| Course | NR 606 Diagnosis & Management in Psychiatric-Mental Health II Practicum |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Comorbidity case write-up |
| Length | About 1,100 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN, Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner (PMHNP) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 606 Week 3
Comorbidity Case Write-Up: D.L., 46, With Major Depression and Newly Diagnosed Moderate Obstructive Sleep Apnea, One Problem Carrying Two Names and One Plan
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 606: Diagnosis & Management in Psychiatric-Mental Health II Practicum
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Comorbidity Case Write-Up: D.L., 46, With Major Depression and Newly Diagnosed Moderate Obstructive Sleep Apnea, One Problem Carrying Two Names and One Plan
One Patient, Two Names
D.L. now carries two diagnoses: major depressive disorder, recurrent, in partial response on sertraline 150 mg, and obstructive sleep apnea, moderate, with an apnea-hypopnea index of 28 events an hour on a home sleep study.
They are not two separate problems. They share the same symptoms in D.L.: unrefreshing sleep, daytime exhaustion and poor concentration. They also affect each other's treatment.
How the Second One Surfaced
It surfaced because the depression did not fully respond. When the PHQ-9 was read item by item, the symptoms that had not moved were sleep, energy and concentration. The partner's report of snoring and pauses in breathing, a body mass index of 33 and blood pressure of 142/90 together gave a STOP-Bang total of 6 (Chung et al., 2016), which prompted a home study. Without the partial response analysis, D.L. would likely have had the sertraline increased or a second antidepressant added.
The Interaction, in a Sentence
Untreated sleep apnea keeps producing the fatigue, poor concentration and low mood that are counted as depression, while several common next steps for depression, sedating agents and medicines that cause weight gain, would make the sleep apnea worse.
Order of Operations
Two orders were possible.
Order A: treat the sleep apnea first with continuous positive airway pressure, hold the antidepressant at its current dose with consistent daily dosing, and reassess the depression after four to six weeks of good airway pressure use.
Order B: change the antidepressant now, by increasing sertraline or adding a second agent, while starting airway pressure at the same time.
I chose order A. If both are changed at once and D.L. improves, nobody will know which change worked, and if D.L. later stops using the airway pressure machine, nobody will know whether the depression treatment is enough on its own. Depressive symptoms improve with sleep apnea treatment in many patients; in one study, depressive symptoms fell substantially after a period of airway pressure treatment (Edwards et al., 2015). Giving that a fair chance first makes the next depression decision cleaner.
The cost of order A is time: four to six more weeks with residual symptoms. That cost is acceptable because D.L.'s mood has improved, suicidal thinking has resolved and the weekend dosing gap has just been closed, so the antidepressant trial itself is only now becoming adequate.
One Plan, Not Two
Airway pressure: auto-adjusting positive airway pressure, started this week through the sleep clinic, which fits the mask and phones D.L. after the first seven nights.
Antidepressant: sertraline 150 mg every morning at home, every day, with a phone reminder.
No sedating additions: no trazodone, mirtazapine or antipsychotic augmentation during this interval, since all can worsen sleep apnea or weight.
Alcohol: no alcohol within three hours of bedtime, since alcohol relaxes the upper airway.
Weight: referral to the practice dietitian; a 5% weight loss can reduce sleep apnea severity.
Blood pressure: recheck at the next visit; primary care informed.
What This Means for Prescribing Later
If the depression needs another step at eight weeks, the choice will be constrained by the sleep apnea. Trazodone and mirtazapine, often used for depression with poor sleep, sedate and can increase weight. Antipsychotic augmentation can increase weight. Bupropion does not cause weight gain and may help energy, but it can raise blood pressure, which is already borderline. Writing these constraints down now means the next decision will start from them rather than rediscover them.
One Monitoring Schedule
At four weeks and again at eight weeks: PHQ-9 item by item, with the sleep, energy and concentration items tracked separately from mood and interest; airway pressure use from the machine's data card, aiming for at least four hours a night on 70% of nights; Epworth Sleepiness Scale; weight; blood pressure; adherence count for sertraline.
One Review Point
At eight weeks, if airway pressure use is good and the sleep, energy and concentration items have fallen while interest has not, the residual is depression and the next decision is about the antidepressant. If all items have fallen, the sleep apnea was doing much of the work. If airway pressure use is poor, the first job is helping D.L. use it.
Why Sequencing Matters for What Comes Next
If the depression later needs another step, the evidence from STAR*D suggests that later steps produce lower remission rates than earlier ones (Rush et al., 2006). Making each step count, by making sure it is judged fairly, matters more for a patient who may need several. Treating the sleep apnea first means that, if an antidepressant change is needed at eight weeks, it will be judged against a clean baseline.
How the Sleep Study Was Arranged
A home study was chosen over a laboratory study because D.L. had no signs of other sleep disorders and was worried about sleeping away from home. The study recorded breathing, oxygen levels and effort over two nights. The sleep physician reviewed it within ten days and recommended auto-adjusting airway pressure, which avoids the need for a second night to set the pressure.
How Adherence to Airway Pressure Will Be Supported
Many patients stop using airway pressure in the first weeks. The sleep clinic will call at one week and download the machine data at four weeks. D.L.'s partner, who reported the snoring, has agreed to help with the mask at night. If D.L. struggles with the mask, the clinic can try a different style before giving up.
Why Not Treat the Sleep Apnea as the Whole Explanation
It would be tidy to say that sleep apnea explains the partial response entirely. But interest has not fully returned, and loss of interest is less typical of sleep apnea than of depression. The plan watches both, and the review point is designed to show how much each was contributing.
