Decision Point One Begin Zoloft 50 mg orally dailyBegin Zoloft 50 mg orally daily RESULTS OF DECISION POINT ONE ·  Client returns to clinic in four weeks ·  Client informs you that he has no tightness in chest, or shortness of breath ·  Client states that he noticed decreased worries about work over the past 4 or 5 days ·  HAM-A score has decreased to 18 (partial response) Decision Point Two Increase dose to 75 mg orally daily RESULTS OF DECISION POINT TWO ·  Client returns to clinic in four weeks ·  Client reports an even further reduction in his symptoms ·  HAM-A score has now decreased to 10. At this point- continue current dose (61% reduction in symptoms) Decision Point Three Maintain current dose Guidance to Student At this point, it may be appropriate to continue client at the current dose. It is clear that the client is having a good response (as evidenced by greater than a 50% reduction in symptoms) and the client is currently not experiencing any side effects, the current dose can be maintained for 12 weeks to evaluate full effect of drug. Increasing drug at this point may yield a further decrease in symptoms, but may also increase the risk of side effects. This is a decision that you should discuss with the client. Nothing in the client’s case tells us that we should consider adding an augmentation agent at this point as the client is demonstrating response to the drug. Avoid polypharmacy unless symptoms cannot be managed by a single drug. Generalized Anxiety Disorder Middle-Aged White Male With Anxiety Anxiety BACKGROUND INFORMATION The client is a 46-year-old white male who works as a welder at a local steel fabrication factory. He presents today after being referred by his PCP after a trip to the emergency room in which he felt he was having a heart attack. He stated that he felt chest tightness, shortness of breath, and feeling of impending doom. He does have some mild hypertension (which is treated with low sodium diet) and is about 15 lbs. overweight. He had his tonsils removed when he was 8 years old, but his medical history since that time has been unremarkable. Myocardial infarction was ruled out in the ER and his EKG was normal. Remainder of physical exam was WNL. He admits that he still has problems with tightness in the chest and episodes of shortness of breath- he now terms these “anxiety attacks.” He will also report occasional feelings of impending doom, and the need to “run” or “escape” from wherever he is at. In your office, he confesses to occasional use of ETOH to combat worries about work. He admits to consuming about 3-4 beers/night. Although he is single, he is attempting to care for aging parents in his home. He reports that the management at his place of employment is harsh, and he fears for his job. You administer the HAM-A, which yields a score of 26. Client has never been on any type of psychotropic medication. MENTAL STATUS EXAM The client is alert, oriented to person, place, time, and ev ...

1. Decision Point One
Begin Zoloft 50 mg orally dailyBegin Zoloft 50 mg orally daily
RESULTS OF DECISION POINT ONE
· Client returns to clinic in four weeks
· Client informs you that he has no tightness in chest, or
shortness of breath
· Client states that he noticed decreased worries about work
over the past 4 or 5 days
· HAM-A score has decreased to 18 (partial response)
Decision Point Two
Increase dose to 75 mg orally daily
RESULTS OF DECISION POINT TWO
· Client returns to clinic in four weeks
· Client reports an even further reduction in his symptoms
· HAM-A score has now decreased to 10. At this point-
continue current dose (61% reduction in symptoms)
Decision Point Three
Maintain current dose
Guidance to Student
At this point, it may be appropriate to continue client at the
current dose. It is clear that the client is having a good response
(as evidenced by greater than a 50% reduction in symptoms) and
the client is currently not experiencing any side effects, the
current dose can be maintained for 12 weeks to evaluate full
effect of drug. Increasing drug at this point may yield a further
decrease in symptoms, but may also increase the risk of side

2. effects. This is a decision that you should discuss with the
client. Nothing in the client’s case tells us that we should
consider adding an augmentation agent at this point as the client
is demonstrating response to the drug. Avoid polypharmacy
unless symptoms cannot be managed by a single drug.
Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Middle-Aged White Male With Anxiety
Anxiety
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The client is a 46-year-old white male who works as a welder at
a local steel fabrication factory. He presents today after being
referred by his PCP after a trip to the emergency room in which
he felt he was having a heart attack. He stated that he felt chest
tightness, shortness of breath, and feeling of impending doom.
He does have some mild hypertension (which is treated with low
sodium diet) and is about 15 lbs. overweight. He had his tonsils
removed when he was 8 years old, but his medical history since
that time has been unremarkable. Myocardial infarction was
ruled out in the ER and his EKG was normal. Remainder of
physical exam was WNL.
He admits that he still has problems with tightness in the chest
and episodes of shortness of breath- he now terms these
“anxiety attacks.” He will also report occasional feelings of
impending doom, and the need to “run” or “escape” from
wherever he is at.
In your office, he confesses to occasional use of ETOH to
combat worries about work. He admits to consuming about 3-4
beers/night. Although he is single, he is attempting to care for

3. aging parents in his home. He reports that the management at
his place of employment is harsh, and he fears for his job. You
administer the HAM-A, which yields a score of 26.
Client has never been on any type of psychotropic medication.
MENTAL STATUS EXAM
The client is alert, oriented to person, place, time, and event. He
is appropriately dressed. Speech is clear, coherent, and goal -
directed. Client’s self-reported mood is “bleh” and he does
endorse feeling “nervous”. Affect is somewhat blunted, but does
brighten several times throughout the clinical interview. Affect
broad. Client denies visual or auditory hallucinations, no overt
delusional or paranoid thought processes readily apparent.
Judgment is grossly intact, as is insight. He denies suicidal or
homicidal ideation.
You administer the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A)
which yields a score of 26.
Diagnosis: Generalized anxiety disorder
RESOURCES
§ Hamilton, M. (1959). Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale.
Psyctests, doi:10.1037/t02824-0
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6630_Week6_Assignment_Rubric
Grid ViewList View
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
Good

