Thoughts on nurses turned MD?

[W19]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I agree; and as someone who actually went to nursing school and is in medical school, I think it's funny that people "seriously, seriously doubt" what I have to say because, heaven forbid, certain aspects of nursing school may be harder than medical school.

There is no aspect of nursing school I can think of that is harder than med school... except making these stupid care plan😛.

 

[jw3600]

I agree; and as someone who actually went to nursing school and is in medical school, I think it's funny that people "seriously, seriously doubt" what I have to say because, heaven forbid, certain aspects of nursing school may be harder than medical school.

For the record I severely, severely doubted your anecdote. But I was serious so you are not incorrect on that point. I seriously am terrified for when I am an attending and all the trophies for everyone millennial generation have become nurses and picked up the already pervasive persecution complex in the nursing world.

 

[pd1112]

Reading your posts on SDN makes me think you're a really pleasant person to be around.

And, no. I still stand by what I said about my nursing exams being more difficult to take than my medical school exams.

What was more difficult about them? Just curious.

 

[acceptmeplease]

For the record I severely, severely doubted your anecdote. But I was serious so you are not incorrect on that point. I seriously am terrified for when I am an attending and all the trophies for everyone millennial generation have become nurses and picked up the already pervasive persecution complex in the nursing world.

I seriously am terrified for the patients you will affect by not listening to them and then spewing hyperbole and generalities.

You are not an authority whatsoever about what occurs or does not occur in the nursing community. Your opinion on the subject is worthless. Why are you even commenting on this thread? You're not even contributing to discussion which I believe is a violation of TOS.

 

[acceptmeplease]

What was more difficult about them? Just curious.

The class before mine got caught using question banks from the texts to take tests. In order to avoid that happening again, our faculty began writing 100% of the test questions and they were awful writers. Many of the professors had never worked a day as a nurse, they simply went to grad school and wrote completely unrealistic questions related to clinical scenarios that was contradictory to class material and board prep because they had no experience from which to write. Multiple questions literally had no correct answer, questions had multiple word-for-word correct answers according to text books; many pathology questions had missing punctuation and misspelled/understood words that completely changed the tone of a question.

I never said medical students would struggle with these tests because they were in any way inferior students to nursing students; they were simply nightmare tests.

**edit** and challenging test questions was not allowed.

 

[pd1112]

The class before mine got caught using question banks from the texts to take tests. In order to avoid that happening again, our faculty began writing 100% of the test questions and they were awful writers. Many of the professors had never worked a day as a nurse, they simply went to grad school and wrote completely unrealistic questions related to clinical scenarios that was contradictory to class material and board prep because they had no experience from which to write. Multiple questions literally had no correct answer, questions had multiple word-for-word correct answers according to text books; many pathology questions had missing punctuation and misspelled/understood words that completely changed the tone of a question.

I never said medical students would struggle with these tests because they were in any way inferior students to nursing students; they were simply nightmare tests.

**edit** and challenging test questions was not allowed.

So it seems like in your personal experience with poor instruction & poorly written tests that were not consistent with nursing education as a whole, nursing school was more difficult than medical school. Fair enough. Your previous posts though made it seem like you were of the opinion that some generalized aspects of nursing school were more difficult than medical school from an intellectual/curricular standpoint, particular when you mentioned good/better nursing programs being more difficult. This conflicts with your most recent post since it would be a stretch to call your program "good" if it had such poor instruction & poorly written tests. If you would've mentioned that from the beginning, probably no one would've disagreed with you or made smarta** replies.

 

[Promethean]

The class before mine got caught using question banks from the texts to take tests. In order to avoid that happening again, our faculty began writing 100% of the test questions and they were awful writers. Many of the professors had never worked a day as a nurse, they simply went to grad school and wrote completely unrealistic questions related to clinical scenarios that was contradictory to class material and board prep because they had no experience from which to write. Multiple questions literally had no correct answer, questions had multiple word-for-word correct answers according to text books; many pathology questions had missing punctuation and misspelled/understood words that completely changed the tone of a question.

