- Joined
- Sep 24, 2014
- Messages
- 6,004
- Reaction score
- 4,360
I wasn’t even aware of this issue until I stopped by a CVS MinuteClinic the other day
Translation: California thinks that PCP physicians are making too much money. Therefore, it's time to strip the practice rights of PCP physicians, increase the supply of PCPs, and put those PCP physicians in their place.
This is why medical students are reluctantly to go into primary care in the first place. Why go through 12 years of training to be paid the same as a NP, as this article is pushing for? Yes, I know that there is a pay difference bet NPs and PCP physicians at this moment.
Honestly, the best way to combat this stupidity is for our leadership to increase the awareness between the quality of care bet a physician, NP, and PA.
I like how the author says "NPs can prescribe medicine, so they can do everything a doctor can."
Thanks, that's all I needed to know
I am pleasantly surprised by the comments to that article. They seem to be at least 50% of relevant comments saying "NPs are not doctors and are not adequately qualified to run independent practices".
LOL. Yeah. Like, administering a flu shot is the same as diagnosing complex medical conditions, and you can prescribe the same pills, so it's all the same, right?
To be fair to the midlevels, the.most common model of NP supervision I have seen is where the NP sees a full primary care clinic and the supervising physician never checks in. In many cases the supervising physician isn't even in the same building. If my 'supervisor' was taking half of my paycheck and providing nothing in return I would be demanding the right for independent practice as well.
We know what supervision looks like, we do it with residents. If we want to stop NPs from becoming independent, we need to start by policing ourselves. Define MD oversight legally (you see take sign out on every patient seen by an NP before the patient leaves the clinic, just like you would do with an Intern) and start taking board certifications and licenses from physicians who don't comply.
There is an argument that NPs need supervision. There is an argument that they are adequately trained and don't. There shouldn't be an argument that we should be allowed to take money for supervising midlevels without actually doing it.
Most physicians have periodic reviews of a selection of their charts, if they work for any kind of a large organization. I have 20 peer reviews each quarter. That's not supervision. I would argue that, if you think it's safe for a patient to leave clinic after seeing an NP without at least getting sign out on the NPs management then you are saying the NP is safe to practice independently.I whole-heartedly agree with that thought. I think some review of charts in some manner should be mandatory. I think the proposed solution in bold is a bit over the top, however. Unfortunately there ARE greedy doctors out there who want the paycheck (and are thus willing to accept the liability of the 'supervising physician') without actually doing any additional work for it.
Article said:“We’re a good answer to the need for cost-effective and high-quality care,” she told me.
My wife's PPD from CVS was like $20 and took her a total of 20 minutes. So for basic nursing tasks I think it might be...I normally avoid these threads like the plague, but this:
I'm sorry, but getting a Z-pac from a "Doc in the Box" at CVS for the common cold does not meet the definition of "cost-effective" or "high-quality"...
If you knew which ones were simple in advance you wouldn't need a doctor at all. I will have 1-2 serious patients per day in clinic, but who it is it's always a surprise.There are a lot of health issues that just don't require a physician's insight. Young healthy people with colds/flu/scrapes/headaches/etc don't need to see a doctor. This happens to probably 50-75% of PCP visits.
Vestiges of journalist integrity are long gone. Anything published is merely non-citation opinion drivel like this, the "business columnist" readily admits he knows nothing on the topic yet is advocating for something he can't comprehend. I can see him now, obnoxiously taking up space at a coffee shop, googling "how many years is np school" then writing in his notes "well trained."
This was one of the most poorly researched articles I've ever read in a major newspaper. LA Times has really become a dumpster fire of a newspaper with all the cuts. Not many major players left that still write with journalistic integrity.
Actual quotes from the article:
"I wasn’t even aware of this issue until I stopped by a CVS MinuteClinic the other day to get my annual flu shot" (no experience, no expertise on topic)
"Many medical issues don’t require the expertise of a physician." (No citation, dangerous platitude)
There are a lot of health issues that just don't require a physician's insight. Young healthy people with colds/flu/scrapes/headaches/etc don't need to see a doctor. This happens to probably 50-75% of PCP visits.
Not only that, but he doesn't even talk to a physician or a physician professional organization to get a counterpoint.
Sent from my SM-G930V using SDN mobile
Ok... so we let NPs open their own clinics. But once they realize they have nobody to turn to and they risk THEIR licenses by opening up their own clinics... I'm sure less will be reluctant to do so and still prefer the safety net provided by a physician.
