Assignment: NURS 6521 Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: Assignment: NURS 6521 Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal

Introduction

The most common trigger of dementia in senior individuals, which affects many people worldwide, is Alzheimer’s disease. It is classified as a neurodegenerative condition brought on by the harmful progression of age-dependent cognitive decline. There is accumulation of amyloid plaques made up of abnormal deposits of located in the extracellular brain parenchyma and hippocampus. In AD, neurofibril tangles can also form inside of the neuron.

Alzheimer’s disease is characterized by a progressive memory loss and cognitive abnormalities. The case study of Mr. Akkad, a 76-year-old Iranian man who was brought in by his son, will be covered in this essay. Following a clinical assessment and mini-mental state evaluation, the patient is identified as having a significant neurodegenerative illness caused by Alzheimer’s disease (DementiaCareCentral.com, 2020)

Having Trouble Meeting Your Deadline?

Get your assignment on Assignment: NURS 6521 Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal completed on time. avoid delay and – ORDER NOW

Do My Paper

Decision 1 Begin Exelon (rivastigmine) 1.5 mg orally BID with an increase to 3 mg orally BID in 2weeks

Rivastigmine is a drug containing a cholinesterase inhibitor with the potential benefit of being pseudo-irreversible. The reversible binding and inactivation of cholinesterase by rivastigmine results in an increase in the level of acetylcholine at cholinergic synapses by blocking acetylcholine’s breakdown. The cholinesterase inhibitor rivastigmine is licensed for use in the treatment of mild to moderate dementia associated with Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases.

Alzheimer’s disease will develop more slowly as a result of the Exelon. The non-cognitive manifestations of Alzheimer’s disease may be treated with this medication. According to published reports, this medicine improves an Alzheimer’s patient’s cognitive functioning. In the instance of Mr. Akkad, this pharmacological therapy seeks to maximize and uphold the patient’s autonomy, functional capacity, and life quality (Rosenthal & Burchum, 2021).

Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?

Get your assignment on Assignment: NURS 6521 Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!

Meet my deadline

In a certain period, the patient will start to show the potential effects of the medication. Exelon will slow the spread of the condition, but the patient won’t notice any effects right away. Therefore, doctors advised patients to report any potential changes in their health within three to six weeks, with or without improvement.

Following the commencement of treatment, doctors should schedule meetings with the patient and family every three to six weeks to assess any changes in cognitive and behavioral issues and to gauge how the patient is responding to the medicine. Mr. Akkad’s patient visited the clinic again after 4 weeks, however there was no improvement in his conduct or cognitive abilities (Kazmierski et al., 2020)

Decision 2 Increase Exelon to 4.5 mg orally BID

The client has returned, and according to his son, neither his father’s cognitive nor behavioral functioning had improved. Additionally, the MMSE test results showed that the drugs’ recommended dosage was not likely to have any positive effects. Mini-mental status examination is a helpful tool for gauging how well a patient is responding to treatment, and family input is crucial for determining the patient’s daily interests.

The second choice is to raise the dosage of rivastigmine in order to reduce symptoms. Exelon lessens the symptoms and slows the disease’s course, although it could take 6 to 8 weeks before memory and behavior start to improve (Kazmierski et al., 2020).

To achieve the best results, the clinical studies advise titrating the Exelon dose to the highest tolerable level. The patient came back with his son after four weeks. According to his son, he is tolerating the medication, attending religious services with family, and everyone is content. One issue is that his dad still finds humor in things that he once found to be serious (Kim et al., 2021).

Decision 3 Maintain current dose of Exelon

The third option is to keep the present dosage of medicine after assessing the condition of the patient by raising the amount in the second choice. Since this patient is responding effectively to the dosage and because there are no negative side effects from this dosage. The patient’s symptoms are reportedly getting better gradually. Behavioral, cognitive, and daily living activity tests have shown that oral Exelon’s effectiveness is dose dependent (Kim et al., 2021).