I never said medical students would struggle with these tests because they were in any way inferior students to nursing students; they were simply nightmare tests.

**edit** and challenging test questions was not allowed.

This. It isn't that nursing material is harder... it is that the tests are much less objective in many ways. The instructor may have a pet theory, not shared with the class, that they expect you to discern on your own and apply to the exam. So, most questions have several right answers in the multiple choices, maybe all of them are right answers... but the instructor is looking for the MOST right response.

Again, there is nothing objective that makes one the most right in many situations. Like the options won't be whether to deal with hypoxia versus pain first, where you could be guided by some obvious external priorities. It will be something like should you teach the newly diagnosed diabetic about diet or medications first. If you try to reason it out at all, you will be told that you are "reading too much into the question... just think about what we discussed in class."

Well, you remember all the stress placed on pharmacology, so you figure you want to be sure they understand their medication orders. Haha! Wrong! The instructor gleefully reminds the class that she mentioned obliquely, on the first day of the diabetes unit that many newly diagnosed type 2 diabetics are encouraged to attempt to control their disease through dietary approaches, and so that is the priority for discussion, then meds.

The next instructor will teach the opposite and call you an imbecile if you question it.

And they told us that we have to use nursing diagnoses because we are not qualified to render a medical diagnosis. So, we all know it is diarrhea, but only a physician can make that determination. So we have to say alteration in bowel function as evidenced by loose stools, cramping, and increased flatus... because to call it what it is would be to exceed our scope. So, no, it isn't the uppity nurses who came up with nursing diagnoses. The uppity ones think they should be able to diagnose the obvious.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[NursingStudent16]

This. It isn't that nursing material is harder... it is that the tests are much less objective in many ways. The instructor may have a pet theory, not shared with the class, that they expect you to discern on your own and apply to the exam. So, most questions have several right answers in the multiple choices, maybe all of them are right answers... but the instructor is looking for the MOST right response.

Again, there is nothing objective that makes one the most right in many situations. Like the options won't be whether to deal with hypoxia versus pain first, where you could be guided by some obvious external priorities. It will be something like should you teach the newly diagnosed diabetic about diet or medications first. If you try to reason it out at all, you will be told that you are "reading too much into the question... just think about what we discussed in class."

Well, you remember all the stress placed on pharmacology, so you figure you want to be sure they understand their medication orders. Haha! Wrong! The instructor gleefully reminds the class that she mentioned obliquely, on the first day of the diabetes unit that many newly diagnosed type 2 diabetics are encouraged to attempt to control their disease through dietary approaches, and so that is the priority for discussion, then meds.

The next instructor will teach the opposite and call you an imbecile if you question it.

And they told us that we have to use nursing diagnoses because we are not qualified to render a medical diagnosis. So, we all know it is diarrhea, but only a physician can make that determination. So we have to say alteration in bowel function as evidenced by loose stools, cramping, and increased flatus... because to call it what it is would be to exceed our scope. So, no, it isn't the uppity nurses who came up with nursing diagnoses. The uppity ones think they should be able to diagnose the obvious.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Do they not have select all that apply questions in medical school? Just curious. I feel the care plan and nursing diagnoses are beneficial in school; but nurses are "supposed" to chart on the nursing care plan on the patient's chart every shift, which I think is pointless, but that's just me.

 

[W19]

It is nursing diagnosis or diagnoses? I spent all my time in nursing school writing 'nursing diagnosis'

 

[Promethean]

It is nursing diagnosis or diagnoses? I spent all my time in nursing school writing 'nursing diagnosis'

Diagnoses is the plural of diagnosis.


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[W19]

Diagnoses is the plural of diagnosis.


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

I don't know when I am going to get better with these nuances in the English language🙁

 

[Promethean]

I don't when I am going to get better with these nuances in the English language🙁

"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse *****. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and riffle their pockets for new vocabulary.[5]" via https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Nicoll

Don't worry too much... people who study it their whole lives still make mistakes with the finer points. Even in the above, the author had to drop back by and point out that he had misspelled rifle.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[Pound4Pound]

Nursing questions are subjective. Each question has more than 1 correct answer and it depends on the instructor which one of those is correct. It doesn't matter if your answer is right and clearly stated in the book. It's what the instructor thinks is right that counts. You get more than 5 of these questions wrong on the test and you end up with a B.

