How do we stop nurse practitioners?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Medscape: Medscape Access

Links are showing rather weird today. Clicky the link my NP frand.

Frand? Did you mean to say "friend" or "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory"? Lol if it was the later then nice use of a legal term in our legal debat...and congratulations, you gave me an article stating the obvious. Ofcourse your not going to just dogmatically follow guidelines especially where clinical judgement should be exercised cautiously, however I would rather "be damned if I do" for following guidelines and standards of care. Thats exactly what my step-father's late wife's oncologist did, and thats why he got off clean for not doing a pet scan when he should have used clinical judgement. He followed "standards of care". Interestingly, it was her family physician that ordered the pet scan and she was lit up. She did not stand a chance at that point.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Medicine is medicine. And nursing is nursing. And that is the problem. This is the foundation of my essential rant on this topic: Nursing IS NOT medicine.

Physicians are trained differently because their focus is fundamentally different in some subtle ways that I think very few appreciate unless they have actively studied both disciplines. Physicians, how ever "holistic," are essentially focused on disease processes and their diagnosis and treatment... and further, they are focused to some extend on theory.

Nursing focuses on application and on the "human response to disease." It is NOT just watered down or simplified medicine. That is to say, at its core, nursing is about how the disease affects the patient and also the implementation of treatment plans. This is sometimes treated with less respect by physicians who imagine that their role is more indispensable, when the truth is that most intellectually honest physicians will readily admit that they may not actually know HOW to implement all of the orders they write.

Oh, sure, they might have an idea of how to place an IV or safely administer a drug or get someone off a bed pan without causing a skin tear or to perform a safe pivot transfer from a wheelchair to a bed or all the steps needed to arrange a transfer to another facility, etc, etc. But they don't always know the nuances that go into actually performing all the hands on care that their patients need. Those who think that they can learn all that it takes to be a nurse and to surpass the nurses in that specialized body of knowledge in the first few weeks of their internship are just as arrogant and just as wrong as the RNs who think they can learn to be a physician in a 20 month online NP program.

Nursing is an important discipline in the provision of care to patients. Medicine is another, separate discipline. And here is the thing... in theory, NPs never really study medicine. They study "advanced nursing." Advanced Practice Nurses, like CRNAs and NPs get a crash course in a bricolage conglomeration of nursing dressed up as medicine and medicine dressed up as nursing, which ends up being weaker than either discipline on its own.

In nursing school and throughout practice as a regular old RN, nurses are restricted from using medical diagnoses and have to instead use a ridiculous and convoluted system of diagnoses in order to avoid stepping on medicine's toes. Nursing notes can read like gobbledygook if you don't know the lingo, and physicians wonder why nurses write bizarre things like "Alteration of elimination, related to dietary intolerance, as evidenced by liquid malodorous stool, abdominal pain, and excessive flatus subsequent to consumption of dairy products," when everyone knows what they really mean is "lactose-intolerance induced diarrhea." If you read a formal nursing care plan, you will see example after example of these nursing diagnoses. It isn't because nurses are being deliberately obtuse. They just aren't permitted to say "The patient has diarrhea" because that is making a medical diagnosis, which they are not, as nurses, qualified to do.

Then you take that same person who learned all their clinical skills in that setting, and give them a year or two (*maybe* 3) of didactic and often no further required clinical education, a large part of which will be devoted, not to learning medicine, but to learning a slightly more detailed version of what they already knew, but letting them use medical diagnoses that make it sound like they are now practicing medicine.

They aren't. They weren't taught it. And that is the essential argument that must be made and made convincingly every time this argument comes up. Nurses don't perform well on tests of medical practice because they are practitioners of nursing.

If this point were fully appreciated, there would be no further question about how to cope with midlevel encroachment. No one who needs medical attention would be satisfied with nursing care alone... any more than they would get better if the physicians rounded on them and wrote orders, but without nurses available to actually provide the necessary care.

Both disciplines are harmed by role confusion. And most importantly, patients are terribly harmed by role confusion. There is absolutely a role for nurse practitioners on a physician-lead health care team. With physician supervision available, they can provide exceptional care... but unless they have attended medical school, they are not qualified to be physicians or to practice medicine. Full stop.

Eloquently stated but detached from reality. NPs, CRNAs, and CNMs do learn and practice medicine (& nursing) and are doing a pretty darn good job of it too. Learn to work with them, not against them.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Oh since we're citing Medscape (not such a great thing all the time) here is a link for you that actually states the opposite of your claims that NPs are the next gold rush of med mal lawsuits.

www.medscape.com/viewarticle/775746_2
Primary care provider role exposes nurse practitioners to malpractice risks - Business Insurance

I'll counter with an industry paper.

The trouble with malpractice on the NP side of things is independent practice is too new and the tail on lawsuits is too long to know where things will settle out. The idea that they'll have a market that is much different than the physicians that they practice at the same level as is ridiculous, they're not magically immune to medmal.
 
Primary care provider role exposes nurse practitioners to malpractice risks - Business Insurance

I'll counter with an industry paper.

The trouble with malpractice on the NP side of things is independent practice is too new and the tail on lawsuits is too long to know where things will settle out. The idea that they'll have a market that is much different than the physicians that they practice at the same level as is ridiculous, they're not magically immune to medmal.

If anything this article helps my argument. While its true, NPs are no longer tertiary providers and are being sued now just the same (as physicians), only 2% of NPs have been named as primary defendants in med mal suits. And as I stated earlier, this article states that the way to mitigate lawsuits is to follow guidelines (in direct contrast to what you were arguing earlier). No matter, I actually don't entirely disagree with you. I too do think if you have an independent NP they should be held to the same standard as its only fair. Last point, I found this statement made in the article to be interesting:

(Carol Burkhart) states “...they (GPs) were hardly ever sued, but as primary care doctors started to treat more extensively and refer less to specialists, you started to see more diagnostic and medication error claims.”

