NSB204 Assessment Task 2
NSB204 Assessment Task 2
NSB204
ASSESSMENT TASK 2
Assessment name: Case Study
Task description: This assignment aims to help you to begin to use your professional and clinical
judgement to think like nurses working in a mental health setting and/or in relation to
the mental health needs of people regardless of the setting.
Relevant to the person in your selected case scenario, your assignment will demonstrate your understanding of the following:
• Mental Status Examination (MSE)
• A clinical formulation using the biopsychosocial model
• Recognising and responding to the mental health needs of the identified person by identifying best practice nursing interventions.
• How to engage a person in a therapeutic relationship
NSB204 Assessment Task 2
What you need to do: Choose from one of the two case studies below. Each case study is a person who is experiencing difficulties related to a mental health disorder.
1. Case scenario one: Natasha
2. Case scenario two: Tom
Please follow the steps outlined below to answer this assignment question. 1. The Mental Status Examination [250 words +/- 10%] Using the mental state examination (MSE) format from your tutorial guide, complete
an MSE of the person from information provided in your selected case study.
Use health terms correctly (for instance, instead of “talks fast” use the correct term “pressure of speech”)
The opening sentence must clearly state your chosen case study.
In text references are not required for this section
2. Clinical Formulation [250 words +/- 10%]
Using information provided in your selected case study complete a clinical
formulation identifying relevant indicators using the 5Ps framework: presenting,
predisposing, precipitating, perpetuating, and protective factors. Include
biopsychosocial factors relevant to the person in the case study.
You may choose to present the clinical formulation in a table or in paragraph format,
ensure responses remain in sentence form.
In text references are not required for this section
3. The Therapeutic Relationship [300 words +/- 10%]
The therapeutic relationship is an important part of the nurse’s role. Explain why the
provision of a therapeutic relationship would be a priority for the nurse when working
with the person from your selected case study. Select one strategy you would use to
develop the therapeutic relationship and provide a rationale for use adapted to
respond to the specific needs of the client in the case. You may consider the recovery
model, person centred care or cultural safety in developing your response.
Academic paragraphs integrating evidence-based literature are expected.
4. Nursing care plan [700 words +/- 10%]
Develop a nursing plan of care for the individual in the case study. Base your plan of
care on information identified in your mental state examination, including your risk
assessment and information identified in your clinical formulation.
– List 2 priority problems in your nursing plan of care
– For each priority problem, identify and describe one evidence-based (non-
pharmacological) nursing intervention to address them. (Each intervention
must identify how it will address the priority care area within a recovery-
orientated framework).
– Identify what assessment data would indicate the interventions are positively
impacting the individual in the case study.
Academic paragraphs integrating evidence-based literature are expected.
Length: 1500 words +/- 10% (word length includes in-text referencing and excludes your reference list).
Estimated time to complete task:
40 hours
NSB204 Assessment Task 2
Weighting: 40%
How will I be assessed: +/- 7 point grading scale using a rubric
Due date: See Blackboard site for details of due date and submission requirements.
Presentation requirements:
Your assignment should be written in CiteWrite APA style and prepared as follows:
• Cover sheet with the assessment title, your name, student number, tutor
name (not necessarily the Unit Coordinator) and word count.
• Include a ‘footer’ on each page with your name, student number, unit code
and page number.
• 3 cm margins on all sides, double-spaced text
• Use single font, such as Times New Roman, Arial or Calibri; font size 12
• Referencing
o CiteWrite APA7 style referencing.
o It is a requirement that you include page numbers for all in-text
references. E.g. (Smith, 2020, p.34). (See
http://www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/)
o Note: markers will be checking references to see that you have
accurately represented the source. Inaccurate citations or falsifying
your references is academic misconduct and will be reported.