4. Point range: 80–89
Fair
Point range: 70–79
Poor
Point range: 0–69
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.
Points:
Points Range:
9 (9%) - 10 (10%)

5. 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.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
8 (8%) - 8 (8%)

6. 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.
Feedback:
Points:

7. Points Range:
7 (7%) - 7 (7%)
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.
Feedback:

8. Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) - 6 (6%)
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.
Feedback:

9. 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.
Points:
Points Range:
18 (18%) - 20 (20%)

10. 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

11. provided.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
16 (16%) - 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains the decision selected.

12. 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.
Feedback:

13. Points:
Points Range:
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)
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

14. 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.
Feedback:

15. Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) - 13 (13%)
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.

16. 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.
Feedback:
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

17. 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.
Points:
Points Range:
18 (18%) - 20 (20%)
The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the
decision selected.

18. 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 cli nically
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.
Feedback:

19. Points:
Points Range:
16 (16%) - 17 (17%)
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

20. 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.
Feedback:
Points:

21. Points Range:
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)
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.

22. 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.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) - 13 (13%)

23. 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

24. with patients, or is missing.
Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses
provided, or is missing.
Feedback:
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.

25. Points:
Points Range:
18 (18%) - 20 (20%)
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.

26. 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.
Feedback:
Points:

27. Points Range:
16 (16%) - 17 (17%)
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.

28. The response accurately explains how ethical considerations
impact the treatment plan and communication with patients.
Examples provided support the decisions and responses
provided.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)

29. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision
selected.
The response inaccuratel y 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

30. provided.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) - 13 (13%)
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains in detail the
decision selected.

31. 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.

32. Feedback:
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.
Points:
Points Range:
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)

33. 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.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
12 (12%) - 13 (13%)

34. 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.
Feedback:
Points:

35. Points Range:
11 (11%) - 11 (11%)
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.
Feedback:

36. Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) - 10 (10%)
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.
Feedback:

37. 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.
Points:
Points Range:
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)

38. 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.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
4 (4%) - 4 (4%)

39. 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.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)

40. 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.
Feedback:
Points:

41. Points Range:
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,
continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.
No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were
provided.
Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting - English writing
standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

42. Points:
Points Range:
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no
errors.
Feedback:

43. Points:
Points Range:
4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation
errors.
Feedback:

44. Points:
Points Range:
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation
errors.
Feedback:

45. Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Feedback:
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.

46. Points:
Points Range:
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
Feedback:

47. Points:
Points Range:
4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.
Feedback:

48. Points:
Points Range:
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.
Feedback:

49. Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Feedback:

50. Show Descriptions
Show Feedback
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.--
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
9 (9%) - 10 (10%)
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.
Good
Point range: 80–89
8 (8%) - 8 (8%)

51. 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.
Fair
Point range: 70–79
7 (7%) - 7 (7%)
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.
Poor

52. Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 6 (6%)
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.
Feedback:
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

53. 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.--
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
18 (18%) - 20 (20%)
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.

54. 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.
Good
Point range: 80–89
16 (16%) - 17 (17%)
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.

55. 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.
Fair
Point range: 70–79
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision
selected.
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision

56. 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.
Poor
Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 13 (13%)

57. 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.

58. Feedback:
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.--
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100

59. 18 (18%) - 20 (20%)
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 cl inically
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

60. provided.
Good
Point range: 80–89
16 (16%) - 17 (17%)
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.

61. Examples provided support the decisions and responses
provided.
Fair
Point range: 70–79
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)
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

62. 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.
Poor
Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 13 (13%)
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.

63. 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.
Feedback:
Decision #3 (1–2 pages)

64. • 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.--
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
18 (18%) - 20 (20%)
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.

65. 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.
Good
Point range: 80–89
16 (16%) - 17 (17%)
The response accurately explains the decision selected.

66. 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.
Fair
Point range: 70–79
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)

67. 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.

68. Poor
Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 13 (13%)
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.

69. 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.
Feedback:
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.--
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)

70. 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 recommendatio ns provided.
Good
Point range: 80–89
12 (12%) - 13 (13%)
The response accurately summarizes the recommendations on
the treatment options selected for this patient.
The response accurately explains a justificatio n for the
recommendation provided, including clinically relevant
resources that support the recommendations provided.
Fair

71. Point range: 70–79
11 (11%) - 11 (11%)
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.
Poor
Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 10 (10%)
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

72. resources that do not support the recommendations provided, or
is missing.
Feedback:
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.--
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,

73. continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and
conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.
Good
Point range: 80–89
4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
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.
Fair
Point range: 70–79
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,
continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.

74. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is
vague or off topic.
Poor
Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,
continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.
No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were
provided.
Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting - English writing standards:

75. Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation--
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
Good
Point range: 80–89
4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation
errors.
Fair
Point range: 70–79
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)

76. Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation
errors.
Poor
Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Feedback:
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.--

77. Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
Point range: 90–100
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
Good
Point range: 80–89
4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.
Fair
Point range: 70–79
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

78. Poor
Point range: 0–69
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Feedback:
Total Points:
100
Name: NURS_6630_Week6_Assignment_Rubric