DO vs DNP - Advice / Real Life Experiences? Career Change

[XFuturePractitionerX]

Hi everyone,

I've been a longtime lurker ... finally posting. My big career leap idea started when I turned 30 (perhaps a few years before that, too) ... I had, for years, been in the business world and finally listened to that little voice in my head that said: "no, you belong in medicine!" Something I've always wanted to do, but somehow, things always shifted to finance.

Anyway, flash forward to present day, I'm 31 and I've already started steps to my career change. I'm currently enrolled in some prerequisite courses I never took in undergrad. I *think* I have a good idea of where I want to be and it mostly involves being in primary care or family medicine. But, given that there are SO many ways to get there, I remain TORN between DO and DNP. I'm hoping some of you with real life experiences may be able to fill in the gaps. I also want to NOT have this become a debate as to which is more "prestigious" because that's not my quest. Rather, I want to know which is more dynamic and fulfilling for the next 30 years of my career.

Here's my conundrum:

• DNP: Given that I don't have a nursing degree, (I have a BS in economics) I know there are accelerated options, such as MEPN or DEPN programs that will accept me as-is (with a non-BSN degree). The compelling thing here is, with this FNP/DNP route, I could accomplish a RN and DNP/FNP within 3 to 4 years. I could be practicing by 36. It leaves me with more years to enjoy the field, which really tempts me.
  • What I feel limits me here is (and this is all speculative, based on my readings, prove me wrong?) --- although comprehensive, the DNP will provide me with less authority. Authority meaning, less scope of practice. I see family medicine as an enormous opportunity to identify so many conditions and problems... I don't ever want to be in a position where, because of my training, I don't have a way to identify something that could potentially change the outlook of their health. I get the impression that FNPs/DNPs without years and years of real life experience (I.e., the very qualified RNs out there who have been practicing for YEARS who then become DNPs) don't get the same comprehensive training (some may argue, "over training") and I worry that it may hinder me. If I had been an RN for 15 years, I probably would feel a LOT MORE CONFIDENT on this topic. Anyone else feel this way who is non-traditional?
• DO: I took a lot of math classes during undergrad, but I didn't take physics or advanced (or even entry) chemistry/bio courses! I know I love those topics, as I excelled in high school, but the reality of having to go into a post-baccalaureate program is very real for me. This would be 2 years, followed by 4 years of DO school, followed my my residency. I could be 41/42 by the time I start practice. So, obviously, the time it will take for me limits me in this situation --- but what's most compelling is the fact that I will be better prepared and equipped. I also like the idea of having a less limited scope of practice. I do enjoy being a leader of a team as well, which I feel the DO track has more potential for.

Thanks for all your help here. Again, I mostly just would appreciate real life experiences, or opinions on this. I think I could be happy with both... my biggest concern is just my lack of healthcare experience going into this --- I want to be the best practitioner I can be.

~ Kelly

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[popopopop]

From my understanding, the DNP develops nursing leadership, not necessarily a clinical degree. If you want to practice medicine, you have to go to medical school. If you go the FNP route, you might be disappointed by how little clinical medicine you are taught and how much "nursing theory" you'll be learning. This is a common gripe about the NP certificate. You should go to the link below and read/search a bit. This topic and the DNP degree have been debated for several years.

Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) | allnurses

 

[femmegoblue]

Hi everyone,

I've been a longtime lurker ... finally posting. My big career leap idea started when I turned 30 (perhaps a few years before that, too) ... I had, for years, been in the business world and finally listened to that little voice in my head that said: "no, you belong in medicine!" Something I've always wanted to do, but somehow, things always shifted to finance.

Anyway, flash forward to present day, I'm 31 and I've already started steps to my career change. I'm currently enrolled in some prerequisite courses I never took in undergrad. I *think* I have a good idea of where I want to be and it mostly involves being in primary care or family medicine. But, given that there are SO many ways to get there, I remain TORN between DO and DNP. I'm hoping some of you with real life experiences may be able to fill in the gaps. I also want to NOT have this become a debate as to which is more "prestigious" because that's not my quest. Rather, I want to know which is more dynamic and fulfilling for the next 30 years of my career.

