Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

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.

To Access:

At each decision point stop to complete the following:

Decision #1

  • Which decision did you select?
  • Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
  • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
  • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #1 and the results of the decision. Why were they different?

Decision #2

  • Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
  • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
  • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #2 and the results of the decision. Why were they different?

Decision #3

  • Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
  • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
  • Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #3 and the results of the decision. Why were they different?

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.

Co-morbid Addiction (ETOH and Gambling) 53-year-old Puerto Rican Female

BACKGROUND

Mrs. Maria Perez is a 53 year old Puerto Rican female who presents to your office today due to a rather “embarrassing problem.”

SUBJECTIVE

Mrs. Perez admits that she has had “problems” with alcohol since her father died in her late teens. She reports that she has struggled with alcohol since her 20’s and has been involved with Alcoholics Anonymous “on and off” for the past 25 years. She states that for the past two years, she has been having more and more difficulty maintaining her sobriety since they opened the new “Rising Sun” casino near her home. Mrs. Perez states that she and a friend went to visit the new casino during their grand opening at which point she was “hooked.” She states that she gets “such a high” when she is gambling. While gambling, she “enjoys a drink or two” to help calm her during high-stakes games. She states that this often gives way to more drinking and more reckless gambling. She also reports that her cigarette smoking has increased over the past two years and she is concerned about the negative effects of the cigarette smoking on her health. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

She states that she attempts to abstain from drinking but that she gets such a “high” from the act of gambling that she needs a few drinks to “even out.” She also notices that when she drinks, she doesn’t smoke “as much” but enjoys smoking when she is playing at the slot machines. She also reports that she has gained weight from drinking so much- she currently weights 122 lbs., which represents a 7 lb. weight gain from her usual 115 lb. weight.

Mrs. Perez is quite concerned today because she has borrowed over $50,000 from her retirement account to pay off her gambling debts. She is very concerned because her husband does not know that she has spent this much money.

MENTAL STATUS EXAM

The client is a 53 year old Puerto Rican female who is alert, oriented to person, place, time, and event. She is dressed appropriately for the weather and time of year. Her speech is clear, coherent, and goal directed. Her eye contact is somewhat avoidant during the clinical interview. As you make eye contact with her, she looks away or looks down. She demonstrates no noteworthy mannerisms, gestures, or tics. Her self-reported mood is “sad.” Affect is appropriate to content of conversation & self-reported mood. She visual or auditory hallucinations, no delusional or paranoid thought processes are readily appreciated. Insight and judgment are grossly intact, however, impulse control is impaired. She is currently denying suicidal or homicidal ideation.

Diagnosis: Gambling disorder, alcohol use disorder

Decision Point One

Select what the PMHNP should do:

Co-morbid Addiction (ETOH and Gambling) 53-year-old Puerto Rican Female

Decision Point One

RESULTS OF DECISION POINT ONE

  • Client returns to clinic in four weeks
  • Mrs. Perez said that she felt “wonderful” as she has not “touched a drop” to drink since receiving the injection
  • Client reports that she has not been going to the casino, as frequently, but when she does go she “drops a bundle” (meaning, spends a lot of money gambling)
  • Client She is also still smoking, which has her concerned. She is also reporting some problems with anxiety, which also have her concerned. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

Decision Point Two

CLICK HERE TO ORDER Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

RESULTS OF DECISION POINT TWO
  • Client returns to clinic in four weeks
  • Client reports that the anxiety that she had been experiencing is gone
  • Client reports that she has met with the counselor, but did not really like her. She did start going to a local meeting gamblers anonymous. She stated that last week, for the first time, she spoke during the meeting. She reports feeling supported in this group

Decision Point Three

Guidance to Student

Although controversy exists in the literature regarding how long to maintain a client on Vivitrol, four weeks is probably too soon to consider discontinuation. The psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner should explore the issues that Mrs. Perez is having with her counselor. As you will learn in future courses, ruptures and the therapeutic alliance can result in clients stopping therapy. Clearly, if the client does not continue with therapy, the likelihood of the gambling problem spontaneously remitting is lower (than had the client continued to receive therapy). Recall that there are no FDA approved treatments for gambling addiction, and the mainstay of treatment for this disorder is counseling. Since Mrs. Perez reports good perceived support from the gamblers anonymous meetings, she should be encouraged to continue her participation with this group.

The PMHNP needs to discuss smoking cessation options with Mrs. Perez in order to address the totality of addictions, and to enhance her overall health. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

NURS 6630 Week 10: Therapy for Patients With Impulsive/Substance Use Disorders (SUD)

INTRODUCTION

Impulsivity and compulsivity have a wide range of clinical presentations and often overlap with many other psychiatric disorders. Some individuals act without forethought and have difficulty saying “no” to certain things, such as using illicit drugs or spending money, whereas other individuals engage in compulsive behaviors with undesirable consequences. In some cases, these impulsive and compulsive behaviors also fuel issues with addiction. To effectively assess and treat patients, you must understand how these disorders differ as well as how their symptoms impact patients and their families.

This week, as you examine therapies for individuals with impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction, you explore the assessment and treatment of patients with these disorders. You also consider ethical and legal implications of these therapies.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Students will:

  • Assess patient factors and history to develop personalized therapy plans for patients with impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction
  • Analyze factors that influence pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic processes in patients requiring therapy for impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction
  • Synthesize knowledge of providing care to patients presenting for impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction
  • Analyze ethical and legal implications related to prescribing therapy for patients with impulsivity, compulsivity, and addiction

Week 10 assignment 1 – ASSESSING AND TREATING PATIENTS WITH IMPULSIVITY, COMPULSIVITY, AND ADDICTION

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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid 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/

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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

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 formattingLinks 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.

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

Rubric

NURS_6630_Week10_Assignment1_Rubric Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction
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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction
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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction
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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction
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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction
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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction

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. Case Study: A Puerto Rican Woman With Comorbid Addiction
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

PreviousNext