Why did physicians start referring out less? Why do they take more responsibility that puts them at greater risk? NPs (for better or for worse) refer out more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Has anyone else noticed a NP is really no more qualified than a 4th year medical student? The questions some of them ask their supervising physician is terrifying. I guess that is what happens when nurses pose as physicians and try to practice medicine after completing their online RN to BSN followed by BSN to NP followed by NP to DNP.
 
Has anyone else noticed a NP is really no more qualified than a 4th year medical student? The questions some of them ask their supervising physician is terrifying. I guess that is what happens when nurses pose as physicians and try to practice medicine after completing their online RN to BSN followed by BSN to NP followed by NP to DNP.
I actually believe a 4th year med student has more knowledge than an NP. The strong science background of a med student leads to them being able to formulate more differential diagnoses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I actually believe a 4th year med student has more knowledge than an NP. The strong science background of a med student leads to them being able to formulate more differential diagnoses.

I agree that you guys are great diagnosticians (most of the time). Being physicians and all, you are expected to be. But as NPs, we actually do possess a very strong masters degree and DNP. To me its impressive that there are some NPs that I have met with (just) an MSN that outshine some physicians in many respects. For myself, I've met physicians that didnt know or think of certain differentials that I thought of. Like I had a really good physician not know what donovanosis was. He just automatically assumed that this patient we had that had genital lesions had HSV, chlamydia, syphillis or something more common. But when I joked and said it could potentially be donovanosis (which is very rare but possible) he shrugged it off and didnt know what I was talking about.
 
Last edited:
Has anyone else noticed a NP is really no more qualified than a 4th year medical student? The questions some of them ask their supervising physician is terrifying. I guess that is what happens when nurses pose as physicians and try to practice medicine after completing their online RN to BSN followed by BSN to NP followed by NP to DNP.

No one is (or should be) posing as a physician. When lay people say, "oh, so your like a doctor?" I say "no, I'm a first rate nurse". I'm very clear about my title to my patients and just let them know that our roles in various respects are similar.
Now regarding your other comment, there are varying degrees of skilled professionals in any line of work. Its all about how much you put into it (and for NPs especially, the quality of schooling that we get). I have found for my self that I often times (in my last two semesters of NP school) surpassing my NP and even physician preceptors in various respects...though I'd never tell them that. But of course they have experience on their side, though this doesn't always equate to an advantage in clinical practice.
 
No one is (or should be) posing as a physician. When lay people say, "oh, so your like a doctor?" I say "no, I'm a first rate nurse". I'm very clear about my title to my patients and just let them know that our roles in various respects are similar.
Now regarding your other comment, there are varying degrees of skilled professionals in any line of work. Its all about how much you put into it (and for NPs especially, the quality of schooling that we get). I have found for my self that I often times (in my last two semesters of NP school) surpassing my NP and even physician preceptors in various respects...though I'd never tell them that. But of course they have experience on their side, though this doesn't always equate to an advantage in clinical practice.

the problem with nurses is it is terribly standardized. All the way from nursing school acceptance, to DNP acceptance, to training. You have many nurses who became nurses because it is a well paid job with a lot of job security, and available jobs in the market. The nursing shortage is so high, the barrier to entry is horrendously low. I dont know many nurses but even the few i do know, nursing was not their first choice. They became nurses because their original career was a dead end and they found out about all the benefits of being a nurse. Very few people will be like, my fashion career isn't taking off, let me pay 300k for post bacc and med school, and spend 3-7 years working 80 hr weeks to practice as MD. But I also know of people who graduated from Ivy leagues/equivalent like many MDs w high GPA but became nurses because it was truly their interest. So in clinical practice, i can easily tell, DAILY, of the huge difference in abilities/qualities among our nurses. We have plenty of nurses who only want to clock in, not work hard, clock out on the dot. I just had a patient complain to me recently about a nurse who left her in the MIDDLE of an epidural placement while was in labor w contractions, because her shift is up, and had to wait for the next nurse to come in. Can you imagine if a MD did that? Needle in your back and MD just goes, C YA, wait for the next MD.
Same can be said of NPs/CRNAs and their huge difference in qualities
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Licensed nurse practitioners have full legal liability and prescriptive authority in all fifty states? That's the only thing that matters, it is the horse that pulls the quality cart.

Independence is independence, and they do not want to be referred to as physician extenders, so respect their autonomy. Pretty obvious solution to original question is to not "collaborate", train, hire or accept their referrals. Wouldn't the same apply to their counterparts in other specialties?
 
the problem with nurses is it is terribly standardized. All the way from nursing school acceptance, to DNP acceptance, to training. You have many nurses who became nurses because it is a well paid job with a lot of job security, and available jobs in the market. The nursing shortage is so high, the barrier to entry is horrendously low...

Actually the opposite is true. Lack of standardization in nursing is arguably its main problem. Nursing schools (good ones) and jobs are highly competitive and often times people are waiting maybe a year or even more to get in. That is why "nurse mil" schools are successful right now and churning out students left and right, leaving students once they graduate, high and dry to only find out its not so easy to get that cush PACU job, or highly saught out ICU job they all want. These students also find out that the school they went to was not accredited and so because of their stupidity or shortsightedness, end up not being able to transfer credits and advance. The shortage your describing is actually with skilled nurses in specialized areas. The industry is dynamic, so this can change especially with many nurses going back to school or changing professions all together..

In regards to your other comments, there are good professionals and bad professionals in all areas. Everything you said about nurses (going into it for the wrong reasons and not in it for the love of their profession) can be said equally about physicians and any other profession for that matter. I've met some pretty horrible physicians.
 
Last edited:
liscensed nurse practitioners have full legal liability and prescriptive authority in all fifty states. That's the only thing that matters, it is the horse that pulls the quality cart. Independence is independence, and they do not want to be referred to as physician extenders, so respect their autonomy. Pretty obvious solution to original question is to not "collaborate", train, hire or accept their referrals. Wouldn't the same apply to their counterparts in other specialties?

Licensed nurse practitioners have full legal liability and prescriptive authority in all fifty states?

