A patient is prescribed a total of 15 mg of Lorazepam daily, divided into three doses. If each tablet is 1 mg, how many tablets are needed for each dose?

Choice A reason: Assessing progress toward outcomes evaluates care plan efficacy, measuring behavioral and psychological changes. Scientifically, addiction involves dopamine-driven reward pathways, and progress tracking ensures interventions address these, reducing relapse risk. This prioritizes measurable recovery goals, like sobriety, ensuring effective management of substance use disorder.

Choice B reason: Client feedback provides insight but isn’t the primary measure of efficacy. Addiction’s neurobiological basis, like dopamine dysregulation, requires objective outcome assessment. Scientifically, subjective feedback may be skewed by denial or cravings, making it less reliable than measurable progress for evaluating substance use disorder treatment effectiveness.

Choice C reason: Documentation ensures care continuity but doesn’t evaluate efficacy. Scientifically, while records track interventions, they don’t measure outcomes like reduced cravings or sobriety. Focusing solely on documentation misses addiction’s neurobiological impact, limiting assessment of the care plan’s success in addressing substance use disorder recovery.

Choice D reason: Medication adherence is important but secondary to outcome assessment. Scientifically, adherence supports dopamine regulation, but evaluating progress toward sobriety or reduced cravings is critical. Focusing only on medication misses broader psychological and behavioral changes, limiting the evaluation of the care plan’s overall effectiveness in addiction recovery.

Choice A reason: Documenting and advising to avoid arguments is insufficient without assessing abuse. Bruises may indicate trauma, elevating cortisol and stress responses. Scientifically, this approach fails to address potential abuse’s neurobiological impact, risking ongoing harm and delaying protective interventions for the elderly patient’s safety.

Choice B reason: Asking family about bruises risks alerting potential abusers, compromising safety. Scientifically, premature confrontation may increase stress, elevating cortisol and worsening trauma-related symptoms. A comprehensive assessment is needed first to confirm abuse, ensuring interventions address the patient’s neurobiological and psychological needs safely.

Choice C reason: Immediate social worker referral is premature without assessment. Bruises and arguments suggest abuse, impacting stress hormones. Scientifically, referral without evaluating the situation risks misaligned interventions, delaying protection and failing to address trauma’s neurobiological effects, like amygdala hyperactivity, critical for elderly patient safety.

Choice D reason: A comprehensive assessment identifies abuse causes and evaluates safety. Bruises may reflect trauma, elevating cortisol and amygdala activity. Scientifically, this guides targeted interventions, addressing neurobiological stress responses and ensuring protection. It prioritizes safety, supporting psychological and physical well-being in potential abuse cases.