ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH IMPILSIVITY, COMPLULSIVITY AND ADDICTION NURS 6630

Custom Writing Services by World Class PhD Writers: High Quality Papers from Professional Writers

Best custom writing service you can rely on:

☝Cheap essays, research papers, dissertations.

✓14 Days Money Back Guerantee

✓100% Plagiarism FREE.

✓ 4-Hour Delivery

✓ Free bibliography page

✓ Free outline

✓ 200+ Certified ENL and ESL writers

✓  Original, fully referenced and formatted writing

ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH IMPILSIVITY, COMPLULSIVITY AND ADDICTION NURS 6630
Sample Answer for ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH IMPILSIVITY, COMPLULSIVITY AND ADDICTION NURS 6630 Included After Question

Impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction are challenging disorders for patients across the life span. Impulsivity is the inclination to act upon sudden urges or desires without considering potential consequences; patients often describe impulsivity as living in the present moment without regard to the future (MentalHelp.net, n.d.). Thus, these disorders often manifest as negative behaviors, resulting in adverse outcomes for patients. For example, compulsivity represents a behavior that an individual feels driven to perform to relieve anxiety (MentalHelp.net, n.d.). The presence of these behaviors often results in addiction, which represents the process of the transition from impulsive to compulsive behavior. 

In your role as the psychiatric nurse practitioner (PNP), you have the opportunity to help patients address underlying causes of the disorders and overcome these behaviors. For this Assignment, as you examine the client case study in this week’s Learning Resources, consider how you might assess and treat clients presenting with impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction. 

Reference: MentalHelp.net. (n.d.). Impaired decision-making, impulsivity, and compulsivity: Addictions’ effect on the cerebral cortex. https://www.mentalhelp.net/addiction/impulsivity-and-compulsivity-addictions-effect-on-the-cerebral-cortex/ 

Resources 

 Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.  

WEEKLY RESOURCES 

Learning Resources 

Required Readings 
Kelly, J. E., & Renner, J. A. (2016). Alcohol-Related disorders. In T. A. Stern, M. Favo, T. E. Wilens, & J. F. Rosenbaum. (Eds.), Massachusetts General Hospital psychopharmacology and neurotherapeutics (pp. 163–182). Elsevier. 
Renner, J. A., & Ward, N. (2016). Drug addiction. In T. A. Stern, M. Favo, T. E. Wilens, & J. F. Rosenbaum. (Eds.), Massachusetts General Hospital psychopharmacology and neurotherapeutics (pp. 163–182). Elsevier. 
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (1999). Treatment of adolescents with substance use disorders: Treatment improvement protocol series  

  Links to an external site., no. 32. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK64350/ 

Chapter 1, “Substance Use Among Adolescents” 
Chapter 2, “Tailoring Treatment to the Adolescent’s Problem” 
Chapter 7, “Youths with Distinctive Treatment Needs” 

  University of Michigan Health System. (2016). Childhood trauma linked to worse impulse control. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services  

  Links to an external site., 54(4), 15.  

  Grant, J. E., Odlaug, B. L., & Schreiber, L. N. (2014). Pharmacological treatments in pathological gambling. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology  

  Links to an external site., 77(2), 375–381. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04457.x  

  Hulvershorn, L. A., Schroeder, K. M., Wink, L. K., Erickson, C. A., & McDougle, C. J. (2015). Psychopharmacologic treatment of children prenatally exposed to drugs of abuse. Human Psychopharmacology  

  Links to an external site., 30(3), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1002/hup.2467  

  Loreck, D., Brandt, N. J., & DiPaula, B. (2016). Managing opioid abuse in older adults: Clinical considerations and challenges. Journal of Gerontological Nursing  

  Links to an external site., 42(4), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.3928/00989134-20160314-04  

  Salmon, J. M., & Forester, B. (2012). Substance abuse and co-occurring psychiatric disorders in older adults: A clinical case and review of the relevant literature. Journal of Dual Diagnosis  

  Links to an external site., 8(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/15504263.2012.648439  

  Sanches, M., Scott-Gurnell, K., Patel, A., Caetano, S. C., Zunta-Soares, G. B., Hatch, J. P., Olvera, R., Swann, A. C., & Soares, J. C. (2014). Impulsivity in children and adolescents with mood disorders and unaffected offspring of bipolar parents. Comprehensive Psychiatry  

Links to an external site., 55(6), 1337–1341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2014.04.018 

Medication Resources 

U.S. Food & Drug Administration. (n.d.). Drugs@FDA: FDA-approved drugs  
Links to an external site.. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm
Links to an external site. 