They'll just do a ton of referring
Until lawmakers learn how to evaluate the quality of a study, the garbage "equivalency" studies that NPs keep putting out will only support their position.
There are a lot of health issues that just don't require a physician's insight. Young healthy people with colds/flu/scrapes/headaches/etc don't need to see a doctor. This happens to probably 50-75% of PCP visits.
If you knew which ones were simple in advance you wouldn't need a doctor at all. I will have 1-2 serious patients per day in clinic, but who it is it's always a surprise.
It's a biased puff piece probably paid for by the AANP.
I’ve said this before and will say this again - the outrage on physicians’ end rarely goes beyond SDN comments. Everyone is mostly on the same page (in theory), but nobody wants to do the leg work and take a public stand on the issue.
I’ve read some of NP “literature/peer reviewed evidence”. It has a lot of holes that can easily be exploited to show how biased the results and conclusions are. The problem is that, aside from just figuring out what’s best for the patient, there are no incentives for anyone to dig deeper and publish anything on the subject. Those of you with muscle, why not at least try to set aside some funding for this type of work?
Problem is, an "easy" case is easy until it isn't, if you can't recognize something complex, rare, or simply outside typical protocol, the patient will suffer.
Besides educating, you can tell others that they have the power to refuse to be seen by NPs, especially since you're probably getting billed the same either way.
I don't want to beat the dead horse, but I am still a lowly pre-med who is trying to figure things out. During undergrad I volunteered in underserved areas with kids and would LOVE to pursue pediatrics, but issues like these scare the crap out of me. Is it better to specialize and hope the NP encroachment doesn't affect pediatrics or suck it up and enjoy life? This is a subject I am uneducated on and was hoping for some help! Thank you guys.
Ok... so we let NPs open their own clinics. But once they realize they have nobody to turn to and they risk THEIR licenses by opening up their own clinics... I'm sure less will be reluctant to do so and still prefer the safety net provided by a physician.
They'll just do a ton of referring
Both patients AND the doctors will eventually get fed up.. no?
Patients will want to see a "real" doctor who can give them an answer instead of constantly being referred around.
If I was the doctor that was constantly being referred, I would eventually tell my patient they did not have to waste another copay to come see me if their nurse practitioner was not able to deal with their matters.
NPs don't want the liability. Eventually patients will get fed up.
Aka we're screwed.
Yeah but then you have to pay the consultant and the NP, driving down their biggest advantage in cost savings.
I dont know, the sick patients may get fed up, but the easy patients wont. Then the NP will just make the most money w least liability. If all your patients are coming in for check up, or a sore throat, or a minor headache, you can get thru them fast, and still bill well. You get paid more seeing 3 healthier patients in 45 min than 1 sick patient.
Yea but once it happens, its highly unlikely we go back and take away their privileges. The AANA will just blame doctors for driving up cost. They'll point to the doctors salaries or something
Both patients AND the doctors will eventually get fed up.. no?
Patients will want to see a "real" doctor who can give them an answer instead of constantly being referred around.
If I was the doctor that was constantly being referred, I would eventually tell my patient they did not have to waste another copay to come see me if their nurse practitioner was not able to deal with their matters.
NPs don't want the liability. Eventually patients will get fed up.
That is what this thread is about. They are requesting to have their own licenses and run their own practices without physician supervision.If they are so mad about physician salaries, tell them to put up their own licenses on the line and stop being babysat by physicians.
.
Each specialist organization has its own lobbyists, almost all physicians belong to their specialty organizations. The AMA also claims to be a lobbyist on behalf of physicians but they're more of lobby on behalf of liberal healthcare ideals than they are for actual physician salaries, a relatively small percentage of physicians belong to the AMA. Finally there are also other lobbyist/advocacy groups that physicians ascribe to.This may be a stupid question, but who is our representative for physicians? ACGME? AAMC? I've no idea. Or does it depend on specialty?
.
That is what this thread is about. They are requesting to have their own licenses and run their own practices without physician supervision.
There are a lot of health issues that just don't require a physician's insight. Young healthy people with colds/flu/scrapes/headaches/etc don't need to see a doctor. This happens to probably 50-75% of PCP visits.
I'm not sure if you guys have heard of this guy, ZDoggMD, but he has an interesting take on things. It is a 20 minute long video, but I figured I would give it a share. Oh! I'm not sure if this violates the TOS, if so, my apologies/take it down.
"Nurse Practitioners are DUMB AND I HATE THEM"
There are good and bad on both sides.
They'll just do a ton of referring
If we still try our own marketing campaign... we look like we are not willing to be apart of the team.