No.

That's the only thing that matters, it is the horse that pulls the quality cart.

Its about access to care. Whether you want to admit it or not, nursing has stepped up and is helping with this.

Independence is independence, and they do not want to be referred to as physician extenders, so respect their autonomy.

Legally, we are "midlevels" so I dont really care to much about semantics. Thats just me though. My respect was gained by my great work and drive, not necessarily by my title. Independent practice is important for nursing because the objective is increasing access to healthcare services for our patients. This cant be done with unnecessary restrictions by the medical profession. So far we are succeeding in improving this issue.

Pretty obvious solution to original question is to not "collaborate", train, hire or accept their referrals.

Not so black and white actually. If you want to be successful as a physician, you will absolutely need to learn to collaborate with nurses at the very least. If you are a specialist and do not accept referrals from NPs then you clearly dont care about the population you serve. You will probably struggle if you dont change your outlook.

Wouldn't the same apply to their counterparts in other specialties?

What do you mean here? Please be more clear if you want to debate.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
Its about access to care. Whether you want to admit it or not, nursing has stepped up and is helping with this.
...
Independent practice is important for nursing because the objective is increasing access to healthcare services for our patients. This cant be done with unnecessary restrictions by the medical profession. So far we are succeeding in improving this issue.
...
Not so black and white actually. If you want to be successful as a physician, you will absolutely need to learn to collaborate with nurses at the very least. If you are a specialist and do not accept referrals from NPs then you clearly dont care about the population you serve. You will probably struggle if you dont change your outlook.

Access to care is a political buzzword. A lot of these arguments tend to lead into this superficial belief that medicine can be reduced to supply and demand economics and that credentials don't matter if someone can do the job for cheaper, or provide a service in demand. I assure you, everyone on this forum takes credentials seriously. Legal responsibility is the most important thing that separates mid-level from physician.

I'm not so sure the world stops turning without nursing practitioners. For instance, many NPs convey this idea of "collaboration without being a physician". The legal and literal translation is to "practice medicine without ultimate legal clinical responsibility". What physicians see is someone cutting corners for credentials. Yes it's true that more physicians are needed to meet rising demand for services. So why didn't you go to medical school to satisfy demand?

You think NPs will be treated like traditional nurses, when in reality you're going to be held to the standards of a physician when you take full legal ownership of your patients. On the other hand, most physicians already treat nurses well because they understand their medical role and scope of practice. What is the scope of practice of an NP? All of a sudden nursing = medicine. Huh. What's dumber than someone practicing medicine without going to medical school? That resembles fraud. But the nurses see it to govern themselves deterministically. They want their cake and they get to eat it. This is why students are warming up to PAs who can be governed under AMA. At least PAs understand credentials.

Overall, NPs are not the only midlevels who consistently speak out for power. CRNAs have been trying unsuccessfully for half a century, but in the last twenty years they have grown at an unsustainable pace. They also seem to believe that medicine does not work without them.
 
Last edited:
FNP_Blix, you seem to be a thoughtful and dedicated NP so I will pose a question here if you don't mind. The part about NP's that I find confusing is their sometimes practicing medicine independently without ever having received medical training. I understand NP's providing specialized care under the direction of a physician such as the NP who administered my bladder cancer treatments after the urologic oncologist prescribed what I was to receive and when. What I don't understand is how an NP can do an annual physical for example. The NP can run through a checklist of things to look for but doesn't have the many years of training that the physician has to assess what all the clues might mean. The NP can choose to consult with a physician but if if working independently is not required to if I understand this correctly. Or is something like an annual physical deemed more a nursing procedure rather than a medical procedure?
 
Access to care is a political buzzword. A lot of these arguments tend to lead into this superficial belief that medicine can be reduced to supply and demand economics and that credentials don't matter if someone can do the job for cheaper, or provide a service in demand. I assure you, everyone on this forum takes credentials seriously. Legal responsibility is the most important thing that separates mid-level from physician.

I'm not so sure the world stops turning without nursing practitioners. For instance, many NPs convey this idea of "collaboration without being a physician". The legal and literal translation is to "practice medicine without ultimate legal clinical responsibility". What physicians see is someone cutting corners for credentials. Yes it's true that more physicians are needed to meet rising demand for services. So why didn't you go to medical school to satisfy demand?

You think NPs will be treated like traditional nurses, when in reality you're going to be held to the standards of a physician when you take full legal ownership of your patients. On the other hand, most physicians already treat nurses well because they understand their medical role and scope of practice. What is the scope of practice of an NP? All of a sudden nursing = medicine. Huh. What's dumber than someone practicing medicine without going to medical school? That resembles fraud. But the nurses see it to govern themselves deterministically. They want their cake and they get to eat it. This is why students are warming up to PAs who can be governed under AMA. At least PAs understand credentials.

Overall, NPs are not the only midlevels who consistently speak out for power. CRNAs have been trying unsuccessfully for half a century, but in the last twenty years they have grown at an unsustainable pace. They also seem to believe that medicine does not work without them.

A lot of your own opinion injected into this reply, so I will try to wade through that..The sole reason ARNPs exist is because of physician shortage and to alleviate the population's barriers to receiving quality and cost effective healthcare. Not really a political buzz word, but the truth. With the introduction of the ACA, this shortage became more apparent with millions of more people becoming insured, but with no medical providers. This prompted organizations like RWJF and IOM to call for NPs (and all healthcare professionals) to practice at the top of their licenses (among other things) to help mitigate this issue. While I agree, we need more physicians, not everyone will do that, and frankly is unrealistic to expect that of all NPs. We need providers now and waiting 12 years for the next wave of med students is not something the public is willing to do.. This leads me to your question as to why I didn't go to medical school. I didn't go because I chose nursing and love this profession. One day, if ARNPs are no longer needed, then I will happily step down from my role to be a full time ICU nurse again. I don't mind that and would am content with that latitude and flexibility that nursing affords me. There are plenty of other areas I can work in without practicing medicine. Nevertheless, in the mean time, I will continue to practice as an NP and serve my community.