A semester grade is usually made up of only 3 exams and 1 final + few % for careplan and clinical. It's really easy to mess up your GPA in nursing school.

The standardized nclex exam (licensure exam) is so much easier than my actual exams in nursing school.

I'm currently doing the prerequisites for medical school. Classes like organic chemistry and biochem are much harder than nursing classes but I'm actually doing well in those classes because they make sense and logical! Can't say the same thing about nursing questions lol.

 

[Psai]

The class before mine got caught using question banks from the texts to take tests. In order to avoid that happening again, our faculty began writing 100% of the test questions and they were awful writers. Many of the professors had never worked a day as a nurse, they simply went to grad school and wrote completely unrealistic questions related to clinical scenarios that was contradictory to class material and board prep because they had no experience from which to write. Multiple questions literally had no correct answer, questions had multiple word-for-word correct answers according to text books; many pathology questions had missing punctuation and misspelled/understood words that completely changed the tone of a question.

I never said medical students would struggle with these tests because they were in any way inferior students to nursing students; they were simply nightmare tests.

**edit** and challenging test questions was not allowed.

So basically your professors were terrible at writimg test questions which is different from them being harder

 

[acceptmeplease]

So basically your professors were terrible at writimg test questions which is different from them being harder

To the person taking the test, there's not much difference.

But yes. The material is not harder than medical school, nor is it in the same ball park of quantity.

The problem, and this is more in response to an earlier reply to a comment of mine, is that the awful test writing is rampant in many nursing schools. Have I taken nursing tests at other schools, no, so technically my evidence is purely anecdotal; but talking to students from other schools and to nurses I worked with from various parts of the country, I've learned their experiences were similar.

 

[BurghStudent]

This. It isn't that nursing material is harder... it is that the tests are much less objective in many ways. The instructor may have a pet theory, not shared with the class, that they expect you to discern on your own and apply to the exam. So, most questions have several right answers in the multiple choices, maybe all of them are right answers... but the instructor is looking for the MOST right response.

Again, there is nothing objective that makes one the most right in many situations. Like the options won't be whether to deal with hypoxia versus pain first, where you could be guided by some obvious external priorities. It will be something like should you teach the newly diagnosed diabetic about diet or medications first. If you try to reason it out at all, you will be told that you are "reading too much into the question... just think about what we discussed in class."

Well, you remember all the stress placed on pharmacology, so you figure you want to be sure they understand their medication orders. Haha! Wrong! The instructor gleefully reminds the class that she mentioned obliquely, on the first day of the diabetes unit that many newly diagnosed type 2 diabetics are encouraged to attempt to control their disease through dietary approaches, and so that is the priority for discussion, then meds.

The next instructor will teach the opposite and call you an imbecile if you question it.

And they told us that we have to use nursing diagnoses because we are not qualified to render a medical diagnosis. So, we all know it is diarrhea, but only a physician can make that determination. So we have to say alteration in bowel function as evidenced by loose stools, cramping, and increased flatus... because to call it what it is would be to exceed our scope. So, no, it isn't the uppity nurses who came up with nursing diagnoses. The uppity ones think they should be able to diagnose the obvious.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

What a royal pain in the arse

 

[NoTownPreMed]

What a royal pain in the arse

I don't know how many times I have been dubbed as an imbecile by my nursing instructors when referencing back to a textbook to refute the answers these professors claimed are correct. The majority of the time, they would tell me to put the book away and explain to them off the top of my head why they are wrong. Those were one of the worst days of my school years.

 

[Promethean]

I don't know how many times I have been dubbed as an imbecile by my nursing instructors when referencing back to a textbook to refute the answers these professors claimed are correct. The majority of the time, they would tell me to put the book away and explain to them off the top of my head why they are wrong. Those were one of the worst days of my school years.