The suggested course of treatment lessens symptoms while delaying the onset of the illness. It does not, however, completely reverse the disease. Healthcare professionals have a crucial role in educating patients about Alzheimer’s disease, including its signs, problems, treatment options, and positive and negative impacts. They can also help patients and their families find financial and legal resources.

However, it is vital to explain to the client and his kid that this illness is permanent and medications only help to lessen the clinical manifestations and help improve the patient’s cognitive and behavioral functionality. The patient did not report side effects of the medication during the re- visit. Additionally, you have the choice of increasing the dosage or supplementing it with an additional drug such as Namenda (Rosenthal & Burchum, 2021).

Conclusion

In conclusion, there is no therapy option that can offer a long-term solution for Alzheimer’s disease. The patient’s quality of life, ability to do everyday tasks, and cognitive and behavioral capabilities can all be enhanced by prescribed medications and suggested therapy. It is a neurogenerative condition that develops slowly and places a heavy strain on sufferers and family.

In order to reduce the negative impacts of this condition on patients and their families, it is crucial to create appropriate and effective decisions. Making sure patients with it have enough sleep and rest in between stimulating activities and providing a tranquil environment for these individuals are crucial (DementiaCareCentral.com, 2020).

References

Rosenthal, L. D., & Burchum, J. R. (2021). Lehne’s pharmacotherapeutics for advanced practice nurses and physician assistants (2nd ed.) St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.

Kim, B., Noh, G. O., & Kim, K. (2021). Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and family caregiver burden: a path analysis. BMC Geriatrics, 21(1), 160.https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02109 w

DementiaCareCentral.com. (2020, October 7). Mini-mental state exam (MMSE) alzheimer’s /dementia test: Administration, accuracy and scoring. Dementia CareCentral.https://www.dementiacarecentral.com/mini-mental-state-exam/.

Kazmierski, J., Messini-Zachou, C., Gkioka, M., & Tsolaki, M. (2018). The impact of a long- term rivastigmine and donepezil treatment on all-cause mortality in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease & OtherDementias®,33(6), 385-393

NURS6521 Advanced Pharmacology

Alzheimer’s is one of the most common progressive neurological disorders among the elderly caused by dementia. Patients will present with mild to moderate cognitive signs and symptoms at the onset of the disorder, which will progress to severe memory loss with time, as they grow much older (Li et al., 2019).

However, several treatment options have been proven to be effective in the management of Alzheimer’s disorder among the elderly. The purpose of this discussion is to illustrate the decision process in selecting the most effective drug, based on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors, for treating an elderly patient diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease.

Patient Case Study Summary

The assigned case study demonstrates a 76-year-old Iranian male with symptoms of Alzheimer’s disorder. The patient displays strange behavior upon arrival at the clinic reporting symptoms of memory loss, forgetfulness, confusion, and diminished interest in religious activities for the last 2 years.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic patient factors which contributed to the selection of drugs for this patient include his advanced age, male gender, Iranian race, and presenting symptoms in addition to the mini-mental exam results of moderate dementia. the patient’s diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disorder will also be considered.

Treatment Decisions

Based on the patient history and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors mentioned above, the most appropriate intervention is to initiate Exelon 1.5mg twice daily. Exelon (rivastigmine) is an FFDA-approved drug for treating mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease (Fish et al., 2019). Previous studies support great effectiveness, and safety profile for use of the drug among the elderly diagnosed with Alzheimer’s (Khoury et al., 2018).

The second decision was to increase the dose of Exelon to 4.5 mg twice daily as recommended by most clinical practice guidelines for patients who have displayed great tolerance but with minimal effectiveness. The last decision was to increase the dose further to 6mg twice daily, to promote optimal effectiveness as the patient still displayed limited remission of symptoms with the previous intervention.

Expected Outcome

Studies show that Exelon when administered appropriately takes between 8 to 12 weeks to completely manage symptoms of Alzheimer’s among elderly patients. As such, with the initial intervention of 1.5mg Exelon twice daily, the patient was expected to display approximately 50% remission of symptoms (Nguyen et al., 2021). The dose was however to be titrated to obtain the optimum outcome, not exceeding 6mg twice daily. The same results were expected with the second and third interventions with no side effects expected.