Note: To access the following medications, use the Drugs@FDA resource. Type the name of each medication in the keyword search bar. Select the hyperlink related to the medication name you searched. Review the supplements provided and select the package label resource file associated with the medication you searched. If a label is not available, you may need to conduct a general search outside of this resource provided. Be sure to review the label information for each medication as this information will be helpful for your review in preparation for your Assignments. 

naltrexone (revia/vivitrol) 
naloxone 
acamprosate 
disulfiram 
Required Media 
Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman with Comorbid Addiction  
Links to an external site.  

Note: This case study will serve as the foundation for this week’s Assignment. 

Optional Resources 

Lupi, M., Martinotti, G., Acciavatti, T., Pettorruso, M., Brunetti, M., Santacroce, R., Cinose, E., Di Iorio, G., Di Nicola, M., & Di Giannantonio, M. (2014). Pharmacological treatments in gambling disorder: A qualitative review. Biomed Research International, 2014  

Links to an external site.. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/537306 

To prepare for this Assignment: 
Review this week’s Learning Resources, including the Medication Resources indicated for this week. 
Reflect on the psychopharmacologic treatments you might recommend for the assessment and treatment of patients requiring therapy for impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction. 
The Assignment: 5 pages 

Examine Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction. You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the medication to prescribe to this client. Be sure to consider factors that might impact the client’s pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic processes. 

At each decision point, you should evaluate all options before selecting your decision and moving throughout the exercise. Before you make your decision, make sure that you have researched each option and that you evaluate the decision that you will select. Be sure to research each option using the primary literature. 

Introduction to the case (1 page) 
Briefly explain and summarize the case for this Assignment. Be sure to include the specific patient factors that may impact your decision making when prescribing medication for this patient. 
Decision #1 (1 page) 
Which decision did you select? 
Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 
Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 
What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature). 
Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. 
Decision #2 (1 page) 
Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 
Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 
What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature). 
Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. 
Decision #3 (1 page) 
Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 
Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 
What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature). 
Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. 
Conclusion (1 page) 
Summarize your recommendations on the treatment options you selected for this patient. Be sure to justify your recommendations and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 

Note: Support your rationale with a minimum of five academic resources. While you may use the course text to support your rationale, it will not count toward the resource requirement. You should be utilizing the primary and secondary literature. 

Reminder : The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632). All papers submitted must use this formatting  

Links to an external site.. 

By Day 7 

Submit your Assignment.  

submission information 

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.  

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK10Assgn1_LastName_Firstinitial  
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page. 
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review. 

 

Rubric 

NURS_6630_Week10_Assignment1_Rubric  

NURS_6630_Week10_Assignment1_Rubric  
Criteria  Ratings  Pts  
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Introduction to the case (1 page)Briefly explain and summarize the case for this Assignment. Be sure to include the specific patient factors that may impact your decision making when prescribing medication for this patient.  
10 to >8.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

The response accurately, clearly, and fully summarizes in detail the case for the Assignment…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the specific patient factors that impact decision making when prescribing medication for this patient. 

8 to >7.0 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

The response accurately summarizes the case for the Assignment…. The response accurately explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient. 

7 to >6.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the case for the Assignment…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient. 

6 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the case for the Assignment, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient. 

 

10 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Decision #1 (1–2 pages)• Which decision did you select?• Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.• Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.• What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).• Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples.  
20 to >17.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided. 

17 to >15.0 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

The response accurately explains the decision selected…. The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected…. The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response…. The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response…. The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided. 

15 to >13.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided. 

13 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the decision selected…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing…. Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing. 

 

20 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Decision #2 (1–2 pages)• Which decision did you select?• Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.• Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.• What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).• Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples.  
20 to >17.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided. 