I sat on an appeal board that granted a student the points on an final exam that allowed a senior student to pass the course and become a nurse. It was absolutely make or break for him... he had failed one course early on, and if he failed this one, he would have been dismissed from the program.

The question he challenged was regarding the most common side effect of a gven drug. Three of the answer choices were common side effects of that drug. The student presented evidence that two of the three were considered most prevalent and that sources differed as to which was most common. The book and one lecture slide said one thing, an obscure chart in another lecture slide said the other. You can guess which the instructor preferred.

You can argue that he shouldn't have been so close to failure that one question could decide his fate, but you'd have to consider that the whole test was written by the same person. They claim "critical thinking" is the reason for giving such muddled exams, but that only works if they are actually scholars and critical thinkers themselves.

This was the instructor who insisted that polypharmacy referred to having prescriptions filled at more than one location, after all.

I went to the young man's graduation and he is now a fine nurse. I am grateful to have been in the right place to break the tie on whether to throw out that question. I am even more grateful to no longer be subject to such arbitrary tests.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[Psai]

I sat on an appeal board that granted a student the points on an final exam that allowed a senior student to pass the course and become a nurse. It was absolutely make or break for him... he had failed one course early on, and if he failed this one, he would have been dismissed from the program.

The question he challenged was regarding the most common side effect of a gven drug. Three of the answer choices were common side effects of that drug. The student presented evidence that two of the three were considered most prevalent and that sources differed as to which was most common. The book and one lecture slide said one thing, an obscure chart in another lecture slide said the other. You can guess which the instructor preferred.

You can argue that he shouldn't have been so close to failure that one question could decide his fate, but you'd have to consider that the whole test was written by the same person. They claim "critical thinking" is the reason for giving such muddled exams, but that only works if they are actually scholars and critical thinkers themselves.

This was the instructor who insisted that polypharmacy referred to having prescriptions filled at more than one location, after all.

I went to the young man's graduation and he is now a fine nurse. I am grateful to have been in the right place to break the tie on whether to throw out that question. I am even more grateful to no longer be subject to such arbitrary tests.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

man that must have sucked

 

[Dranger]

Lol wut. I work ICU with 3 ACNP's and have never seen a physician ever show any disrespect.

Same. I work with a few ACNPs that rotate around in the ICU and as general hospitalists doing procedures, admits, round etc and have seen nothing but respect shown to them by the MDs. Dare I say they treat them as peers....Hell the pulmonology group wants to hire more.

 

[Gither]

Same. I work with a few ACNPs that rotate around in the ICU and as general hospitalists doing procedures, admits, round etc and have seen nothing but respect shown to them by the MDs. Dare I say they treat them as peers....Hell the pulmonology group wants to hire more.

Likely not hiring more of them for their medical knowledge, but costs less for the pulm groups. Kind of like a resident being cheap labor. Likely not showing disrespect in person cause it's rude/unprofessional/makes them look bad and docs in general are not very confrontational. Those pulm's prob come on here to talk crap 🙂

 

[Kaustikos]

Likely not hiring more of them for their medical knowledge, but costs less for the pulm groups. Kind of like a resident being cheap labor. Likely not showing disrespect in person cause it's rude/unprofessional/makes them look bad and docs in general are not very confrontational. Those pulm's prob come on here to talk crap 🙂

wow.....

 

[Dranger]

Likely not hiring more of them for their medical knowledge, but costs less for the pulm groups. Kind of like a resident being cheap labor. Likely not showing disrespect in person cause it's rude/unprofessional/makes them look bad and docs in general are not very confrontational. Those pulm's prob come on here to talk crap 🙂

Yeah man I can totally see them doing that after the ACNP started the POC for night admits, took call, intubated and placed CVCs while the attending doc got some sleep until day rounds (when previously the docs in the group pulled call then rounded). Makes total sense to talk **** at that point.

 

[jl lin]

This. I know that if I stay in nursing, I will never be seen as anything more than a glorified ass-wiper, as evidenced by many of the comments on SDN. I'm too intelligent for that ****.

Wow. Maybe it's the critical care area I have worked, but I have never felt this way. Neither by patients or docs or other allied health. I think it's about attitude, competence, and how you carry yourself.

