NURS 6630 WEEK 2 Discussion: Foundational Neuroscience

NURS 6630 WEEK 2 Discussion: Foundational Neuroscience

Discussion: Foundational Neuroscience

As a psychiatric nurse practitioner, it is essential for you to have a strong background in foundational neuroscience. In order to diagnose and treat patients, you must not only understand the pathophysiology of psychiatric disorders but also how medications for these disorders impact the central nervous system. These concepts of foundational neuroscience can be challenging to understand.

Therefore, this Discussion is designed to encourage you to think through these concepts, develop a rationale for your thinking, and deepen your understanding by interacting with your colleagues.

For this Discussion, review the Learning Resources and reflect on the concepts of foundational neuroscience as they might apply to your role as the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner in prescribing medications for patients.

ORDER AN ORIGINAL DISCUSSION HERE

By Day 3 of Week 2

Post a response to each of the following:

• Explain the agonist-to-antagonist spectrum of action of psychopharmacologic agents, including how partial and inverse agonist functionality may impact the efficacy of psychopharmacologic treatments.
• Compare and contrast the actions of g couple proteins and ion gated channels.
• Explain how the role of epigenetics may contribute to pharmacologic action.
• Explain how this information may impact the way you prescribe medications to patients. Include a specific example of a situation or case with a patient in which the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner must be aware of the medication’s action.

Learning Resources

Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

Camprodon, J. A., & Roffman, J. L. (2016). Psychiatric neuroscience: Incorporating pathophysiology into clinical case formulation. In T. A. Stern, M. Favo, T. E. Wilens, & J. F. Rosenbaum. (Eds.), Massachusetts General Hospital psychopharmacology and neurotherapeutics (pp. 1–19). Elsevier.

 

ORDER AN ORIGINAL DISCUSSION HERE

Sample Discussion Solution: NURS 6630 WEEK 2 Foundational Neuroscience

Agonist-to-antagonist spectrum of action of psychopharmacologic agents

A drug that stimulates the activation of the receptors of the brain thereby maximizing the drug’s effect is referred to as an agonist. The subsequent drug associated with the blocking of the receptors is referred to as an antagonist. The partial antagonist is characterized by reduced activation of the brain’s receptors unlike the agonist. Some examples of partial agonists, antagonist and agonist respectively include Buprenorphine, Naloxone and Heroine. The three drugs can be used appropriately as remedies when an overdose of either of them is experienced. For instance, recommendation of naloxone can be done with an aim of reducing the binding of excessive heroin with receptors when an overdose of heroin is experienced (Wager et al., 2017). Partial agonists such as Buprenorphine can also be used in treatment of excessive heroin intake in the body.

Compare and contrast the actions of g couple proteins and ion gated channels

The two main categories of post-synaptic receptors include the ion gated channels and the g couple proteins. The ion gated channels are made up of domains that play a role in the binding of neurotransmitters as well as forming the ion channel. The post-synaptic receptor’s second category is the g couple proteins. The g couple proteins depend on the multiple metabolic steps with the help of the lower messenger systems. Whenever the process of neurotransmitters binding occurs to the metabotropic transmitters, the activation of the g proteins also occurs (Yudin & Rohacs, 2019). The receptors and the g proteins also separate after which direct interactions with the ion channel happens.

Epigenetics and pharmacological action

            Epigenetics encompasses all the processes engaged when altering the functionality of genes without making any changes within the codes of RNA and DNA (Goronzy et al., 2018). Genetic changes can also be inherited from parents to offspring. The functionality of a medication towards an individual can therefore be tested through epigenetics. A specific drug’s efficacy may also change with time when a gene that has an altered genetic functionality is affected. For example, when the process of dopamine formation in an individual is altered, it might result to drug addiction within an individual. The binding of the receptor may also accelerate the drug addiction when dopamine formation is altered.

Best practice

            Healthcare providers should always gain a thorough information concerning the patients’ health problems before making any relevant therapeutic recommendations. The family and medical history of a patient should be thoroughly analyzed by the responsible healthcare provider before considering any medication recommendation. At my current place of work, we put more emphasis on the family medication history and genetic testing. The efficacy of most psychotropics have however failed to respond to some genetic disorders. As a result of epigenetics, the knowledge of the previously used medications on close relatives helps most patients succeed in these medications. Healthcare providers should therefore acknowledge epigenetics during their role as prescribers.

 

References

Goronzy, J. J., Hu, B., Kim, C., Jadhav, R. R., & Weyand, C. M. (2018). Epigenetics of T cell

aging. Journal of leukocyte biology, 104(4), 691-

699. https://doi.org/10.1002/JLB.1RI0418-160R

Wager, T. T., Chappie, T., Horton, D., Chandrasekaran, R. Y., Samas, B., Dunn-Sims, E. R., …

& Mead, A. N. (2017). Dopamine D3/D2 receptor antagonist PF-4363467 attenuates

opioid drug-seeking behavior without concomitant D2 side effects. ACS chemical

            neuroscience, 8(1), 165-177. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.6b00297

Yudin, Y., & Rohacs, T. (2019). The G‐protein‐biased agents PZM21 and TRV130 are partial

agonists of μ‐opioid receptor‐mediated signalling to ion channels. British journal of

            pharmacology, 176(17), 3110-3125.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.14702

 

Rubric Detail

Name: NURS_6630_Week2_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent

Point range: 90–100 Good

Point range: 80–89 Fair

Point range: 70–79 Poor

Point range: 0–69
Main Posting:

Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s).

Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources. 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the Discussion question(s).

Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible references. 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the Discussion question(s).

One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Post is cited with fewer than two credible references. 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the Discussion question(s).

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible references.
Main Posting:

Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors. 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Posting:

Timely and full participation 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date. 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Posts main Discussion by due date.

Meets requirements for full participation. 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main Discussion by due date. 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.
First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth. 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
First Response:
Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited. 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
First Response:
Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date. 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.
Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth. 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
Second Response:
Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited. 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Second Response:
Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date. 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date. 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6630_Week2_Discussion_Rubric