What D.L. Was Told
That sleep apnea and depression are feeding each other, that the breathing machine comes first so that the effect of each treatment can be seen clearly and that the antidepressant stays the same for now. D.L. asked whether the machine would be needed forever. I said that depends on how weight and sleep change, and that the sleep clinic would advise.
References
Chung, F., Abdullah, H. R., & Liao, P. (2016). STOP-Bang Questionnaire: A practical approach to screen for obstructive sleep apnea. Chest, 149(3), 631-638. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.15-0903
Edwards, C., Mukherjee, S., Simpson, L., Palmer, L. J., Almeida, O. P., & Hillman, D. R. (2015). Depressive symptoms before and after treatment of obstructive sleep apnea in men and women. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 11(9), 1029-1038. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.5020
Rush, A. J., Trivedi, M. H., Wisniewski, S. R., Nierenberg, A. A., Stewart, J. W., Warden, D., Niederehe, G., Thase, M. E., Lavori, P. W., Lebowitz, B. D., McGrath, P. J., Rosenbaum, J. F., Sackeim, H. A., Kupfer, D. J., Luther, J., & Fava, M. (2006). Acute and longer-term outcomes in depressed outpatients requiring one or several treatment steps: A STAR*D report. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163(11), 1905-1917. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.11.1905
The Chamberlain NR 606 Week 3 instructions
The Week 3 write-up treats one problem carrying two names. Early on, state the interaction in a plain sentence: what treating the first condition does to the second, and what leaving the second untreated does to the first. Let that sentence govern the rest. Defend the order of operations against the alternative order. Write one plan, with one regimen, one monitoring schedule and one review point. Explain how the second condition surfaced. Most rubrics mark down a stapled paper with two separate management sections, a sequencing decision made silently and the second diagnosis used as a complete explanation for everything.
How the NR 606 Week 3 example is put together
The sample names the two diagnoses with the sleep study result and shows how the partial response analysis brought the second to light. The interaction is stated in one sentence: untreated sleep apnea keeps producing symptoms counted as depression, while common next steps for depression would worsen the apnea. Two orders are compared and airway treatment first is chosen to keep each effect visible. One plan covers airway pressure, daily sertraline, no sedating additions, alcohol timing, weight and blood pressure. One schedule and one review point follow, with sections on later prescribing constraints, support for machine use, the sleep study and why sleep apnea is not the whole explanation. Margin notes mark the interaction sentence and the single plan.
Where the points sit in the NR 606 Week 3 rubric
The dominant loss is the stapled paper, with two management sections and nothing between them; this write-up has one plan. A sequencing decision made silently costs the next share, and here two orders are compared openly. Using the second diagnosis as the full explanation loses a row, while a section explains why interest may still be depressive. Missing a single review point loses marks, and one is set with three possible outcomes. Stating the interaction in one sentence earns the synthesis criterion. Planning support for the airway treatment shows the sequence depends on it being used. Writing down the prescribing constraints the apnea creates prepares the next decision. Explaining how the sleep study was chosen shows the workup was proportionate.
NR 606 Week 3 help from the desk
Weak NR 606 Week 3 write-ups manage each diagnosis in its own section. Others choose an order of treatment without saying why. Many assume the newly found condition explains everything. Monitoring is often split into two schedules. Few say how the second condition was discovered. Write the interaction as one sentence, compare the two possible orders, choose one and build a single plan with one schedule and one review point. Keep watching for symptoms the second condition does not explain. If your patient's comorbidity differs, share both diagnoses, and a single-plan sample can be written. Plan support for whichever treatment comes first, so the sequence holds.
Get a NR 606 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 3 case and instructions from your classroom, and a custom example is written to your material and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. If your section supplies a template for the write-up, include it, since the sequencing argument has to be fitted into whatever headings you were given.
More NR 606 papers and PMHNP samples
- NR 606 Week 1: Inherited Patient Post
- NR 606 Week 2: Partial Response Analysis
- NR 606 Week 4: Plan Revision Note
- NR 606 Week 5: Case Analysis
- NR 606 Week 6: Augmentation Rationale
- NR 606 Week 7: Progress Note Series
- NR 606 Week 8: Complex Case Paper
- NR 605 Week 3: Treatment Plan Write-Up
- NR 548 Week 3: Mental Status Write-Up
- NR 546 Week 3: Medication Selection Rationale
- NR 547 Week 3: Diagnostic Formulation
NR 606 Week 3 questions, answered
What if the two conditions do not obviously interact?
They interact through the patient even when the pharmacology stays quiet. Shared time, shared attention, shared adherence burden and shared cost all count, and a paper can argue interaction on those grounds honestly. What does not work is asserting a drug interaction that has no basis just to satisfy the assignment, since the section on it will read as invented and a reader in this field will notice.
Which condition should be treated first?
There is no general answer, which is exactly why it is graded. The usual argument runs from destabilisation: whichever condition is making the other unmanageable tends to move first, and safety concerns outrank comfort. What matters for marks is that the write-up chooses, defends the choice against the other order, and states what it accepts getting worse while the chosen order plays out.
How much of the earlier history belongs in the paper?
Enough to show what has already been tried and what it produced, since this course never starts from a clean slate. Long chronologies crowd out the analysis and lose marks by displacement. A good rule is that history earns space only when it constrains the current decision, and anything that does not constrain it goes into a line or leaves the paper.
Where can I find a free NR 606 Week 3 sample paper?
The full comorbidity write-up treating depression and obstructive sleep apnea as one problem is on this page.
Why is the airway treated first in the NR 606 Week 3 write-up?
Changing both at once would hide which treatment helped, and airway pressure may itself lift fatigue and concentration that were counted as depression.