Decision 1

What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence

and references to the Learning Resources.

By pinpointing that Carrie has Early Onset Schizophrenia an appropriate treatment may

be formulated from now on. Without proper medical intervention, the patient may suffer from

other degenerative symptoms. Thompson and his colleagues (2001) have discovered that the

progression of Early Onset Schizophrenia significantly accelerates gray matter loss. As a result,

the brain's control over muscle movement and sensory organs become weakened over time.

Despite her young age, Carrie may have difficulty in performing regular movements such as

walking and feeding herself. The proper and early diagnosis of the patient's condition will create

more opportunities for medical success.

Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #1 and the results of

the Decision. Why were they different?

There were no significant differences between the decision and the actual results. The

diagnosis of Early Onset Schizophrenia seems to be accurate. Carrie manifests the major and

minor symptoms of the said condition. With the help of this diagnosis, improper treatments and

prescriptions will be avoided. And since the patient is a thirteen-year-old minor, utmost

sensitivity and caution must at all times be observed.

Decision 3
Why did you select this Decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the

Learning Resources.

Lurasidone is an antipsychotic medication commonly prescribed for patients with

schizophrenia. For Carrie's case, the medicine is to be taken orally at 40mg a day. For child

patients like Carrie, the prescribed dosage will be potent enough without endangering her liver.

According to a study conducted by Goldman and his co-researchers (2017), the 40mg dosage of

Lurasidone contributed to meaningful symptom improvements among the subjects within six

weeks. This medication does not appear to have any dangerous side effects. Lurasidone, after

being taken for one hundred four weeks straight, does not seem to trigger any form of cognitive

impairment (Harvey, Goldman, Tocco, Deng, Cucchiaro, & Loebel, 2018). Aside from

schizophrenia, Lurasidone appears to be effective in other conditions as well. In another study,

Lurasidone can be used in treating bipolar disorder and other forms of dementia (Channing,

Mitchell, & Cortese, 2018).

What were you hoping to achieve by making this Decision? Support your response with evidence

and references to the Learning Resources.

The main function of Lurasidone is the balancing of dopamine and serotonin levels. In

effect, this would help patients remain calm and grounded. For Carrie, this would reduce her

delusion tendencies. Also, it will help her contain herself and become more sociable. As found

out by Owen (2011), Lurasidone also has chemical agents that help relieve restlessness and keep

the patients less erratic. All-in-all, the main goal of giving Carrie the 40mg dosage of Lurasidone

daily is to tone down the symptoms of schizophrenia. In the long run, this would help the patient

recognize if she is already starting to experience delusions. With a better grasp of her senses,
Carrie may be able to live a free and independent life. Despite living with the condition, she will

be able to remain functional and productive.

Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #3 and the results of

the decision. Why were they different? Also, include how ethical considerations might impact

your treatment plan and communication with clients and their families.

The expectations and actual results align. There were no significant anomalies that may

cause an alarm to the patient's health and recovery. The Lurasidone treatment is going on

smoothly.

As for the ethical considerations, it is always important to secure the patient's consent. In

the case of Carrie, since she is a minor, her parents' must agree. In the record, it shows that her

parents are against medicinal intervention. To deal with this problem, it is important that the

affected parties be properly informed of the proposed treatment plan. Studies and clinical proofs

must be shown to establish credibility. At all times, no patient must be forced into undergoing a

treatment plan that they are uncomfortable with. The patients and their respective family

members may be encouraged but never threatened, tricked, or intimidated.

References

Channing, J., Mitchell, M., & Cortese, S. (2018). Lurasidone in children and adolescents:

Systematic review and case report. Journal of Child and Adolescent

Psychopharmacology, 28(7), 428-436.

Goldman, R., Loebel, A., Cucchiaro, J., Deng, L., & Findling, R.L. (2017). Efficacy and safety

of Lurasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia: A 6-week, randomized placebo-

controlled study. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 27(6), 516-525.

Harvey, P.D., Goldman, R., Tocco, M., Deng, L., Cucchiaro, J., & Loebel, A. (2018). Effect of

Lurasidone on cognition in adolescents with schizophrenia: Interim analysis of a 2-year

open-label extension study. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 44(1), 353.

Owen, R.T. (2011). Lurasidone: A new treatment option for schizophrenia. Drugs of Today,

47(11), 807-816.

Thompson, P.M., Vidal, C., Giedd, J.N., Gochman, P., Blumenthal, J., Nicolson, R., Toga, A.W.,

& Rapoport, J.L. (2001). Mapping adolescent brain change reveals dynamic wave of

accelerated gray matter loss in very early-onset schizophrenia. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences, 98(20), 11650-11655.