 

[jl lin]

There is no aspect of nursing school I can think of that is harder than med school... except making these stupid care plan😛.

Lol

 

[Kaustikos]

I think it's about attitude, competence, and how you carry yourself.

There lies the problem. But not just with nursing. But some units have people that just don't care or are incompetent.
Nurses are clutch. Or can be. Some are dinguses, but it comes with working in a hospital.

 

[Wordead]

Wow. Maybe it's the critical care area I have worked, but I have never felt this way. Neither by patients or docs or other allied health. I think it's about attitude, competence, and how you carry yourself.

Critical care nurses generally are much, much better than floor nurses, who on the whole range from okay to sundowning.

 

[first_time_poster]

i would hope that nurses would improve their gpa in medical school. They're basically taking the same classes again.

 

[acceptmeplease]

i would hope that nurses would improve their gpa in medical school. They're basically taking the same classes again.

What? No.

 

[first_time_poster]

What? No.

What? You're kidding right? I wouldn't know since I only go to medical school. All the horses I talk with say that they learn the same stuff. Some one is lying.

 

[first_time_poster]

What? You're kidding right? I wouldn't know since I only go to medical school. All the horses I talk with say that they learn the same stuff. Some one is lying.

Ah sorry damn autocorrect. Nurses not horses.

 

[Psai]

What? You're kidding right? I wouldn't know since I only go to medical school. All the horses I talk with say that they learn the same stuff. Some one is lying.

Ask anyone who has done both and they will tell you that there is so much that they didnt know about. Even pas that went through both will say the same and their education is more rigorous and similar to a medical education than np coursework

 

[username456789]

I think you guys are missing some sarcasm.

 

[Kaustikos]

I'll only say nurses don't get the same education but say that I'm jealous because of the PTSD inducing anatomy course.

 

[jl lin]

There lies the problem. But not just with nursing. But some units have people that just don't care or are incompetent.
Nurses are clutch. Or can be. Some are dinguses, but it comes with working in a hospital.

^ What does this mean? Clutch?

 

[jl lin]

Ah sorry damn autocorrect. Nurses not horses.

You learn many medical things, as well as nursing theory--like disease path, symptoms, standard and even experimental treatments, expected and unexpected responses to treatments, pharmacology, associated side effects/problems with treatments--pharmacological or otherwise, planning of care and evaluation--assessment, diagnoses (medical awareness for the actual medical diagnoses) but can document on your assessment findings only what is stated by patient or physician, etc and then only nursing diagnoses--which are basically how the diagnoses present in a general way. You learn complications of diseases and treatments and preventative measures, risk factors, current research and stats, etc. Thing is, you don't go into a deeper understanding of the disease processes or necessarily (it depends on the nurse and area of work--such as critical care compared to say med surg) the modality of actions of treatment on the cellular level, in general, as compared with medicine. Now this can change as per the individual nurse and the area in which she/he works and his/her own dedication to study while in direct practice. You also have to have a greater depth of understanding to score high on the CCRN, which is specialization in critical care, after NCLEX and working in critical care for I think at least 2000 hours. The hours requirement may have changed since I took it..

Along w/ all this and other things, you have to learn a lot of nursing theory and application, which, in my mind is far from "all bad," meaning there is a lot of good in learning the theories and approaches to application; b/c in general, much of it is very holistic.

But for the sciences, like anything, it will depend upon the individual. E.g., I was fascinated to learn about drug mechanisms of actions against microbial cells in microbiology. Not every student or nurse will be that interested, and well, that is that individual's loss IMHO.