Difference Between Expected Outcome and Actual Outcome

Just like expected, the patient displayed a minimal reduction of symptoms of Alzheimer’s with no side effects reported with the first intervention. After the dose was increased in the second intervention, the patient reported further remission of symptoms, but at a slow rate, hence increasing the dose in the last intervention, which led to optimal remission of Alzheimer’s symptoms just as expected (Huang et al., 2020).

Conclusion

Alzheimer’s is a common disorder among the elderly compromising their quality of life and well-being. For the patient in the provided case study, it was necessary to administer Exelon at a starting dose of 1.5 mg which was titrated to 4.5mg then 6.5mg twice daily. The patient displayed great effectiveness with this medication in the management of his Alzheimer’s symptoms, with no side effects reported.

References

Fish, P. V., Steadman, D., Bayle, E. D., & Whiting, P. (2019). New approaches for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 29(2), 125-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmcl.2018.11.034

Huang, L. K., Chao, S. P., & Hu, C. J. (2020). Clinical trials of new drugs for Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of biomedical science, 27(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12929-019-0609-7

Khoury, R., Rajamanickam, J., & Grossberg, G. T. (2018). An update on the safety of current therapies for Alzheimer’s disease: focus on rivastigmine. Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety, 9(3), 171-178. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042098617750555

Li, D. D., Zhang, Y. H., Zhang, W., & Zhao, P. (2019). Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Frontiers in neuroscience, 13, 472. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00472

Nguyen, K., Hoffman, H., Chakkamparambil, B., & Grossberg, G. T. (2021). Evaluation of rivastigmine in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurodegenerative Disease Management, 11(1), 35-48. https://doi.org/10.2217/nmt-2020-0052

Week 8 Assignment Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal

For your Assignment Assignment NURS 6521 Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal , your Instructor will assign you one of the decision tree interactive media pieces provided in the Resources. As you examine the patient case studies in this module’s Resources, consider how you might assess and treat patients presenting symptoms of neurological and musculoskeletal disorders.

Photo Credit: Getty Images/Science Photo Library RF

To Prepare

Review the interactive media piece assigned by your Instructor.

Reflect on the patient’s symptoms and aspects of the disorder presented in the interactive media piece.

Consider how you might assess and treat patients presenting with the symptoms of the patient case study you were assigned.

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: Assignment: NURS 6521 Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal

You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the diagnosis and treatment for this patient. Reflect on potential co-morbid physical as well as patient factors that might impact the patient’s diagnosis and treatment.

Alzheimer Disease

The case study is about a 76-year-old male Iranian patient suspected of having Alzheimer’s disease. The conclusion is reports based on his eldest son, and during the test, there were no organic disease processes found. The behavioral changes began two years earlier, which involved changes in personality and apathy, accompanied by memory loss, which challenges in recognizing the appropriate words.

During the speech, self-reported euthymic mood and clinical interview confabulation are often noticed. The patient often has an impairment and a lack of impulse control in his insight and judgment. There is no reported ideation of suicide, and because of Alzheimer’s disease, the patient is diagnosed with neurocognitive disorder.

Donepezil 5 mg at bedtime will be used as the first approach. The donepezil use has been studied for

assignment nurs 6521 decision tree for neurological and musculoskeletal — Assignment NURS 6521 Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal

decades by patients who have Alzheimer’s disease. The medication is an inhibitor of acetylcholinesterase, which raises the brain’s acetylcholine levels also makes up for the reduced cholinergic neurons function (Čolović, Krstić, Lazarević-Pašti, Bondžić, & Vasić, 2013). An evaluation of randomized clinical trials analyzes the effect that donepezil has on Alzheimer’s patients utilizing randomized control trials.

The results revealed that there is evidence that donepezil is effective in managing this condition in three main fields, including behavior, functional capacity, and cognition (Knowles, 2006, pp. 195–219). These are the key areas in which the patient affected as well as the aim was to reduce his quality of life effect. As demonstrated in the case, he had major personality changes that had a negative impact on his involvement in activities of interest.

