Fill in order details

  • Submit your instructions
    to writers for free!

Chat with the writer

  • Chat with preferred expert writers
  • Request a preview of your paper
    from them for free

Editing

  • Project edited by the quality evaluation department

Download Your Completed Project

  • Download the completed project from your account or have it sent to your email address

ANSWERED!! Post a brief explanation of three important components of the psychiatric interview and why you consider these elements important. Explain the psychometric properties of the rating scale you were assigned

Discussion: The Psychiatric Evaluation and Evidence-Based Rating Scales

Assessment tools have two primary purposes: 1) to measure illness and diagnose clients, and 2) to measure a client’s response to treatment. Often, you will find that multiple assessment tools are designed to measure the same condition or response. Not all tools, however, are appropriate for use in all clinical situations. You must consider the strengths and weaknesses of each tool to select the appropriate assessment tool for your client. For this Discussion, as you examine the assessment tool assigned to you by the Course Instructor, consider its use in psychotherapy.

To Prepare:

  • Review this week’s Learning Resources and reflect on the insights they provide regarding psychiatric assessment and diagnosis.
  • Consider the elements of the psychiatric interview, history, and examination.
  • Consider the assessment tool assigned to you by the Course Instructor.

Post a brief explanation of three important components of the psychiatric interview and why you consider these elements important. Explain the psychometric properties of the rating scale you were assigned. Explain when it is appropriate to use this rating scale with clients during the psychiatric interview and how the scale is helpful to a nurse practitioner’s psychiatric assessment. Support your approach with evidence-based literature.

Rubric Detail

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
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 3 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 3 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 2 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 1 or no credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Further 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

Name: NRNP_6635_Week2_Discussion_Rubric

ANSWER

The Psychiatric Evaluation and Evidence-Based Rating Scales

Components of Psychiatric Interview 

The first important component of a psychiatric interview is the history of the present illness. The component is important because it can provide data about the present symptoms and the impact of symptoms on the patient’s social system (Sando et al., 2017). The component can provide data about the impact of the condition on the patient’s work, social interaction, and family and whether the patient has social support (Sadock et al., 2017). When collecting data about the present symptoms, the professional should ask about the patient’s sleep quality, level of energy, concentration, appetite, and whether the patient experiences social thoughts. The second important component is psychiatric history (Medeasy, 2017). This component is significant because it can provide about whether the patient has suffered mental health problems in the past. After collecting this data, the psychiatrist will know whether the patient’s current symptoms are recurrent or are signs of a new disease.

The third vital component during the psychiatric interview is a mental status exam. The mental status exam will provide data about the patient’s general appearance (Sadock et al., 2017). Some of the data that can be collected using this component are the patient’s dressing code and general hygiene (Medeasy, 2017). The psychiatrist will also collect data about the patient’s eye contact, cooperation, and motor movements. The mental status exam can also provide information about the patient’s speech (Sando et al., 2017). When assessing the patient’s speech, the patient will describe its rate, grammar, fluency, or volume. Mode and affect of the patient will also be realized during the mental status exam.

Psychometric Properties of PTSD Checklist (PCL)

Gelaye et al. (2017) note that PCL is one of the greatly used tools to measure PTSD symptoms. The first psychometric property of the tool is that it is valid and acceptable in measuring PTSD. Gelaye et al. (2017) conducted a study to examine the validity of PCL in screening pregnant patients for PTSD. The authors note that the PCL designed in the Spanish language can be used by mental health professionals to screen pregnant patients for PTSD. In other words, the authors note that the PCL is acceptable and can be used to screen patients who may have PTSD. The second psychometric property of the PCL tool is that it is reliable. Gelaye et al. (2017) also found that the tool is reliable and factorial. Ibrahim et al. (2018) also conducted a study and found that PCL is reliable and can be used to screen people for PTSD. The authors concluded that PCL can be used to assess and screen Arab and Kurdish populations because it achieved the optional balance of specificity and sensitivity.

Another study that also supports the reliability and validity of the PCL tool was done by Mat Salleh et al. (2020). The results of Mat Salleh et al. (2020)’s study shows that the internal consistency reliability of the tool was 0.95, meaning that the tool is acceptable used be applied in assessing PTSD among patients. Mahmoudi and Amini (2020) also conducted a study and found that PCL is an accurate and sensitive tool for measuring and assessing the level of PTSD among people who have experienced accidents and disasters. The authors concluded that the tool can be used to measure PTSD to promote the victims’ health. Based on the findings above, the tool can be used to assess patients with PTSD during the psychiatric interview because it is reliable and valid. The tool is vital in nursing because it can provide reliable and valid data about the rate of the patient’s PTSD condition.

References

Gelaye, B., Zheng, Y., Medina-Mora, M. E., Rondon, M. B., Sánchez, S. E., & Williams, M. A. (2017). Validity of the posttraumatic stress disorders (PTSD) checklist in pregnant women. BMC Psychiatry17(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1304-4

Ibrahim, H., Ertl, V., Catani, C., Ismail, A. A., & Neuner, F. (2018). The validity of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) as screening instrument with Kurdish and Arab displaced populations living in the Kurdistan region of Iraq. BMC psychiatry18(1), 1-8. https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12888-018-1839-z#Sec17

Mahmoudi, O., & Amini, M. R. (2020). The Reliability and Validity of the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL) in the Earthquake-Stricken Population of Kermanshah, Iran. International Journal of Health and Life Sciences6(2). https://sites.kowsarpub.com/ijhls/articles/101860.html

Mat Salleh, M.N., Ismail, H. and Mohd Yusoff, H. (2020), “Reliability and validity of a post-traumatic checklist-5 (PCL-5) among fire and rescue officers in Selangor, Malaysia”, Journal of Health Research, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHR-11-2019-0243

Medeasy. (2017). Psychiatric history taking and the mental status examination | USMLE & COMLEX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5KwDgWX8L8

Sadock, B. J., Sadock, V. A., & Ruiz, P. (2017). Psychiatric interview, history, and mental status examination. In Kaplan and Sadock’s Concise Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry (4th ed., pp. 9–15). Wolters Kluwer.

NOTE: THIS ANSWER HAS ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED!

Place your order now for the similar assignment and get fast, cheap and best quality work written by our expert level  assignment writers.Post a brief explanation of three important components of the psychiatric interview and why you consider these elements important. Explain the psychometric properties of the rating scale you were assigned

Use Coupon Code: NEW30 to Get 30% OFF Your First Order

What our customers say
_____

You cannot copy content of this page