When a nurse is your health-care provider, you’re at risk

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The indoctrination started earlier than that because I remember during a class titled 'Nursing as Discipline and Profession' :rolleyes:, the professor bring up a blog like that (not sure if it was SDN) showing physicians somewhat bashing nurses... When I decided to go to med school, I asked that same prof for a LOR, she agreed to give it to me. Then I emailed her multiple times to follow up; she never replied to my emails. Later I met another nurse who had a similar experience, she told me that nurses are not usually happy when other nurses are going to med school. I don't know whether that is true or not... Anyway, that was when I figured out she was not going to give that LOR. In nursing school, 'We are the patient advocate' and 'Physicians often times are not in patients best interest' were drilled in our head...

It's weird how similar our situations were.

The older nursing teachers were so militantly against the medical profession. I will say that the youngest of my nursing teachers were supportive of me, but it got to where my advisor was so disappointed that I would not pursue advanced nursing practice because of medical school that she wouldn't look me in the eye.

I feel like day 1 of nursing school around the country consists of "welcome to nursing, your biggest challenge is going to be saving patients from doctors."

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
It's weird how similar our situations were.

The older nursing teachers were so militantly against the medical profession. I will say that the youngest of my nursing teachers were supportive of me, but it got to where my advisor was so disappointed that I would not pursue advanced nursing practice because of medical school that she wouldn't look me in the eye.

I feel like day 1 of nursing school around the country consists of "welcome to nursing, your biggest challenge is going to be saving patients from doctors."
That same prof who would not give me that LOR was one of the prof who told me to do NP. I was dumbfounded when she would not give me an LOR for med school. Regarding their animosity toward physicians, I thought that was only happening at my school, but other RN told me it happened at their school as well. Also, they are very good in using subtle language to paint physicians as egocentric jerks who only care about $$$$$ and status...

One of my mentors was an NP who became DO, she told me she always remind them that she was a nurse and NP when they try to pull their BS on her...
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Note I make no comparison between ISIL and Organized Nursing. Just the liberalized failure to respond appropriately in both cases.
I disagree since ISIL would not have been in Iraq had Saddam been president... There are unintended consequences for these stuff. US can spend 100 years in some of these the countries in the Middle East and try to put them on 'democratic path' (whatever that means), but the moment we leave, some 20s or 30s year old captain in the Army will give a Coup Etat and we will be back to square one. That is how it has always been when you look at history... That comparison was not good; however, I agree with you about liberal and nursing....
 
Last edited:
Yep, I agree. We assume our level of meritocracy, professionalism, and training in deference and team building are universally held prerogatives.

Whereas nurses are taught to imbibe a potent mixture of Bolshevism and The Culture of Offendedness which are made all the more slick by operating on a subconscious level. And explains pefectly why places like Portland have no natural defenses against them whereas as places like Texas call bull****.

The failures of the left permeate our medical schools like the aging baby boomers who run them.


OK, now this is true in my estimation: "nurses are taught to imbibe a potent mixture of Bolshevism and The Culture of Offendedness which are made all the more slick by operating on a subconscious level."

Yup it's a mix of anti-capitalist and support towards nationalistic forms of socialism. And the current political climate is perfect for furthering "the cause."

Don't get me wrong. I'm not for people going into medicine primarily for the money, b/c I think it's a joke, and you won't be able to be advocates that carry the most weight for the patients with that primary motivation.
 
I was looking through vitals for something else and came across this. All DNPs have MD tacked on after their names.

No issue with the title Dr. Why is there an MD tacked on after though?

Scroll through for an example

http://www.vitals.com/geriatric-doctors/co/englewood?page=3


Oh Hell No! What is this? This chick had better had gone to medical school her to put MD after DNP!!! And she had better had gone to and residency and taken examinations if she tries to put BC as well!!! If not, this is blatantly illegal!!! Dr. Joan M Nelson DNP, MD
Of course, when you click on to education, all your get is the lead into nursing publications. OMG!
 
I looked her up and it says she got an ND degree. Probably just a typo
Oh Hell No! What is this? This chick had better had gone to medical school her to put MD after DNP!!! And she had better had gone to and residency and taken examinations if she tries to put BC as well!!! If not, this is blatantly illegal!!! Dr. Joan M Nelson DNP, MD
Of course, when you click on to education, all your get is the lead into nursing publications. OMG!
Yeah there are no licensed physicians in the state of Colorado with that name. Here is her actual educational background.
 
Yeah there are no licensed physicians in the state of Colorado with that name. Here is her actual educational background.

Thanks.
So how in the world does this = or allow her to put MD after her name? This is so disturbing.

Yes, but someone needs to make sure this is cleared up ASAP. It's false representation, etc.
Anybody can just post anything, and then they can come back and say it's an "innocent typo?" No. Make sure if it's your name/title you make sure it gets corrected by the web page construction team.

So now professional information on the Internet is like Facebook, where people can lie their butts off and no one calls them on it?
 
I looked her up and it says she got an ND degree. Probably just a typo
Could very well be. The other DNP on Vitals that I saw had DNP, FNP and MD listed as well. Vitals lists the residencies and fellowship exactly as they would for a physician.

Healthgrades for instance lists DNP education under "medical school".

There's numerous entries that say the following:

Dr. XX XXX, DNP

Undergrad Graduation: "UCLA" 2002

Medical School Graduation: "U Mich" 2004

If I didn't know better, I would assume that person graduated medical school.

