Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay

Posted: November 14th, 2022

Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay

Complex Regional Pain Disorder Complex Regional Pain Disorder White Male With Hip Pain BACKGROUND This week, a 43-year-old white male presents at the office with a chief complaint of pain. He is assisted in his ambulation with a set of crutches. At the beginning of the clinical interview, the client reports that his family doctor sent him for psychiatric assessment because the doctor felt that the pain was “all in his head.” He further reports that his physician believes he is just making stuff up to get “narcotics to get high.” SUBJECTIVE The client reports that his pain began about 7 years ago when he sustained a fall at work. He states that he landed on his right hip. Over the years, he has had numerous diagnostic tests done (x-rays, CT scans, and MRIs). Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay. He reports that about 4 years ago, it was discovered that the cartilage surrounding his right hip joint was 75% torn (from the 3 o’clock to 12 o’clock position). He reports that none of the surgeons he saw would operate because they felt him too young for a total hip replacement and believed that the tissue would repair with the passage of time. Since then, he reported development of a strange constellation of symptoms including cooling of the extremity (measured by electromyogram). He also reports that he experiences severe cramping of the extremity. He reports that one of the neurologists diagnosed him with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), also known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD). However, the neurologist referred him back to his family doctor for treatment of this condition. He reports that his family doctor said “there is no such thing as RSD, it comes from depression” and this was what prompted the referral to psychiatry. He reports that one specialist he saw a few years ago suggested that he use a wheelchair, to which the client states “I said ‘no,’ there is no need for a wheelchair, I can beat this!” The client reports that he used to be a machinist where he made “pretty good money.” He was engaged to be married, but his fiancé got “sick and tired of putting up with me and my pain, she thought I was just turning into a junkie.” He reports that he does get “down in the dumps” from time to time when he sees how his life has turned out, but emphatically denies depression. He states “you can’t let yourself get depressed… you can drive yourself crazy if you do. I’m not really sure what’s wrong with me, but I know I can beat it.” During the client interview, the client states “oh! It’s happening, let me show you!” this prompts him to stand with the assistance of the corner of your desk, he pulls off his shoe and shows you his right leg. His leg is turning purple from the knee down, and his foot is clearly in a visible cramp as the toes are curled inward and his foot looks like it is folding in on itself. “It will last about a minute or two, then it will let up” he reports. Sure enough, after about two minutes, the color begins to return and the cramping in the foot/toes appears to be releasing. The client states “if there is anything you can do to help me with this pain, I would really appreciate it.” He does report that his family doctor has been giving him hydrocodone, but he states that he uses is “sparingly” because he does not like the side effects of feeling “sleepy” and constipation. Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay. He also reports that the medication makes him “loopy” and doesn’t really do anything for the pain. MENTAL STATUS EXAM The client is alert, oriented to person, place, time, and event. He is dressed appropriately for the weather and time of year. He makes good eye contact. Speech is clear, coherent, goal directed, and spontaneous. His self-reported mood is euthymic. Affect consistent to self-reported mood and content of conversation. He denies visual/auditory hallucinations. No overt delusional or paranoid thought processes appreciated. Judgment, insight, and reality contact are all intact. He denies suicidal/homicidal ideation, and is future oriented. Diagnosis: Complex regional pain disorder (reflex sympathetic dystrophy) Decision Point One Select what the PMHNP should do: Savella 12.5 mg orally once daily on day 1; followed by 12.5 mg BID on day 2 and 3; followed by 25 mg BID on days 4-7; followed by Savella 12.5 mg orally once daily on day 1; followed by 12.5 mg BID on day 2 and 3; followed by 25 mg BID on days 4-7; followed by 50 mg BID thereafter 50 mg BID thereafter Amitriptyline 25 mg po QHS and titrate upward weekly by 25 Amitriptyline 25 mg po QHS and titrate upward weekly by 25 mg to a max dose of 200 mg per day mg to a max dose of 200 mg per day Neurontin 300 mg po BEDTIME with weekly increases of 300 Neurontin 300 mg po BEDTIME with weekly increases of 300 mg per day to a max of 2400 mg if needed mg per day to a max of 2400 mg if needed The Assignment Examine Case Study: A Caucasian Man With Hip Pain. 