Foundational Neuroscience and Psychiatric Disorders
Foundational Neuroscience and Psychiatric Disorders
Discussion: Foundational Neuroscience
As a psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner, it is essential for you to have a strong background in foundational neuroscience. In order to diagnose and treat clients, 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.
Learning Objectives
Foundational Neuroscience and Psychiatric Disorders
Students will:
· Analyze the agonist-to-antagonist spectrum of action of psychopharmacologic agents
· Compare the actions of g couple proteins to ion gated channels
· Analyze the role of epigenetics in pharmacologic action
· Analyze the impact of foundational neuroscience on the prescription of medications
Foundational Neuroscience and Psychiatric Disorders Learning Resources
Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
Post a response to each of the following: Include sub headings please.
1. Explain the agonist-to-antagonist spectrum of action of psychopharmacologic agents.
2. Compare and contrast the actions of g couple proteins and ion gated channels.
3. Explain the role of epigenetics in pharmacologic action.
4. Explain how this information may impact the way you prescribe medications to clients. Include a specific example of a situation or case with a client in which the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner must be aware of the medication’s action.
Required Readings
Post a response to each of the following: Include sub headings please.
1. Explain the agonist-to-antagonist spectrum of action of psychopharmacologic agents.
2. Compare and contrast the actions of g couple proteins and ion gated channels.
3. Explain the role of epigenetics in pharmacologic action.
4. Explain how this information may impact the way you prescribe medications to clients. Include a specific example of a situation or case with a client in which the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner must be aware of the medication’s action.
Points to follow when writing a paper:
· Please all bullets points, bold, red and highlighted area must be attended to.
· A clear purpose statement (The purpose of this paper is to…) is required in the introduction of all writings.
· Please review all rubrics.
· Check APA format/setting.
· Your final paragraph should be a summary of the key points of your paper.
· Please personalized where necessary.
Refrain from direct quote
Class Rules
Avoid public facing sites like university web pages or foundation pages (such as the American Cancer Society or the Alzheimer’s Association) and medical sites designed for consumption by the general public (such as Mayo Clinic or WebMD).
you are required to cite scholarly resources including peer-review journals and current practice guidelines.
May use https://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/clinicians-providers/guidelines-recommendations/index.html
Writer must be familiar with nursing pharmacology
| Excellent
Point range: 90–100 |
Good
Point range: 80–89 |
Fair
Point range: 70–79 |
Poor
Point range: 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. Post is 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%)
Posts main Discussion by due date.
Meets requirements for full participation. |
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, may have some depth.
|
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, 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, may have some depth.
|
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, 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 |
|---|