Regarding your other point about responsibilities and litigation, you are really just misinformed or just don't know what you're talking about. NPs that are independent practitioners (in states where this is allowed) do purchase their own insurance and do in fact get sued. They take full responsibility for their actions as medical providers. And I personally am not against taking on the legal responsibility of being independent if that is something I choose to do. So no, I do not "think NPs will be treated like traditional nurses."

And to address some of your last statements regarding NPs practicing medicine and fraudulently doing so - that is simply not the case. Not much to say about that accept that I simply disagree. PAs are looked at favorably because by virtue, they are assistants to the physician. Many medical students and physicians (though with full fledged physicians it's actually much less because they wise up and learn to work with NPs) are threatened by NPs and CRNAs because they have possession of their own professional fates and are not under the thumb of the medical profession..

Lastly, while the medical profession would likely survive without NPs, the healthcare system would be crippled if tomorrow there were laws that banned NPs from practicing. Their contributions are large, and why you don't see that is beyond me. In this hypothetical scenario, It would take years for recovery to happen and millions of people would no longer have medical providers.
 
Last edited:
FNP_Blix, you seem to be a thoughtful and dedicated NP so I will pose a question here if you don't mind. The part about NP's that I find confusing is their sometimes practicing medicine independently without ever having received medical training. I understand NP's providing specialized care under the direction of a physician such as the NP who administered my bladder cancer treatments after the urologic oncologist prescribed what I was to receive and when. What I don't understand is how an NP can do an annual physical for example. The NP can run through a checklist of things to look for but doesn't have the many years of training that the physician has to assess what all the clues might mean. The NP can choose to consult with a physician but if if working independently is not required to if I understand this correctly. Or is something like an annual physical deemed more a nursing procedure rather than a medical procedure?

We actually do receive adequate training (using the nursing model) to practice advanced practice nursing which involves the discipline of medicine. Our training does not resemble physician training because NP education is population based (not specialty based). NPs will never go on to become surgeons (unless that NP goes to med school) and so the breadth of medical training is obviously not the same. However, with that said, as an FNP, I am trained in advanced pathophysiology, pharmacology, advanced assessment, health promotion; primary care of the older adult, adult, women, and pediatrics; and various other subjects. The other courses nurses take (like theory and research) actually do serve a great purpose. For example, large hospital systems adopt nursing care models developed by nurse theorist to improve their delivery models (e.g., Inova Health System integrates Jean Watson's nursing theory of "Human Caring" to improve how it delivers care...It is a magnet hospital)...What I think physicians don't understand is that nursing is actually a really broad discipline. We are like wardens of the healthcare system so our education has to encompass various disciplines, with medicine being one of those disciplines that we learn.

And to answer your question about physicals and independent practice - nurses that practice "independently" must still refer just as any GP would. There is no difference in that respect. And regarding physicals, I can tell you that I was trained to ID abnormalities and formulate a list of differentials based on my findings in the history and physical - not just blindly go through the procedure.
 
Last edited:
FNP,

I mean, just by virtue of being alive and listening for the past ten years I know everything you just told me. I voted for Obama and at the time believed in his vision and push for more primary care physicians. Since then I have learned more about the intricate business of medicine. I feel like your views are immature and misguided, if not idealistic like a teenager's. The government doesn't care about the indigent, and resists paying for everyone's health. Half of our population doesn't understand how to differentiate care from a physician versus anyone else. Anyone with a white coat can masquerade, and all of healthcare is starting to be blended together under the heading "providers". But nurses are going to save us? Without socialized or funded healthcare the battle is already lost. Things are going to get more expensive in spite of all that help. People will also die, and not because it takes so long to create physicians. Our government doesn't care.

You seem convinced that the thumb of the medical profession is some damnable bureaucratic force preventing you from saving lives. I'm just reminding you, 100 years ago anyone could put up a sign and with word of mouth alone sell their medical services. So what's preventing any entity with enough lobbying power from convincing our government that they're legally qualified and credentialed? NPs have just proven it's possible. In a contradictory manner, NPs have literally established themselves as medical professionals outside of the medical profession. They branded themselves as outsiders. For the sake of patients, I hope they can find a way to get good training.
 
Last edited:
I mean, just by virtue of being alive and listening for the past ten years I know everything you just told me. I voted for Obama and at the time believed in his vision and push for more primary care physicians. Since then I have learned more about the intricate business if medicine. I feel like your views are immature and misguided, if not idealistic like a teenager's. The government doesn't care about the indigent, and resists paying for everyone's health. Half of our population doesn't understand how to differentiate care from a physician versus anyone else. Anyone with a white coat can masquerade. But nurses are going to save us? Without socialized or funded healthcare the battle is already lost. Things are going to get more expensive in spite of all that help. People will also die, and not because it takes so long to create physicians. Our government doesn't care.

You seem convinced that the thumb of the medical profession is some damnable bureaucratic force preventing you from saving lives. 100 years ago anyone could put up a sign and with word of mouth alone sell their medical services. So what's preventing any entity with enough lobbying power from convincing our government that they're legally qualified and credentialed? NPs have just proven it's possible. In a contradictory manner, NPs have literally established themselves as medical professionals outside of the medical profession. They branded themselves as outsiders.

Kbeitz, I am not immature or misguided. But I am an optimist - I have to be. Nurse's are true advocates for their patients, and I believe nurses will continue to have a major part in how healthcare is shaped and delivered. I believe that NPs are for the betterment of society and have made some really great contributions. Contrary to your beliefs, I don't think nurses are the only answer to alleviating our healthcare systems ailments (though we are definitely going to be a large part of that answer), but will require all disciplines to be on board. Nursing's positive influence in healthcare is already a reality and whether you like it or not will continue to shape our system. There is no undoing this. You act like NPs are some big threat, hacks trying to hide behind white coats and harm the public maliciously. I really do not think this is the case at all. That is why there are checks, balances, and laws in place to deter or eliminate unsafe practitioners (whether physicians or NPs).