The effects of Donepezil vary as complications may occur along with minimal clinical benefits. The patient-reported side effects documented in patients taking this medication, like appetite, loss of weight, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. (Kumar & Sharma., 2019).

The second decision was cognitive behavioral therapy use, that has been shown to have a beneficial effect in early-stage patients of Alzheimer’s disease. In isolated cases, evidence suggesting psychosocial treatments for dementia patients identified (Forstmeier, Maercker, Savaskan, & Roth, 2015). There is also limited empirical information on such approaches, though. Among patients who have neuropsychiatric symptoms, certain researchers have described behavioral treatments as necessary.

This may also be used by the patient to promote behavior, especially directed at reducing apathy & enhancing the patient’s self-control. Mood improvement might have a positive effect on the quality of life as well as the patient’s ability to engage in activities that increase his cognitive status.

In this case, the third decision will involve family members in the therapeutic process, which will continue to improve behaviors that help the patient. The aim is to improve the patient’s support system and also daily interactions, though it has been shown to have a significant effect on the emotional and cognitive well-being of dementia patients.

References

Čolović, M. B., Krstić, D. Z., Lazarević-Pašti, T. D., Bondžić, A. M., & Vasić, a. V. (2013). Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors: pharmacology and toxicology. Curr Neuropharmacol, 11(3), 315–335. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3648782/

Forstmeier, S., Maercker, A., Savaskan, E., & Roth, a. T. (2015). Cognitive-behavioral treatment for mild Alzheimer’s patients and their caregivers (CBTAC): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials., 16. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4650298/

Knowles, J. (2006). Donepezil in Alzheimer’s disease: an evidence-based review of its impact on clinical and economic outcomes. Core Evid., 1(3), 195–219. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3321665/

Kumar, A., & Sharma., S. (2019). Donepezil. StatPearls Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513257/

By Day 7 of Week 8

Write a 1- to 2-page summary paper that addresses the following:

Briefly summarize the patient case study you were assigned, including each of the three decisions you took for the patient presented.

Based on the decisions you recommended for the patient case study, explain whether you believe the decisions provided were supported by the evidence-based literature. Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.

What were you hoping to achieve with the decisions you recommended for the patient case study you were assigned? Support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.

Goals and Outcomes

The overarching goal was to reduce the patient’s pain levels to an acceptable threshold (around 3 on the scale) and restore his ability to perform daily activities without crutches. The outcomes were remarkably positive; the patient’s pain diminished from a debilitating 9 to a manageable 4. This reduction facilitated enhanced mobility and daily functioning, marking a significant improvement in his overall well-being. Despite minor weight gain, the patient’s improved quality of life underscored the success of the interventions.

Discrepancies Between Expectations and Results

In this case, the outcomes closely mirrored the expectations. The patient experienced a substantial reduction in pain, improved functionality, and minimal side effects, including manageable weight gain. The decisions made successfully struck a delicate balance between therapeutic benefits and potential drawbacks, ensuring the patient’s optimal quality of life. The minor weight gain, while a concern, was overshadowed by the vast improvements in pain control and functionality, aligning with the patient’s stated preferences.

Conclusion

CRPS management necessitates a holistic and individualized approach, integrating evidence-based practices, patient preferences, and vigilant monitoring of outcomes. This case study underscores the pivotal role of healthcare providers in navigating the complexities of CRPS treatment. By employing a comprehensive understanding of available therapies and their potential effects, clinicians can significantly enhance the lives of individuals afflicted with this debilitating condition.

Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decision in the exercise. Describe whether they were different. Be specific and provide examples.

Patient Case Study Summary

Treatment Decisions

Expected Outcome

The dose was however to be titrated to obtain the optimum outcome, not exceeding 6mg twice daily. The same results were expected with the second and third interventions with no side effects expected.

Difference Between Expected Outcome and Actual Outcome

Conclusion

References

Fish, P. V., Steadman, D., Bayle, E. D., & Whiting, P. (2019). New approaches for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 29(2)