Here's my conundrum:

• DNP: Given that I don't have a nursing degree, (I have a BS in economics) I know there are accelerated options, such as MEPN or DEPN programs that will accept me as-is (with a non-BSN degree). The compelling thing here is, with this FNP/DNP route, I could accomplish a RN and DNP/FNP within 3 to 4 years. I could be practicing by 36. It leaves me with more years to enjoy the field, which really tempts me.
  • What I feel limits me here is (and this is all speculative, based on my readings, prove me wrong?) --- although comprehensive, the DNP will provide me with less authority. Authority meaning, less scope of practice. I see family medicine as an enormous opportunity to identify so many conditions and problems... I don't ever want to be in a position where, because of my training, I don't have a way to identify something that could potentially change the outlook of their health. I get the impression that FNPs/DNPs without years and years of real life experience (I.e., the very qualified RNs out there who have been practicing for YEARS who then become DNPs) don't get the same comprehensive training (some may argue, "over training") and I worry that it may hinder me. If I had been an RN for 15 years, I probably would feel a LOT MORE CONFIDENT on this topic. Anyone else feel this way who is non-traditional?
• DO: I took a lot of math classes during undergrad, but I didn't take physics or advanced (or even entry) chemistry/bio courses! I know I love those topics, as I excelled in high school, but the reality of having to go into a post-baccalaureate program is very real for me. This would be 2 years, followed by 4 years of DO school, followed my my residency. I could be 41/42 by the time I start practice. So, obviously, the time it will take for me limits me in this situation --- but what's most compelling is the fact that I will be better prepared and equipped. I also like the idea of having a less limited scope of practice. I do enjoy being a leader of a team as well, which I feel the DO track has more potential for.

Thanks for all your help here. Again, I mostly just would appreciate real life experiences, or opinions on this. I think I could be happy with both... my biggest concern is just my lack of healthcare experience going into this --- I want to be the best practitioner I can be.

~ Kelly

A girl on here a couple days ago posted a thread about feeling unfulfilled and not confident in practicing clinically nearing the end of her graduation from her FNP program, as was considering making the jump to medicine. I can't offer much advice on this particular issue, but let me find the thread and post it here. It might be helpful to message her to get some perspective from someone who was deciding between NP and DO, picked NP, and doesn't quite know how well it's working out for her.

If you want to enter primary care or FM, all you would need is the three year residency after medical school, during which you are still practicing medicine and making money. You don't need a formal post-bacc program, just get all those required courses in at a CC or a local school. Wouldn't you need to take 1-2 years to get them for direct entry FNP programs as well? When I was looking at those a few years ago they still had a hefty list of hard science pre reqs. So it's a difference of only three years to potentially be a whole lot happier. If you wanted to be a surgeon or something that would take forever, your age may play more of a role, but the difference for you isn't that much. Just my two cents!

Edit: Here is the thread I was talking about NP to DO?

Edit Again: Definitely look at that allnurses forum the user above posted, it is filled with content of people in DNP programs saying the same thing "I have done two semesters of a DNP program, just long enough to learn it will not teach me advanced clinical skills and it is focused on research and policy, as the other posters above stated."

 

[deleted480308]

Hi everyone,

I've been a longtime lurker ... finally posting. My big career leap idea started when I turned 30 (perhaps a few years before that, too) ... I had, for years, been in the business world and finally listened to that little voice in my head that said: "no, you belong in medicine!" Something I've always wanted to do, but somehow, things always shifted to finance.

Anyway, flash forward to present day, I'm 31 and I've already started steps to my career change. I'm currently enrolled in some prerequisite courses I never took in undergrad. I *think* I have a good idea of where I want to be and it mostly involves being in primary care or family medicine. But, given that there are SO many ways to get there, I remain TORN between DO and DNP. I'm hoping some of you with real life experiences may be able to fill in the gaps. I also want to NOT have this become a debate as to which is more "prestigious" because that's not my quest. Rather, I want to know which is more dynamic and fulfilling for the next 30 years of my career.