I have to ask, why are NPs such a concern to you anyways? Don't you know your own truth? For Christ's sake you are a physician! No one will ever usurp you..At the end of the day, physicians will still be the heavy hitters in the medical arena. It will be physicians that continue to find cures to diseases and discover new and ground breaking ways to perform surgeries. Nurses are more involved in healthcare delivery, the prevention of disease, etc. among other things. We are on the same team and if anything, we want the full support of the medical profession and to continue the partnership we have enjoyed for so many years.

Nurses and doctors have traditionally been at each others throats but we will eventually find common ground and resolve this bickering between two great professions.
 
Last edited:
Why are NPs such a concern to you anyways?

I add it to the list of signs of a seriously failing and fragmented healthcare profession. Financial incentives are everywhere. Everyone wants respect, but nobody wants to respect a $300k price tag and 7-10 years of graduate training. I debate CRNAs and NPs who demand respect and demand to be part of the team, with a balanced work-home life and six figure income...and who then turn around and call physicians lazy and point out that greedy physicians can be replaced while nurses are irreplaceable and cheapen healthcare. Would I recognize these people if i were to work with them? Do we need them in healthcare?
 
I add it to the list of signs of a seriously failing and fragmented healthcare profession. Financial incentives are everywhere. Everyone wants respect, but nobody wants to respect a $300k price tag and 7-10 years of graduate training. I debate CRNAs and NPs who demand respect and demand to be part of the team, with a balanced work-home life and six figure income...and who then turn around and call physicians lazy and point out that greedy physicians can be replaced while nurses are irreplaceable and cheapen healthcare. Would I recognize these people if i were to work with them? Do we need them in healthcare?

NPs are used in several other countries and common wealth countries. Are their systems cheap and failing too? The answer is no. They are trying to do what we are doing here in the states. Increase access to healthcare and provide a solution to the lack of physicians.
And guess what? I do agree with you! Physician training should be better funded by the government. I wish it was actually because then, I would go to medical school. I'm still young, and I know I could do it. But financially, it's too big of a risk. And yes, there is a lot of animosity between nurses and physicians. I don't think blaming who was the jerk first is going to fix anything. But there has to be mutual respect on both sides, and traditionally, physicians have more power and have treated nurses poorly over the years. Nursing is elevating itself in so many ways, so it's no longer acceptable for physicians to treat nurses like dirt. From my point of view, I do not think all physicians are greedy or lazy. Not at all. Once again, I will ask you - don't you know your own truth as a physician? You shouldn't have anything to be scared of. Even if the world is falling a part or all hell breaks loose, you will still have a place and a purpose. People will still look to you as a beacon. So let this go...work, train, and collaborate with NPs. Look at creative solutions to make it a win-win for you and nurses and most importantly, the patients you serve in your community. I know I will be trying to do this. I will find an open minded physician to go into business with, where we can serve the community and tackle healthcare issues together.
 
Last edited:
Actually the opposite is true. Lack of standardization in nursing is arguably its main problem. Nursing schools (good ones) and jobs are highly competitive and often times people are waiting maybe a year or even more to get in. That is why "nurse mil" schools are successful right now and churning out students left and right, leaving students once they graduate, high and dry to only find out its not so easy to get that cush PACU job, or highly saught out ICU job they all want. These students also find out that the school they went to was not accredited and so because of their stupidity or shortsightedness, end up not being able to transfer credits and advance. The shortage your describing is actually with skilled nurses in specialized areas. The industry is dynamic, so this can change especially with many nurses going back to school or changing professions all together..

In regards to your other comments, there are good professionals and bad professionals in all areas. Everything you said about nurses (going into it for the wrong reasons and not in it for the love of their profession) can be said equally about physicians and any other profession for that matter. I've met some pretty horrible physicians.

By terribly standardized, meaning lack of standardization. Nursing jobs are highly competitive? It seems like my hospital and those aruond here would hire anybody with a pulse. There is such a huge nursing shortage it's like get anyone here!. And there is a huge difference between MD and nursing. Yes there are bad and good in both, but its MUCH more in nursing. Because MD is a bottle neck. Top students get into Med school. Nursing schools are not filled with the top students of ivy league or equivalent schools. There are no doctor mil schools churning out doctors. So right from step 1 you already have too big of a difference in top nursing students and bottom compared to MDs. I think that explains why I always get so many ridiculous pages in the middle of the night about nothing.

That 3 COMMON things that bother me the most from nurses are the lack of basic medical knowledge from a lot of them (knowing when it's emergent and when its not), too many condescending attitudes (though this may be due to my location hahahah), and lack of investment in your work (too many are too focused about whether they get out on time on the dot or not. )
But a good nurse or NP is very helpful and important to our system and i hope we can train more of those..
 
Last edited:
By terribly standardized, meaning lack of standardization. Nursing jobs are highly competitive? It seems like my hospital and those aruond here would hire anybody with a pulse. There is such a huge nursing shortage it's like get anyone here!. And there is a huge difference between MD and nursing. Yes there are bad and good in both, but its MUCH more in nursing. Because MD is a bottle neck. Top students get into Med school. Nursing schools are not filled with the top students of ivy league or equivalent schools. There are no doctor mil schools churning out doctors. So right from step 1 you already have too big of a difference in top nursing students and bottom compared to MDs. I think that explains why I always get so many ridiculous pages in the middle of the night about nothing.

That 3 COMMON things that bother me the most from nurses are the lack of basic medical knowledge from a lot of them (knowing when it's emergent and when its not), too many condescending attitudes (though this may be due to my location hahahah), and lack of investment in your work (too many are too focused about whether they get out on time on the dot or not. )
But a good nurse or NP is very helpful and important to our system and i hope we can train more of those..

lol ummm well nursing school is no medical school - hello! lol but yes, medical school has higher academic standards and of course breeds individuals with much more medical knowledge. Comparing apples and oranges really. I feel this changes a lot though with experience as a nurse and also once you start comparing NPs, CRNAs, CNMs to the medical profession. Also, trust me, you would rather have a safe nurse who calls too much vs one that doesn't...if you don't like that, then hire an NP to do call for you! Or just write standing orders and operate on protocols for basic requests...But yes, lol maybe it's your location. Who knows. Wish I had all the answers.