• Headings can be used to structure your assignment logically e.g. The mental
State Examination
• You do not need an introduction or a conclusion
• Be written in academic style using full sentences and paragraphs unless
stated otherwise
• References should be no older than 7 years
What you need to submit:
Submit one Word document via Turnitin that contains the following items:
• Copy of email if you have received an extension
• Cover sheet
• Responses to each question clearly identified
• Reference list at the end of your assignment
http://www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/
NSB204 Assessment Task 2
NSB204 ASSESSMENT TASK 2 RUBRIC
Learning Outcomes Assessed: 2, 3, 4, 5 Weighting: 40%
Criteria +/- 7 +/- 6 +/- 5 +/- 4 +/- 3 +/- 2 1
Demonstrates knowledge and understanding of MSE & Clinical Formulation
Weighting 30%
Completed the MSE effectively to present a comprehensive mental
status assessment of the consumer. Informative and
accurate clinical formulation that fully addressed all 5Ps.
Consistently used examples from the case study.
Demonstrated accurate application of correct
psychiatric terminology throughout
Completed the MSE effectively to present a comprehensive mental
status assessment of the consumer. Informative and
accurate clinical formulation that fully addressed all 5Ps.
Consistently used examples from the case study.
Demonstrated accurate application of correct
psychiatric terminology throughout
Completed the MSE effectively to present a mostly comprehensive
mental status assessment of the consumer.
Informative clinical formulation that mostly addressed all 5Ps.
Used examples from the case study.
Demonstrated mostly accurate application of correct psychiatric
terminology throughout
Completed the MSE to present a mental status assessment of the
consumer. Clinical formulation addressed some of the
5Ps. Used a few examples from the case study.
Demonstrated application of some
correct psychiatric terminology
Attempted to complete the MSE to present a mental status
assessment of the consumer; some important elements
missing. Clinical formulation addressed some of the
5Ps; some important elements missing. Used very few
examples from the case study.
Demonstrated application of occasional correct
psychiatric terminology
Minimal attempt to complete the MSE to present a mental status
assessment of the consumer; many important elements
missing. Clinical formulation addressed some of the
5Ps; many important elements missing. Minimal use of
examples from the case study.
Demonstrated minimal application of correct psychiatric terminology
Minimal to no attempt to complete the MSE to present
a mental status assessment of the consumer; many to
all important elements missing. Clinical formulation
did not address most or all the 5Ps; many important elements
missing. Minimal to no use of examples from the
case study. Did not demonstrate
application of correct psychiatric terminology
Demonstrates knowledge and understanding of strategy for development of therapeutic relationship
Weight 15%
Provides critical understanding of the
relevance and importance of the therapeutic
relationships as part of the nurse’s role. Your proposed nursing
strategy is highly appropriate and clearly articulates rationale for
implementation for the case study. Comprehensively
supported with current evidence-based literature that is valid,
authoritative, and relevant
Provides mostly in- depth understanding of
the relevance and importance of the therapeutic relationship
as part of the nurse’s role. Your proposed nursing
strategy is appropriate and articulates rationale for implementation for
the case study. Almost always supported by high
quality evidence-based literature that is valid, authoritative, and
relevant.
Provides understanding of the relevance and
importance of the therapeutic relationship as part of the nurse’s
role. Your proposed nursing strategy is mostly
appropriate and discusses rationale for implementation for the
case study. Mostly supported by high quality evidence-
based literature that is valid, authoritative, and relevant.
Provides some understanding of the
relevance and importance of the therapeutic relationship
as part of the nurse’s role. Your proposed nursing
strategy is not highly appropriate and rationale for
implementation for the case study not strongly identified.
Limited support from high quality evidence-
based literature that is valid, authoritative, and relevant
Provides minimal understanding of the
relevance and importance of the therapeutic relationship
as part of the nurse’s role. Your proposed nursing
strategy is not appropriate and minimal rationale discussed for
implementation for the case study. Very limited support
from high quality evidence-based literature that was valid,
authoritative, and relevant.
Very limited to no understanding of the
relevance and importance of the therapeutic relationship
as part of the nurse’s role. Your proposed nursing
strategy is not appropriate and no rational provided for
implementation for the case study.
Very limited to no support from high quality evidence-based
literature that was valid, authoritative, and relevant.
