NURS 6630N Week 7 Assignment
July 4, 2025NURS 6630N Week 9: Other Nervous System Special Considerations
July 4, 2025Week 8: Mood Stabilizer
This Assignment is designed to help you analyze the many considerations for prescribing mood stabilizers, as well as organizing the many different lab components to consider when prescribing to a patient.
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY Learning Resources/Readings
- Goldin, D. S. (2023). Fast facts for psychopharmacology for nurse practitioners. Springer Publishing.
- Stahl, S. M. (2021). Stahl’s essential psychopharmacology: Neuroscientific basis and practical applications (5th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
- Chapter 6, “Mood Disorders and the Neurotransmitter Networks Norepinephrine and y-Aminobutyric Acid (GABA)” (pp. pp. 244—282)
- American Psychiatric Association. (2010). Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with bipolar disorder. (2nd ed.). APA. https://psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/raw/sitewide/practice_guidelines/guidelines/bipolar.pdf
- Drugs.com. (2023). https://www.drugs.com/
- Note: Please use the following resource to check the most up-to-date box warnings, FDA approvals and indications, recommendations for follow-up evaluations, changes, etc.
- Approved Medications for Bipolar and Related Mood Disorders
Note: Utilize the following medication table to familiarize yourself with the medications aligned with the topics presented this week.
| Lithium | Valproate | Lamotrigine | Carbamazepine | Lurasidone |
| Aripiprazole | Cariprazine | Lumateperone | Quetiapine | Risperidone |
| Olanzapine | Ziprasidone | Asenapine |
To Prepare:
- Review the Required Learning Resources.
- Review indications and considerations for traditional mood stabilizer psychopharmacology treatments, including carbamazepine, lamotrigine, lithium, and valproate products.
The Assignment
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.
- 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)
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 Paper 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.
NURS_6630_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
| NURS_6630_Week8_Assignment_Rubric | ||
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome For 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 Outcome Reviews 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 Outcome Discusses 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 Outcome The 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 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 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 descriptive. 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 Outcome Written 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 Outcome Written Expression and Formatting: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 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