But I'm so pleased to hear that you are willing to identify the good NPs and nurses and work with them and train them :). Thank you if you are actually doing that..As leaders in medicine, it's so important that you (physicians) educate nurses too (yes, even despite political banter and differences) because ultimately it helps us both achieve our main goal, which is good and safe patient care..I too hope we can train more bright nurses. I actually do think we are already attracting a lot of bright people to our profession. I've met former lawyers, engineers, and doctors (from other countries) working as RNs. I've also met some of the most motivated and compassionate people I know in this profession.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
FNP_Blix, thank you for answering my question. It was helpful. My current primary care physician is an ND in practice for himself and doesn't have any staff other than a shared office manager with someone in a different discipline. As I look about it seems most primary care practices have NP's on staff these days which is why I want to better understand what NP's are as concerns primary care.

As an aside I have noticed that virtually all NP's are women. That is problematic when it comes to physicals given the proclivity of female providers to bring in female chaperones for male intimate exams and procedures. That's an indignity I will not submit to, and so I avoid females as primary care providers.
 
FNP_Blix, thank you for answering my question. It was helpful. My current primary care physician is an ND in practice for himself and doesn't have any staff other than a shared office manager with someone in a different discipline. As I look about it seems most primary care practices have NP's on staff these days which is why I want to better understand what NP's are as concerns primary care.

As an aside I have noticed that virtually all NP's are women. That is problematic when it comes to physicals given the proclivity of female providers to bring in female chaperones for male intimate exams and procedures. That's an indignity I will not submit to, and so I avoid females as primary care providers.

Glad I can clarify our role a bit. And that's understandable. I prefer a male provider and/or physician as well. I'm a male NP btw and there are more of us entering the field, though your right, the vast majority are female.
 
Frand? Did you mean to say "friend" or "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory"? Lol if it was the later then nice use of a legal term in our legal debat...and congratulations, you gave me an article stating the obvious. Ofcourse your not going to just dogmatically follow guidelines especially where clinical judgement should be exercised cautiously, however I would rather "be damned if I do" for following guidelines and standards of care. Thats exactly what my step-father's late wife's oncologist did, and thats why he got off clean for not doing a pet scan when he should have used clinical judgement. He followed "standards of care". Interestingly, it was her family physician that ordered the pet scan and she was lit up. She did not stand a chance at that point.
While I am terribly sorry to hear about this case, the vast majority of data - particularly a very convincing Canadian study that I can find for you - shows that while diagnoses of small, non-metastatic neoplasms have skyrocketed with the advent of regular screening, the mortality rate on breast cancer has stayed the exact same. AKA, screening, on average, doesn't work. It's sad and definitely has saved some lives, but as a whole it would be far more efficacious to reinvest funds from screening into better methods of care.
 
While I am terribly sorry to hear about this case, the vast majority of data - particularly a very convincing Canadian study that I can find for you - shows that while diagnoses of small, non-metastatic neoplasms have skyrocketed with the advent of regular screening, the mortality rate on breast cancer has stayed the exact same. AKA, screening, on average, doesn't work. It's sad and definitely has saved some lives, but as a whole it would be far more efficacious to reinvest funds from screening into better methods of care.

Yes I know that already, but you don't understand the whole picture in this particular case...This physician should have ordered a PET scan. She had already received chemo and mastectomy, so therefore was high risk. 1 year after, while in remission, she started seeing "bumps" on her left axilla. The oncologist did finally do an MRI, after she asked twice what was happening (for which the physician just said it was from the chemo and likely cystic), however did not even once think mets. It was her primary care physician who ended up ordering the PET scan and discovered the mets.
 
Jury awards $20 million for postpartum death

"The jury found the nurse practitioner negligent and the negligence the direct cause of Bermingham’s death."

Hoping to see more cases like this in the future.

Do you really want to have that battle with me? How about we start citing physician negligent cases shall we? Lets judge the whole profession of medicine and say that "they shouldn't practice medicine" because of the bountiful evidence of med mal cases they have been primary defendants in...see how this can become a slippery slope?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Yes I know that already, but you don't understand the whole picture in this particular case...This physician should have ordered a PET scan. She had already received chemo and mastectomy, so therefore was high risk. 1 year after, while in remission, she started seeing "bumps" on her left axilla. The oncologist did finally do an MRI, after she asked twice what was happening (for which the physician just said it was from the chemo and likely cystic), however did not even once think mets. It was her primary care physician who ended up ordering the PET scan and discovered the mets.
What you're describing is likely accurate. I'm not familiar with those clinical guidelines. My hope is that healthcare professionals will aid each other in identifying evidence-based screenings protocols while still promoting individualized, patient-centered care.
 
What you're describing is likely accurate. I'm not familiar with those clinical guidelines. My hope is that healthcare professionals will aid each other in identifying evidence-based screenings protocols while still promoting individualized, patient-centered care.

For the most part, healthcare professionals do already aid each other in identifying evidence-based screening protocols while still promoting individualized, patient-centered care. It's happening every single day. I would also add that most physicians and NPs work copacetically together and I would say that a majority of physicians are okay with NPs and I've met physicians that actually prefer to hire them (versus a PA)...It's just on this blog (and some others I guess) where you see a small fraction of the medical profession spewing vitriol about NPs and the healthcare industry overall. They sit behind their key boards complaining, but do nothing to fix the problem or make it a win-win for everyone...I come on this website to hopefully shine some light on the profession of nursing and NPs in particular.
 
