.
- Explain how the role of epigenetics may contribute to pharmacologic action.
- Explain how this information may impact the way you prescribe medications to patients. Include a specific example of a situation or case with a patient in which the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner must be aware of the medication’s action.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: Week2_Discussion_Rubric
Show Descriptions
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.–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Main Posting:
Writing–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Main Posting:
Timely and full participation–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
First Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
First Response:
Writing–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
First Response:
Timely and full participation–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Second Response:
Writing–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Second Response:
Timely and full participation–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Good
Point range: 80–89 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Fair
Point range: 70–79 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Total Points: 100 |