Here's my conundrum:

• DNP: Given that I don't have a nursing degree, (I have a BS in economics) I know there are accelerated options, such as MEPN or DEPN programs that will accept me as-is (with a non-BSN degree). The compelling thing here is, with this FNP/DNP route, I could accomplish a RN and DNP/FNP within 3 to 4 years. I could be practicing by 36. It leaves me with more years to enjoy the field, which really tempts me.
  • What I feel limits me here is (and this is all speculative, based on my readings, prove me wrong?) --- although comprehensive, the DNP will provide me with less authority. Authority meaning, less scope of practice. I see family medicine as an enormous opportunity to identify so many conditions and problems... I don't ever want to be in a position where, because of my training, I don't have a way to identify something that could potentially change the outlook of their health. I get the impression that FNPs/DNPs without years and years of real life experience (I.e., the very qualified RNs out there who have been practicing for YEARS who then become DNPs) don't get the same comprehensive training (some may argue, "over training") and I worry that it may hinder me. If I had been an RN for 15 years, I probably would feel a LOT MORE CONFIDENT on this topic. Anyone else feel this way who is non-traditional?
• DO: I took a lot of math classes during undergrad, but I didn't take physics or advanced (or even entry) chemistry/bio courses! I know I love those topics, as I excelled in high school, but the reality of having to go into a post-baccalaureate program is very real for me. This would be 2 years, followed by 4 years of DO school, followed my my residency. I could be 41/42 by the time I start practice. So, obviously, the time it will take for me limits me in this situation --- but what's most compelling is the fact that I will be better prepared and equipped. I also like the idea of having a less limited scope of practice. I do enjoy being a leader of a team as well, which I feel the DO track has more potential for.

Thanks for all your help here. Again, I mostly just would appreciate real life experiences, or opinions on this. I think I could be happy with both... my biggest concern is just my lack of healthcare experience going into this --- I want to be the best practitioner I can be.

~ Kelly

FNPs don't do family medicine, they are nurses with less training than physicians who have legislatively manipulated legal permission to advertise that they do family medicine. Physicians do family medicine

 

[FNPBC2MD]

I have a DNP after completing a 4 yr BSN to DNP program. The DNP is full of courses that you will never use including more nursing theory and plenty of leadership courses. The DNP is meant to take existing research and translate it into practice. I did complete over 1200 clinical hours. The requirement to be an NP is actually only 500 clinical hours. I practice in Palliative Care currently. I do not feel like our education is sufficient and that is why I plan to finish the pre-requisites and apply to med schools. There is a large knowledge deficit no matter what anyone tells you. I ask the Attending questions every single day as well as constantly look up information. Not all NP programs are equal either. My school had faculty physically evaluate us on each clinical site every semester. Some schools make phone calls. Some completely online programs don't check at all. I want to expand my knowledge base to provide the best care for my patients. I have 8 yrs of college already and should have chosen the physician route originally. If you are not even a nurse yet then I would suggest you think long and hard before sacrificing years. Do your own research.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[@Hazel-rah]

My story: I'm an RN. I got accepted to an FNP program last year and just couldn't do it, for same reasons already mentioned. I'm applying AMCAS now... we'll see...

You might be interested to look at the practice laws in your state. NPs have a wide range of practice rights in various states.

I recommend shadowing NPs and DOs and taking a few out to lunch. Good luck!

 

[Ho0v-man]

I have a lot of friends who went RN->NP. There's two programs in my area and I've seen the course work. It's a joke. Even compared to like gen chem 1 it's a joke. All online with open book, open notes and unproctored tests. One of the programs allows you to fail certain courses and still obtain your degree. The other one auto accepts anyone who had a 3.0 or higher in undergrad. I remember actually face palming IRL when one of my friends was freaking out about having to take a proctored final. "How am I supposed to find these answers without Google?!" Meanwhile I had a stress ulcer studying for my ochem final... Maybe other schools are better idk.

Your fastest route to mid level is PA. SDN gripes about them too, but their education is much more standardized than NP and the prereqs are the same as MD/DO in case you change your mind.

LECOM (the cheapest DO school) has a 3 year med school program geared toward primary care. So if you get into that then it's ~ 4 years to be a mid level vs. 5 years to be a doctor. You'd still fall behind financially due to that extra year and then residency, but you'd come out ahead a few years after residency and with better training.