Last edited:
For the most part, healthcare professionals do already aid each other in identifying evidence-based screening protocols while still promoting individualized, patient-centered care. It's happening every single day. I would also add that most physicians and NPs work copacetically together and I would say that a majority of physicians are okay with NPs and I've met physicians that actually prefer to hire them (versus a PA)...It's just on this blog (and some others I guess) where you see a small fraction of the medical profession spewing vitriol about NPs and the healthcare industry overall. They sit behind their key boards complaining, but do nothing to fix the problem or make it a win-win for everyone...I come on this website to hopefully shine some light on the profession of nursing and NPs in particular.
That is great to hear. I was very unsettled by the title of this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Taurus, why would you be hoping to see more tragic cases such as this young mother dying? Nobody should find joy in a needless death. Debating the merits of NP's and the roles they are allowed to fill is fair game and a public debate that needs to happen, but nobody should be happy when one of the other side's patients dies like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
More cases like this increases awareness of the limited training of NP's. Their liability risk should therefore be appropriately adjusted by hospitals and insurance companies. Should someone who has only 700 hours of training and which can be done almost all online be at the same risk level as someone with 10,000 hours of supervised training? I don't think so. Their insurance premiums should be significantly higher.

If hospitals or groups want to take on the liability risk of using fully autonomous
NPs, I say let them. I fully expect all 50 states to allow autonomous NP's and CRNA's. It's a train wreck waiting to happen.

Nobody wants to see needless deaths. That's why you don't let loose these minimally trained people on an unwitting public. Only through court cases involving massive lawsuit amounts will there be change. The NP's obtained their autonomy not through more or better training. They got it through lobbying the state governments. The disastrous results are inevitable. Now the hospitals and insurance companies will act as counterbalances.

I'm very happy that autonomous NP's will face the same liability amounts as physicians. It's only fair.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Taurus, why would you be hoping to see more tragic cases such as this young mother dying? Nobody should find joy in a needless death. Debating the merits of NP's and the roles they are allowed to fill is fair game and a public debate that needs to happen, but nobody should be happy when one of the other side's patients dies like this.

Thank you. Well stated.
 
Medical student (as of next year).

Awesome, we need more physicians. Just because I'm debating physicians on the efficacy of NPs does not mean I don't support the obvious need for more of you guys. So I'm happy to hear that and congrats. You gonna try to go for primary care?
 
More cases like this increases awareness of the limited training of NP's. Their liability risk should therefore be appropriately adjusted by hospitals and insurance companies. Should someone who has only 700 hours of training and which can be done almost all online be at the same risk level as someone with 10,000 hours of supervised training? I don't think so. Their insurance premiums should be significantly higher.

If hospitals or groups want to take on the liability risk of using fully autonomous
NPs, I say let them. I fully expect all 50 states to allow autonomous NP's and CRNA's. It's a train wreck waiting to happen.

Nobody wants to see needless deaths. That's why you don't let loose these minimally trained people on an unwitting public. Only through court cases involving massive lawsuit amounts will there be change. The NP's obtained their autonomy not through more or better training. They got it through lobbying the state governments. The disastrous results are inevitable. Now the hospitals and insurance companies will act as counterbalances.

I'm very happy that autonomous NP's will face the same liability amounts as physicians. It's only fair.

I agree with three of your points. First, I agree that if an NP is practicing independently, then absolutely, we should be legally held to the same standard. Second, I too fully expect all 50 states to allow autonomous NP and CRNA practice. And three, if we are going to hold NPs to the same legal standard, and increase scope and autonomy, then I also agree that standards should be higher. Maybe something similar to a Flexner Report that occurred in the D.O. profession (however I think NPs can do this while maintaining their independence allied with the nursing profession).

Where I disagree with you (because of the data that is out there) is your statement stating that allowing autonomy for NPs will be "a train wreck waiting to happen." Based on the current data, CRNAs, NPs, and CNMs (all independent APNs) have increased access to care for patient who otherwise couldn't receive medical services, and do it safely and effectively. Now besides that one lawsuit that you cited (and maybe some anecdotal studies that you may be able to dig up) if you can cite anything else that proves otherwise, then be my guest and post it. In the states where NPs do practice independently, they are proving to be doing an excellent job.

And regarding your other statement about how we gained autonomy (basically stating that this was achieved just by lobbying), that is just not true. Nursing has gained a reputation over the years and NPs and CNMs came into existence, practicing autonomously (informally) in the 30s with even less education than we have today. Who better to expand practice roles than to nurses in the face of extreme physician shortages? Nurses are at the front lines and bring a unique perspective to healthcare.
 
Awesome, we need more physicians. Just because I'm debating physicians on the efficacy of NPs does not mean I don't support the obvious need for more of you guys. So I'm happy to hear that and congrats. You gonna try to go for primary care?
I'm thinking that direction, yeah. I'm a bit concerned that legislation is going to push out PCPs in favor of mid-level providers. I happen to think most mid-level providers offer very competent care and can certainly help in bridging the access gap we face.. actually wrote my thesis on healthcare access in primary care. So in short I'm thinking primary care until it becomes more clear where future legislative efforts are headed.
 
I agree with three of your points. First, I agree that if an NP is practicing independently, then absolutely, we should be legally held to the same standard. Second, I too fully expect all 50 states to allow autonomous NP and CRNA practice. And three, if we are going to hold NPs to the same legal standard, and increase scope and autonomy, then I also agree that standards should be higher. Maybe something similar to a Flexner Report that occurred in the D.O. profession (however I think NPs can do this while maintaining their independence allied with the nursing profession).

Where I disagree with you (because of the data that is out there) is your statement stating that allowing autonomy for NPs will be "a train wreck waiting to happen." Based on the current data, CRNAs, NPs, and CNMs (all independent APNs) have increased access to care for patient who otherwise couldn't receive medical services, and do it safely and effectively. Now besides that one lawsuit that you cited (and maybe some anecdotal studies that you may be able to dig up) if you can cite anything else that proves otherwise, then be my guest and post it. In the states where NPs do practice independently, they are proving to be doing an excellent job.

