Construct a 5- to 6-page paper discussing each of the four traditional mood stabilizer medications: carbamazepine, lamotrigine, lithium, and valproate products. Support your answers with five (5) evidence-based, peer-reviewed scholarly literature.
Note: APA style format will apply.
Your paper should include the following for each:
Proposed mechanism of action
Baseline assessment, laboratory considerations, and frequency of ongoing labs and assessments
Note: Discuss the importance of assessment and labs.
Special population considerations (birth assigned gender, age, other medical comorbidity considerations)
FDA approval indications
Typical dosing with discussion on therapeutic endpoints for psychiatric use
Major drug–drug interaction considerations
For each of these medications, please review potential drug–drug interactions listed below. Consider alternative dosing schedules, clinical implications for the drug interactions, additional patient education needed, any additional monitoring recommended, or collaboration needed with other medical professions (such as, primary care providers)
Lamotrigine + Valproate
Lamotrigine + Rifampin
Valproate + Estrogen containing birth control.
Valproate + Amitriptyline
Lithium + Furosemide
Lithium + Lisinopril
Carbamazepine + Lurasidone
Carbamazepine + Grapefruit juice
Discuss the ethical, legal, and social implications related to prescribing bipolar and other related mood-disorder diagnoses therapy for patients.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. For this Assignment, you are only required to include a title page. The Walden Writing Center Sample PaperLinks to an external site. provides an example of those required elements.
By Day 7 of Week 8
Submit by Day 7 of Week 8.
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 WK8Assgn_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_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
NURS_6630_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFor each of the four (4) traditional mood stabilizers, response includes proposed mechanism of action, baseline assessment, laboratory considerations, and frequency of ongoing. Discusses the importance of assessment and labs. Indication of special population considerations FDA approval. Discusses typical dosing with focus on therapeutic endpoints for psychiatric use of major drug-drug interaction considerations.
50 to >36.0 pts
Excellent
The response comprehensively and clearly describes all of the elements for each of the four (4) mood stabilizers.
36 to >24.0 pts
Good
The response clearly describes at least 75% the Assignment elements for three to four (3–4) mood stabilizers.
24 to >11.0 pts
Fair
The response describes at least 50% the Assignment elements for each mood stabilizer or only two (2) mood stabilizers discussed.
11 to >0 pts
Poor
The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that describe 25% or less of the Assignment elements for one (1) mood stabilizer, or some or all are missing.
50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReviews the potential drug–drug interactions of the following: *Lamotrigine + Valproate; *Lamotrigine + Rifampin; *Valproate + Estrogen containing birth control; *Valproate + Amitriptyline; *Lithium + Furosemide; *Lithium + Lisinopril; *Carbamazepine + Lurasidone; *Carbamazepine + Grapefruit juice. Consider alternative dosing schedules, clinical implications for the drug interactions, additional patient education needed, any additional monitoring recommended, or collaboration needed with other medical professionals.
20 to >18.0 pts
Excellent
Reviews all seven to eight (7-8) of the potential drug-drug interactions with clear and accurate Discussion of alternative dosing, patient education, monitoring recommendation, and when to collaborate.
18 to >15.0 pts
Good
Reviews five to six (5–6) of the potential drug-drug interactions with clear and accurate Discussion of alternative dosing, patient education, monitoring recommendation, and when to collaborate.
15 to >10.0 pts
Fair
Reviews three to four (3–4) of the potential drug-drug interactions with some Discussion and minor inaccuracies of alternative dosing, patient education, monitoring recommendation, and when to collaborate.
10 to >0 pts
Poor
Reviews up to eight (8) of the potential drug-drug interactions with vague and major inaccuracies noted in the Discussion, including alternative dosing, patient education, monitoring recommendation, and when to collaborate.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscusses ethical, legal, and social implications related to prescribing these medications to patients.
10 to >7.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly discusses ethical, legal and social implications. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the Discussion.
7 to >4.0 pts
Good
The response accurately discusses ethical, legal and social implications. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the Discussion.
4 to >1.0 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely discusses ethical, legal and social implications. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the Discussion.
1 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely discusses ethical, legal and social implications, or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the Discussion, or it is missing.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe paper is succinct and is 5–6 pages. Five (5) evidence-based, peer- reviewed scholarly references outside of course resources.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
The paper is succinct and is 5–6 pages. Five (5) evidence-based, peer- reviewed scholarly references outside of course resources
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
The paper is succinct and is 7–8 pages. Four (4) evidence-based, peer- reviewed scholarly references outside of course resources
3 to >1.0 pts
Fair
The paper is somewhat succinct and is 8–9 pages. Two or three (2 or 3) evidence-based, peer- reviewed scholarly references outside of course resources
1 to >0 pts
Poor
The paper is not succinct and is 10+ pages. One (1) or no evidence-based, peer- reviewed scholarly references outside of course resources
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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 is provided which delineates all required criteria.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the Assignment is stated yet is brief and not descriiptive.
3 to >1.0 pts
Fair
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.
1 to >0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains one or two grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3 to >1.0 pts
Fair
Contains three or four grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
1 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains five or more grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains one or two APA format errors.
3 to >1.0 pts
Fair
Contains three or four APA format errors.
1 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains five or more APA format errors.
5 pts
Total Points: 100