 

[acceptmeplease]

You learn many medical things, as well as nursing theory--like disease path, symptoms, standard and even experimental treatments, expected and unexpected responses to treatments, pharmacology, associated side effects/problems with treatments--pharmacological or otherwise, planning of care and evaluation--assessment, diagnoses (medical awareness for the actual medical diagnoses) but can document on your assessment findings only what is stated by patient or physician, etc and then only nursing diagnoses--which are basically how the diagnoses present in a general way. You learn complications of diseases and treatments and preventative measures, risk factors, current research and stats, etc. Thing is, you don't go into a deeper understanding of the disease processes or necessarily (it depends on the nurse and area of work--such as critical care compared to say med surg) the modality of actions of treatment on the cellular level, in general, as compared with medicine. Now this can change as per the individual nurse and the area in which she/he works and his/her own dedication to study while in direct practice. You also have to have a greater depth of understanding to score high on the CCRN, which is specialization in critical care, after NCLEX and working in critical care for I think at least 2000 hours. The hours requirement may have changed since I took it..

After all this and other things, you have to learn a lot of nursing theory and application, which, in my mind is far from "all bad," meaning there is a lot of good in learning the theories and approaches to application; b/c in general, much of it is very holistic.

But for the sciences, like anything, it will depend upon the individual. E.g., I was fascinated to learn about drug mechanisms of actions against microbial cells in microbiology. Not every student or nurse will be that interested, and well, that is that individual's loss IMHO.

The material is still not even close.

 

[Dranger]

Critical care nurses generally are much, much better than floor nurses, who on the whole range from okay to sundowning.

Even being a nurse (ICU) I spit out my coffee reading that last part. I do feel bad for some of the hospitalists holding the pager after listening to some inane pages/calls. Maybe that's why they hang out in the ICU? We don't bother them even with non-pulm/intesivist patients.

 

[Dranger]

The material is still not even close.

I agree as I have first-hand seen the material used in med schools, however how much of the minute material is really retained a few years into practice. I get muscle memory and having a base learning level plays a factor but if I asked a specific medical school STEP like question to one of my attendings what is the chance they would answer exactly right? What if it isn't their specialty? Would you assume their first-hand experience and updates from current EBP are more important than details learned in a lecture hall 15 years before?

 

[Gither]

The material is still not even close.

This. There's no replacement or comparison to the time and effort dedicated M1/M2 sitting all day and night in front of the book and in lab... then the hours spent the next two years in the hospital rotating through all specialties of medicine and studying more after going home each shift for shelfs. In the midst of all this there are was the hundreds of hours studying for step 1, 2 and audition rotations. That was the easy part... Now I'm a resident and I work harder, longer, and learn more in a given month than ever before.

 

[Member 1337]

They claim "critical thinking" is the reason for giving such muddled exams, but that only works if they are actually scholars and critical thinkers themselves. This was the instructor who insisted that polypharmacy referred to having prescriptions filled at more than one location, after all. I went to the young man's graduation and he is now a fine nurse. I am grateful to have been in the right place to break the tie on whether to throw out that question. I am even more grateful to no longer be subject to such arbitrary tests. Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Hey, umm, Promethean... can you stop being so creepily insightful... I mean, really... it's starting to wig people out. And the fact that you do it all from "Tapatalk," like, some otherworldly crystal ball of ethereal seer-magic doesn't help... just, like, tone down your inner oracle a touch from eleven...

 

[acceptmeplease]

I agree as I have first-hand seen the material used in med schools, however how much of the minute material is really retained a few years into practice. I get muscle memory and having a base learning level plays a factor but if I asked a specific medical school STEP like question to one of my attendings what is the chance they would answer exactly right? What if it isn't their specialty? Would you assume their first-hand experience and updates from current EBP are more important than details learned in a lecture hall 15 years before?

How much material is retained from nursing school? If you're only able to retain x% of something, would medical school not be more advantageous than nursing school with regards to how much information is retained?

You'd be surprised how much information is still relevant today that was taught 15 years ago. The anatomy hasn't changed. Biochem and cell bio probably changed from "this is most likely" to "evidence shows this", but that's still more involved than what nurses are learning even today.

I can't specifically answer how it will directly relate to clinical practice or how much an attending would remember, but I'd bet that they would score better on the exam than a nursing student/nurse would.