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 stop to complete the following: • Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay. Decision #1 o Which decision did you select? o Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources. o What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources. o Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #1 and the results of the decision. Why were they different? • Decision #2 o Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources. o What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources. o Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #2 and the results of the decision. Why were they different? • Decision #3 o Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources. o What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources. o Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #3 and the results of the decision. Why were they different? Also include how ethical considerations might impact your treatment plan and communication with clients. Note: Support your rationale with a minimum of three academic resources. While you may use the course text to support your rationale, it will not count toward the resource requirement. Below is a simple paper for reference, the needs an introduction and a conclusion. Assessing and Treating Clients with Anxiety Disorder Introduction Anxiety disorders refer to a syndrome of mental disorders typified by substantial feelings of fear and anxiety. The anxiety and fears may cause physical symptoms like shakiness and rapid heart rate. Various forms of anxiety disorders include panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, agoraphobia, generalized anxiety disorder, among other disorders (Locke et al, 2015). The focus of this assignment is on a 46-year-old male who presented with symptoms of anxiety disorder that included shortness of breath, chest tightness as well as a feeling of impending doom. Lab results and EKG in the ER were normal which ruled out myocardial infarction. (HAM-A) scale yielded a score of 26 and a diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) was made. Following the diagnosis, three decisions will be made about the treatment regimen for the client. After making each decision, a rationale supported by clinical evidence and patient data will be provided. Moreover, after making each decision, factors likely to impact the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic processes for the client will be considered when making decisions. Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay. Finally, ethical considerations likely to impact the client’s treatment plan will be discussed. Decision # 1 The first decision for this client would be to start Zoloft 50 mg orally daily. This decision was made because Zoloft is selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and SSRIs are the recommended first-line treatments for anxiety disorders. SSRIs work by increasing the amount of serotonin within the brain; serotonin is a brain chemical that is very important for mood regulation (Locher et al, 2017). Accordingly, SSRIs such as Zoloft work by hindering serotonin reuptake in the brain and therefore increases the level of serotonin in the brain; availability of serotonin thus helps in regulating moods and hence improves anxiety symptoms. In addition, evidence shows that Zoloft is effective in improving anxiety symptoms manifest in GAD; this is because anxiety depletes serotonin in the brain and this is addressed by an SSRI such as Zoloft which replaces the depleted serotonin in the brain (Patel et al, 2018). Imipramine (Tofranil) at 25 mg BID and Buspirone (Buspar) 10 mg orally twice daily choices were not selected because evidence shows that SSRIs as the first-line medications in the treatment of anxiety disorders. Both Imipramine and Buspirone takes about 2 – 4 weeks before making any improvement on the symptoms. Moreover, these two medications are not well tolerated as Zoloft and also have numerous side effects when compared to Zoloft. By selecting the decision to begin Zoloft 50 mg orally daily, it was expected that symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder manifested by the client would gradually clear away. It was also expected that the HAM-A score for the client would significantly reduce indicating an improvement of the anxiety symptoms. This is because evidence shows that Zoloft as an SSRI is effective in the treatment of GAD symptoms (Patel et al, 2018). In addition, it was hoped that the client would have minimal side effects and tolerate the medication because evidence shows that SSRIs have minimal side effects are well tolerated (Clevenger et al, 2018) There was no significant difference between the actual outcome of the decision and the expected results because when the client came for review the anxiety symptoms had significantly reduced and manifested by the client not having symptoms such as shortness of breath or chest tightness. Moreover, the client reported that he had stopped worrying about his job and also the HAM-A score dropped from 28 to 18 which shows that the client was responding to treatment, although partially. Decision # 2 The chosen second decision is to increase the client’s Zoloft dose to 75 mg orally daily.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM- FREE PAPER NOW

Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay. This decision was selected because the client’s HAM-A score dropped from 28 to 18 which indicated a partial response to treatment which shows that the client is responding to the treatment. Therefore, the increase of the dose from 50 mg to 75mg will further increase the availability of serotonin within the brain and thus further improve the anxiety symptoms for the client. Evidence supports the gradual increase of the SSRIs dosage if the clients are not satisfactorily responsive to the treatment (Jakubovski et al, 2016). This decision was also based on the fact that the client seems to be tolerating Zoloft medication well and without any side effect. The option to increase Zoloft to 100mg was not chosen because dosage increase and titration are supposed to be gradual to ensure the client continues to tolerate the medication well with minimal side effects. On the other hand, the option to have the client continue with the same dose and have him reassessed after four weeks was not selected because the client’s response is partial and therefore it is essential to increase the dosage to ensure complete response to the medication (Jakubovski et al, 2016). By choosing this decision, the expectation was that the anxiety symptoms would continue reducing and this would be indicated by a significantly reduced HAM-A score. There was no noticeable difference between the actual decision and the expected decision because on coming to the clinic the client’s anxiety symptoms had further reduced as indicated by the further reduction of the HAM-A score. Decision # 3 For the third decision, the decision will be to maintain the client on the current dose of Zoloft 75 mg orally daily. This decision was made because with the current regime the client is showing improvement of the anxiety symptoms as such as tightness in the chest, difficulty breathing or the feeling that something terrible is about to happen and also the HAM-A score indicated significant reduction with the current dose. This means that the client is responding to the current medication and dose adequately. In addition, with the current dose, the client is not experiencing any side effects and he is tolerating the medication very well. Evidence and clinical guidelines recommend titration of medications according to the response of the client; in this case, the client is responding very well and hence there is no need to titrate medication any further (Jakobsen et al, 2017). The option to either augment the current treatment with Buspar or the option of increasing the current dose of Zoloft to 100mg was not chosen since the client is showing a satisfactory response to the current dose of Zoloft 75 mg. Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay.  By selecting this decision, the expectation is that the client will show a complete response to the treatment where the client will report complete clearance of the symptoms and the HAM-A score will significantly reduce. Impact of Ethical Considerations on the Treatment Plan For this client, the ethical considerations will encompass informed consent, confidentiality, and autonomy. First, it is essential to seek informed consent from the client to ensure that the client has full information about the recommended treatment before he consents to the treatment (Millum, 2013). Secondly, the confidentiality of the client should be respected. This means that any information and the client’s treatment regimen should not be disclosed to any other party without the consent of the client. Lastly, the client’s autonomy should be respected where the client should not be forced or coerced to have any treatment; he should decide to accept or refuse the treatment. Any decision the client makes about the treatment should be respected (Millum, 2013). Conclusion The selected first decision is to begin Zoloft 50 mg orally daily. The rationale for selecting this decision is because SSRIs such as Zoloft are the first treatment choice for anxiety disorders and evidence shows that the medication is effective in treating anxiety symptoms. There was significant improvement with this decision. The second decision was to increase the dose to the Zoloft dose to 75 mg orally daily. This decision was made because the client was showing partial response as indicated by the HAM-A score and hence increasing the dose would facilitate a satisfactory response. The third decision is to maintain the current dose because the client is showing a satisfactory response to the treatment as indicated by the reduced HAM-A score and reduced symptoms as per the subjective data. Finally, the ethical considerations that should be considered include autonomy, confidentiality, and informed consent.   References Clevenger S, Devvrat M, Dang J, Vanle B & William I. (2018). The role of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in preventing relapse of major depressive disorder. Ther Adv Psychopharmacology. 8(1): 49–58. Jakubovski E, Anjali V, Freemantle N, Taylr M & Bloch M. (2016). Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Dose-Response Relationship of Selective-Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Major Depressive Disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 173(2): 174–183. Jakobsen J, Kumar K, Timm A, Gluud C, Ebert E et al. (2017). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors versus placebo in patients with major depressive disorder. A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis. BMC Psychiatry. 17(58). Locke A, Faafp M, Krist N & Shultz C. (2015). Diagnosis and Management of Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Panic Disorder in Adults. Am Fam Physician. 1;91(9),617-624. Locher, C., Koechlin, H., Zion, S. R., Werner, C., Pine, D. S., Kirsch, I. & Kossowsky, J. (2017). Efficacy and Safety of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Serotonin-Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors, and Placebo for Common Psychiatric Disorders Among Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 74(10), 1011–1020. Millum J. (2013). Introduction: Case Studies in the Ethics of Mental Health Research. J Nerv Ment Dis. 200(3), 230–235. Patel D, Feucht C, Brown K & Ramsay J. (2018). Pharmacological treatment of anxiety disorders in children and adolescents: a review for practitioners. Transl Pediatr. 7(1): 23–35. Assessing and Treating Clients With Pain Essay