And regarding your other statement about how we gained autonomy (basically stating that this was achieved just by lobbying), that is just not true. Nursing has gained a reputation over the years and NPs and CNMs came into existence, practicing autonomously (informally) in the 30s with even less education than we have today. Who better to expand practice roles than to nurses in the face of extreme physician shortages? Nurses are at the front lines and bring a unique perspective to healthcare.
There aren't extreme physician shortages, just maldistribution.

Who better? More doctors
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I'm thinking that direction, yeah. I'm a bit concerned that legislation is going to push out PCPs in favor of mid-level providers. I happen to think most mid-level providers offer very competent care and can certainly help in bridging the access gap we face.. actually wrote my thesis on healthcare access in primary care. So in short I'm thinking primary care until it becomes more clear where future legislative efforts are headed.

I think that primary care physicians will most definitely have a role (and be very lucrative as well). Primary care physicians, if the current trend persists (which it likely will), will act more as collaborating consultants for mid-levels. The truth is that most (and I mean MOST) NPs and PAs will want a collaborating physician and will pay good money to have a physician check and sign off on charts. Corporations also will be looking for PCPs to fill a role similar to this as well (to basically have collaborative agreements with a team of mid-levels).
 
There aren't extreme physician shortages, just maldistribution.

Who better? More doctors
It's all well and good to say there isn't a doctor shortage, but the reality is that physicians are, at large, less likely to practice in undesirable locations than mid-levels. Whether it's called physician shortage or geographic maldistrubution of health resources, the fact remains that the underserved are screwed without a change in health policy or in the attitudes of healthcare providers (but probably a little of both).
 
There aren't extreme physician shortages, just maldistribution.

Who better? More doctors

Yes more physicians would be ideal, however when you say maldistribution, are you suggesting that we take residents and let them start practicing prematurely to fill the void? You know the medical profession will never go for that as it would mean succumbing to outside pressures and lowering standards for the medical profession. These resident doctors practicing independently would be sub-par to the ones that got all of their training and so thus, a divide. Also, when people make the maldistribution argument, they are suggesting bringing in more physicians from overseas with questionable credentials to come and practice. There is a lot of variability with this as well and poses a risk for the reputation of the medical profession. You also have to consider the human factor. Most physicians (and admittedly nurses too) want to live in urban areas where they can have the best lifestyle and make a good living. Medical professionals tend to specialize or work where its most lucrative to pay off debts and have a good life. With nurses, NPs basically only have one option - and that's primary care. We are far more likely to work with the indigent and take a lower salary.
 
Last edited:
I think that primary care physicians will most definitely have a role (and be very lucrative as well). Primary care physicians, if the current trend persists (which it likely will), will act more as collaborating consultants for mid-levels. The truth is that most (and I mean MOST) NPs and PAs will want a collaborating physician and will pay good money to have a physician check and sign off on charts. Corporations also will be looking for PCPs to fill a role similar to this as well (to basically have collaborative agreements with a team of mid-levels).
I'm hoping so! I wouldn't be shocked to see more 2 and 3 year medical school programs pop up that fast track for primary care (like Texas Tech has). What this will do to quality of care remains to be seen, but certainly looks like it might encourage physicians to enter family Med.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It's all well and good to say there isn't a doctor shortage, but the reality is that physicians are, at large, less likely to practice in undesirable locations than mid-levels. Whether it's called physician shortage or geographic maldistrubution of health resources, the fact remains that the underserved are screwed without a change in health policy or in the attitudes of healthcare providers (but probably a little of both).
1. I don't buy that midlevels are dreaming of working in the hood or in the middle of nowhere in primary care any more than docs. They are pushing for nice areas and better paying gigs too.
2. If you think we need more capacity, the answer is more docs...not lesser trained independent midlevels
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Yes more physicians would be ideal, however when you say maldistribution, are you suggesting that we take residents and let them start practicing prematurely to fill the void? You know the medical profession will never go for that as it would mean succumbing to outside pressures and lowering standards for the medical profession. These resident doctors practicing independently would be sub-par to the ones that got all of their training and so thus, a divide. Also, when people make the maldistribution argument, they are suggesting bringing in more physicians from overseas with questionable credentials to come and practice. There is a lot of variability with this as well and poses a risk for the reputation of the medical profession as well. You also have to consider the human factor. Most physicians (and admittedly nurses too) want to live in urban areas where they can have the best lifestyle and make a good living. Medical professionals tend to specialize or work where its most lucrative to pay off debts and have a good life. With nurses, NPs basically only have one option - and that's primary care. We are far more likely to work with the indigent and take a lower salary.
Nope. I'm suggesting we continue expanding medical schools and residencies.

And NPs don't at all just have one option (primary care)...you know that and it's disengenuous to pretend otherwise
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Nope. I'm suggesting we continue expanding medical schools and residencies.

And NPs don't at all just have one option (primary care)...you know that and it's disengenuous to pretend otherwise

To practice independently, yes, the only option is in primary care. In specialties, we are extenders.
 
1. I don't buy that midlevels are dreaming of working in the hood or in the middle of nowhere in primary care any more than docs. They are pushing for nice areas and better paying gigs too.
2. If you think we need more capacity, the answer is more docs...not lesser trained independent midlevels

You don't have to buy it sb247. Just look at the data. NPs have a far larger proportion of them credentialed and practicing in primary care and in the underserved areas.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/meeting-the-primary-care-needs-of-rural-america.aspx
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
1. I don't buy that midlevels are dreaming of working in the hood or in the middle of nowhere in primary care any more than docs. They are pushing for nice areas and better paying gigs too.
2. If you think we need more capacity, the answer is more docs...not lesser trained independent midlevels
I just disagree. Preventive medicine cannot be practiced without a wealth of primary care providers, and our physicians are generally unwilling to establish themselves in underserved areas for a long-term career. I'd be interested to see what effect removing government subsidies for medical education of physicians who go on to practice in over-served areas/specialties... perhaps that would push physicians to seek a service-oriented career over a comfortable career
 
Top