17 to >15.0 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

The response accurately explains the decision selected…. The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected…. The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response…. The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response…. The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided. 

15 to >13.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided. 

13 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains in detail the decision selected…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing…. Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing. 

 

20 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Decision #3 (1–2 pages)• Which decision did you select?• Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.• Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.• What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature).• Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples.  
20 to >17.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided. 

17 to >15.0 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

The response accurately explains the decision selected…. The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected…. The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response…. The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response…. The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided. 

15 to >13.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients…. Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided. 

13 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains in detail the decision selected…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing…. Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing. 

 

20 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Conclusion (1 page)• Summarize your recommendations on the treatment options you selected for this patient. Be sure to justify your recommendations and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature.  
15 to >13.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient…. The response accurately and clearly explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that fully support the recommendations provided. 

13 to >11.0 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

The response accurately summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient…. The response accurately explains a justification for the recommendation provided, including clinically relevant resources that support the recommendations provided. 

11 to >10.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the recommendations provided. 

10 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient, or is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that do not support the recommendations provided, or is missing. 

 

15 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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 are provided that delineate all required criteria.  
5 to >4.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity…. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. 

4 to >3.5 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

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 they are brief and not descriptive. 

3.5 to >3.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time…. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. 

3 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.    5 pts  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation   5 to >4.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 

4 to >3.5 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 

3.5 to >3.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 

3 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. 

 

5 pts 
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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.  
5 to >4.0 pts  

Excellent Point range: 90–100 

Uses correct APA format with no errors. 

4 to >3.5 pts  

Good Point range: 80–89 

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 

3.5 to >3.0 pts  

Fair Point range: 70–79 

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 

3 to >0 pts  

Poor Point range: 0–69 

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. 

 

5 pts 
Total Points: 100  

 

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH IMPILSIVITY, COMPLULSIVITY AND ADDICTION NURS 6630
Title: ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH IMPILSIVITY, COMPLULSIVITY AND ADDICTION NURS 6630

Impulsivity disorders are characterized by the inability to resist the sudden, powerful desire to do something and difficulties controlling emotions or behaviors. On the other hand, addiction is a complex mental condition characterized by compulsive substance use regardless of detrimental consequences. The purpose of this paper is to describe a patient with an addiction disorder and the treatment interventions.

Introduction to the Case

The case scenario depicts Mrs. Perez, a 53-year-old Puerto Rican woman with alcohol drinking problems since her late teenage years. Perez has been a part of Alcoholics Anonymous from time to time for the last 25 years. The patient also reports that she has been finding it more difficult to remain sober in the past two years since a casino was opened in her neighborhood. Perez mentions that she gets high when gambling since she takes some drinks when playing high-stake gambling games. However, this leads to increased alcohol consumption and irresponsible gambling. In addition, the client states she has increasingly been smoking in the past two years and is worried about the adverse health impacts.

Mrs. Perez reports that she has tried refraining from alcohol consumption, but gambling makes her high, making her take a few drinks to even up. She has also realized that when she consumes alcohol, she smokes minimally, but she enjoys smoking when gambling. The patient has experienced weight gain from excessive drinking, and her current weight is 122 lbs, having gained 7 lbs. The patient is worried since she borrowed more than $50,000 from her retirement account to pay gambling debts. Noteworthy MSE findings include avoiding eye contact, sad mood, and impaired impulse control. Mrs. Perez is diagnosed with Gambling disorder and alcohol use disorder. The patient factors that may affect decision-making with regard to treatment include age, overall health status, comorbid mental health illnesses, the patient’s previous experience with medication, the patient’s beliefs and opinions on useful therapies, history of treatment compliance, and the patient’s motivation for abstinence.

Decision #1

Vivitrol (naltrexone) injection, 380 mg IM in the gluteal region four-weekly.

Reason for this Decision

Naltrexone was the ideal treatment because it is an FDA-indicated drug for treating alcohol use disorder (AUD). Joshi et al. (2021) explain that naltrexone alleviates alcohol cravings, decreases alcohol consumption, and the monthly injectable formulation helps in compliance. Kranzler and Soyka (2018) explain that naltrexone decreases mesolimbic opioidergic activity, thus cont

error: Not Allowed