No indication of understanding of the
therapeutic relationship as part of the nurse’s role.
No nursing strategy proposed and / or no rational discussed
for implementation for the case study.
Not supported with high quality evidence-based
literature that was valid, authoritative, and relevant.
NSB204 Assessment Task 2
Person-centred Nursing Care
Weighting 35%
Clearly and accurately identified two (2) of the highest priority
problems. Each problem is addressed with a highly
relevant, comprehensive nursing intervention. Both
interventions integrate the recovery-model framework and are
informed and justified by high quality evidence-based
literature and practice. Evaluation of each intervention is clearly
outlined and well suited to the intervention.
Clearly identified two (2) priority problems. Each problem is
addressed with a relevant nursing intervention. Both
interventions integrate the recovery-model framework and are
informed and justified by high quality evidence-based
literature and practice. Evaluation of each intervention is outlined
and well suited to the intervention.
Identified two (2) priority problems. Each problem is
addressed with a somewhat relevant nursing intervention.
Both interventions integrate some elements of the
recovery-model framework and are mostly informed and
justified by high quality evidence-based literature and practice.
Evaluation of each intervention is outlined and mostly suited to the
intervention.
Identified two (2) priority problems. Each or one problem is addressed
with a nursing intervention that is not highly relevant to the
problem. Interventions attempt to integrate some elements of the
recovery-model framework and are mostly informed and
justified by high quality evidence-based literature and practice.
Evaluation of each intervention is attempted and mostly
suited to the intervention.
Incorrect identification of one or two priority problems. One or both
problems not addressed with appropriate nursing interventions. Minimal
integration of elements of the recovery-model framework into the
interventions and are not informed or justified with high quality
evidence-based literature and practice. Evaluation of each
intervention is attempted but is not appropriate to the
intervention.
Identified priority problem(s) not appropriate to the client.
One or both problems not addressed with appropriate nursing
interventions. Minimal to no integration of elements of the
recovery-model framework into the interventions and are
not informed or justified with high quality evidence-based
literature and practice. Evaluation of each intervention is not
appropriate to the intervention.
Either no problems are identified or they are not appropriate
to the client. Appropriate nursing interventions not
identified. No integration of any elements of the
recovery-model framework into the interventions.
Interventions not supported with high quality evidence-
based literature and practice. No evaluation of
interventions identified
Communicates in academic writing, incorporating expected information literacy standards Weighting 20%
Logically structured,
clearly expressed and professionally presented case study response that adhered
fully to the task requirements. Consistently used
professional, non- discriminatory language.
Frequently correct spelling and grammar. Consistently and
accurately cited sources & applied QUT APA style of referencing.
Kept to word limit.
Met, for the most part,
the presentation requirements. Expressed your ideas concisely and fluently
with correct spelling and grammar. Almost always used
professional non- discriminatory language.
Almost always cited sources correctly & applied QUT APA style
of referencing. Kept to word limit.
Met several aspects of
the presentation requirements. Usually expressed your ideas clearly with
correct spelling and grammar. Mostly used
professional non- discriminatory language.
Mostly cited sources correctly and applied QUT APA style of
referencing. Kept to word limit
Met a few aspects of
the presentation requirements. Expressed your ideas clearly.
Sometimes used professional non- discriminatory
language Occasionally cited sources and sometimes
correctly applied QUT APA style of referencing.
Kept to word limit.
Met few aspects of the
presentation requirements. Ideas were often not expressed clearly.
Examples identified of non-professional and discriminatory
language. Rarely cited sources or correctly applied QUT
APA style of referencing. Was under or over the
word limit.
Many errors in
presentation requirements. Ideas were not expressed clearly.
Many examples identified of non- professional and
discriminatory language. Rarely cited sources or correctly
applied QUT APA style of referencing. Was significantly under
or over the required word limit.
Has not
communicated in academic writing incorporating expected academic
integrity standards &/or information literacy standards
Satisfactorily complied with the Academic Integrity standards outlined in the MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity.
https://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/C/C_05_03.jsp