 

[ICUBlue]

As an ICU RN beginning to take prereqs for medical school, i realize that I will likely use approximately zero of the information I learned in nursing school should I get into medical school. My actual work experience, however, I believe to be a different story. I base this on the fact that I hardly even use what I learned in nursing school NOW. About 90% of the knowledge I use at my job I have gained from my job/from outside reading on the subject content of my job. It's scary how much I don't know in my role, and it's even scarier that I read about the subject while just about none of my peers do. The lack of preparedness that nursing school gives you to be a nurse, especially in critical care, is horrendous; I assume none of it will transfer to tangible medical student benefit.

I do hope, however, that my experience as an RN will be of slight benefit. I emphasize slight. Benefit-- BASIC conceptual visualization of some pathophys content d/t remembering particular case, increased overall awareness of clinical environment and surroundings for MAYBE the first few weeks of M3, an easier time with patient interviews, and the valuable perspective of the troubles of another major discipline of the healthcare team(having been a nurse can only help my communication with them in the future, right?). No benefit- EVERYTHING ELSE.

 

[Kaustikos]

As an ICU RN beginning to take prereqs for medical school, i realize that I will likely use approximately zero of the information I learned in nursing school should I get into medical school. My actual work experience, however, I believe to be a different story. I base this on the fact that I hardly even use what I learned in nursing school NOW. About 90% of the knowledge I use at my job I have gained from my job/from outside reading on the subject content of my job. It's scary how much I don't know in my role, and it's even scarier that I read about the subject while just about none of my peers do. The lack of preparedness that nursing school gives you to be a nurse, especially in critical care, is horrendous; I assume none of it will transfer to tangible medical student benefit.

I do hope, however, that my experience as an RN will be of slight benefit. I emphasize slight. Benefit-- BASIC conceptual visualization of some pathophys content d/t remembering particular case, increased overall awareness of clinical environment and surroundings for MAYBE the first few weeks of M3, an easier time with patient interviews, and the valuable perspective of the troubles of another major discipline of the healthcare team(having been a nurse can only help my communication with them in the future, right?). No benefit- EVERYTHING ELSE.

I'll go ahead and ask:
Wouldn't auto saying you were a nurse make clinical life so much easier with staff? Like, everyone won't treat you 100% like a med student

 

[Promethean]

I'll go ahead and ask:
Wouldn't auto saying you were a nurse make clinical life so much easier with staff? Like, everyone won't treat you 100% like a med student

Do you mean on rotations? Not necessarily.

So, there are people who look askance at RNs aiming to become Drs. Most people are like: hey, right on, go you. But there are some who are jealous, or classist (I don't know how else to describe "wanting others to stay in their place and not get uppity,") etc. There are also some people who just really don't like anything out of the ordinary. They like their world to be easily categorizable, unmuddied by nuance. With those folks, telling them that you have a more complicated background than they expect at first glance can make things much harder going.

Still, showing up for a surgery rotation and knowing what not to touch in the OR will win you a few points, whether staff know your background or not. When you are comfortable and confident in a clinical setting, you don't really have to advertise it. It is just obvious, and that will make life easier.

 

[acceptmeplease]

Do you mean on rotations? Not necessarily.

So, there are people who look askance at RNs aiming to become Drs. Most people are like: hey, right on, go you. But there are some who are jealous, or classist (I don't know how else to describe "wanting others to stay in their place and not get uppity,") etc. There are also some people who just really don't like anything out of the ordinary. They like their world to be easily categorizable, unmuddied by nuance. With those folks, telling them that you have a more complicated background than they expect at first glance can make things much harder going.

Still, showing up for a surgery rotation and knowing what not to touch in the OR will win you a few points, whether staff know your background or not. When you are comfortable and confident in a clinical setting, you don't really have to advertise it. It is just obvious, and that will make life easier.

Yea, if it affords me some advantage based on knowledge or skills, great, but I'm not talking about my RN experience on rotations. I feel that's just asking for trouble.

 

[ICUBlue]

I agree, I highly doubt I'd be very vocal about my experience-unless inquired about-on rotations. I wasn't saying my experience would help my communication with nurses in the future bc I would tell them I was an RN and they would communicate more w me as a result of that. Rather, I would possibly better understand their perspective better since it used to be my own. Less about them knowing where I stand and more about an increased frame of reference of my own