 

[FNPBC2MD]

I have a lot of friends who went RN->NP. There's two programs in my area and I've seen the course work. It's a joke. Even compared to like gen chem 1 it's a joke. All online with open book, open notes and unproctored tests. One of the programs allows you to fail certain courses and still obtain your degree. The other one auto accepts anyone who had a 3.0 or higher in undergrad. I remember actually face palming IRL when one of my friends was freaking out about having to take a proctored final. "How am I supposed to find these answers without Google?!" Meanwhile I had a stress ulcer studying for my ochem final... Maybe other schools are better idk.

Your fastest route to mid level is PA. SDN gripes about them too, but their education is much more standardized than NP and the prereqs are the same as MD/DO in case you change your mind.

LECOM (the cheapest DO school) has a 3 year med school program geared toward primary care. So if you get into that then it's ~ 4 years to be a mid level vs. 5 years to be a doctor. You'd still fall behind financially due to that extra year and then residency, but you'd come out ahead a few years after residency and with better training.

My program required all exams/tests to be proctored but sadly there are plenty that do not. The degree mills like Walden etc have very low standards. Having now worked with some of the graduates from those programs, I can honestly tell you it is scary and reflects poorly on NPs in general. One of our faculty members advised us that it takes a year for an NP to be where a PA is upon graduation. PA programs in my opinion offer better education and produce graduates with more skills. The 1 hour on suturing that we had is not going to cut it in any capacity.

 

[Ho0v-man]

My program required all exams/tests to be proctored but sadly there are plenty that do not. The degree mills like Walden etc have very low standards. Having now worked with some of the graduates from those programs, I can honestly tell you it is scary and reflects poorly on NPs in general. One of our faculty members advised us that it takes a year for an NP to be where a PA is upon graduation. PA programs in my opinion offer better education and produce graduates with more skills. The 1 hour on suturing that we had is not going to cut it in any capacity.

Couldn't agree with you more on how it reflects on the profession. I know someone who's been working opt primary care for three years and a few months ago told me the harrowing story about how scared she was when she thought she going to have to suture for the first time.

It sucks because if you think who would make the best "physician extender" (or whatever the PC term should be) the obvious answer is smart experienced nurses. Sadly, the NP degree is not what it should be at all. Even the few schools that are "good" don't seem to make as standardized of a product as PA schools. One of the programs I'm complaining about is part of a rather prestigious MD school.

 

[Empress1971]

Couldn't agree with you more on how it reflects on the profession. I know someone who's been working opt primary care for three years and a few months ago told me the harrowing story about how scared she was when she thought she going to have to suture for the first time.

It sucks because if you think who would make the best "physician extender" (or whatever the PC term should be) the obvious answer is smart experienced nurses. Sadly, the NP degree is not what it should be at all. Even the few schools that are "good" don't seem to make as standardized of a product as PA schools. One of the programs I'm complaining about is part of a rather prestigious MD school.

Totally agree. One has to be very careful as to the route he/she takes.

 

[princekc]

My program required all exams/tests to be proctored but sadly there are plenty that do not. The degree mills like Walden etc have very low standards. Having now worked with some of the graduates from those programs, I can honestly tell you it is scary and reflects poorly on NPs in general. One of our faculty members advised us that it takes a year for an NP to be where a PA is upon graduation. PA programs in my opinion offer better education and produce graduates with more skills. The 1 hour on suturing that we had is not going to cut it in any capacity.

Interesting to hear this coming from an NP.

" One of our faculty members advised us that it takes a year for an NP to be where a PA is upon graduation"

^ Not necessary true.

MD/DO>>>PA>>>NP.

 

[XFuturePractitionerX]

Thank you all for your replies. I know this is primarily a physician / pre-physician forum, so I realize things are mostly skewed in favor of physicians and PAs here, but it truly helps getting that perspective (the reason why I posted here and read posts here). I think Hazel is probably correct in saying... shadow someone a DO *and* an NP. At this point, I think all the reading I've done here and elsewhere makes my thinking kind of cloudy. I read all the time the tension between NPs and MDs/DOs ... but then I hear there is also a hierarchy of MD/DO. I guess that's just how life works, people like to put things into categories. Ultimately, because I have a little bit of time to work with --- thank you again, Hazel ... I should just really listen/observe actual NPs/DOs before leaping forward. I'm going to make some calls Again, thank you everyone... all of these replies were helpful.

~ Kelly