I think there's just a lot of confusing/disingenuous things on these websites, I'm surprised it's not considered an issue.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
To be fair I've also seen DOs listed as MDs on those sites. I think it's their own inaccuracies more than purposeful misinformation
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Need some news network investigators to make an issue out of this and publicize all over the media.
 
To be fair I've also seen DOs listed as MDs on those sites. I think it's their own inaccuracies more than purposeful misinformation

Yea but when the professional or their administrators see it, and believe me, they look--I mean if they check people out on FB. . .--anyway, when they see it, what, if anything do they do to try to correct it? If they just leave it, that is still wrong.
 
To be fair I've also seen DOs listed as MDs on those sites. I think it's their own inaccuracies more than purposeful misinformation

I actually saw that also. I didn't click on all the DO,MD profiles. The one's I did look into were mainly in the NY area and their medical schools were typically listed as foreign. I made the assumption, perhaps wrongly that they were all part of NYCOMs emigre program and that was why it was like this.

Either way, I think all inaccuracies should be changed. There are only 2 types of physicians in the US, MD and DO. I just think all the degrees should be listed appropriately so patients can make an informed choice using those sites.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I actually saw that also. I didn't click on all the DO,MD profiles. The one's I did look into were mainly in the NY area and their medical school's were typically listed as foreign. I made the assumption, perhaps wrongly that they were all part of NYCOMs emigre program and that was why it was like this.

Either way, I think all inaccuracies should be changed. There are only 2 types of physicians in the US, MD and DO. I just think all the degrees should be listed appropriately so patients can make an informed choice using those sites.

These sites just data mine to come up with their physician directories. They are horribly inaccurate in so many ways.

I'm all for getting mad at NPs but I don't think you can blame them for the inaccuracy of crappy websites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
These sites just data mine to come up with their physician directories. They are horribly inaccurate in so many ways.

I'm all for getting mad at NPs but I don't think you can blame them for the inaccuracy of crappy websites.

Noted. Didn't realize that it was put together like that. I still think Vitals and Healthgrades should really fix that up though.
 
I disagree since ISIL would not have been in Iraq had Saddam been president... There are unintended consequences for these stuff. US can spend 100 years in some of these the countries in the Middle East and try to put them on 'democratic path' (whatever that means), but the moment we leave, some 20s or 30s year old captain in the Army will give a Coup Etat and we will be back to square one. That is how it has always been when you look at history... That comparison was not good; however, I agree with you about liberal and nursing....

Shh, this is how we get off topic. Bash NPs who think they are MDs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
just so you are aware, what you just explained was that there was a study highlighting that there is a difference in cost, not quality. I am not disagreeing with you that nurse practitioners may order more tests or maybe more cautious when they are treating patients, however I have not read one study stating that their quality of care is leading two patients having adverse effects. If that were the case, nurse practitioners wouldn't be allowed to work in any hospital in the country.

1. Ordering more test does not necessarily mean "more cautious."
2. Ordering more tests puts the patient at risk of both side effects of said test (for a lot of tests, unnecessary radiation), as well as consequences of treatment and work up of clinically insignificant findings (VOMIT=Victim of Medical Imaging).
3. If a nurse needs more imaging for basic workups that can be done by physicians without said imaging, what else are the nurses missing?
4. If the entire point of arguing for NPs is "they're cheaper," then doesn't that fall apart when they order more tests and imaging?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
4. If the entire point of arguing for NPs is "they're cheaper," then doesn't that fall apart when they order more tests and imaging?

Depends on the perspective. Cheaper for the provider; more expensive for the payer

Edit: And actually potentially more profitable for the provider in a strictly fee for service environment. More tests = more reimbursements
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Sigh. Don't get me started.

My favorite is the constant "pt requesting ambien to sleep" page. Then when I ask the patient about it the next morning they say "Oh, yeah, the nurse told me that ambien is really great and I just needed to ask for it."

Sigh.
In all seriousness, how does one go about responding to members of the nursing staff who are like this? I mean, especially if they are well-seasoned nurses who more or less have memorized the protocols for virtually every common sort of thing, sometimes they get a little pushy and it's quite clear they're out of their depth yet they are still expecting you to go with what they think is best. Usually they say thing like, "This is what we always do for this" and think you are incompetent and/or just a control freak for not simply signing off on their treatment plan. I've yet to have a resident explain to me the most effective way of dealing with this, especially since the nurses who do things like this typically only do it to younger residents (from what I've seen or heard).
 
When i had my blood sample drawn for my decennial check up, I asked the nurse if she would hold my hand throught it, she said no. Terrible people.
 
No, but I'm sure a whole battery of tests would be
Carcinoid tumors are notoriously difficult to visualize on CT. And I would wager that 99% of nurses don't even know what 5-HIAA is.

EDIT: nvm, misread your post.
 
it is the main metabolite of serotonin ( thank you google).
 
Carcinoid tumors are notoriously difficult to visualize on CT. And I would wager that 99% of nurses don't even know what 5-HIAA is.
In NP and PA school they most likely learn to memorize lots of protocols (since there is not any time for the in-depth pathophysiology). So each of those symptoms are probably followed up with a dozen lab and radiological studies. It is pretty well known that PAs and NPs order more tests than physicians, and its not because they are more careful but because they don't have a good knowledgebase with which to narrow things down from the start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
In all seriousness, how does one go about responding to members of the nursing staff who are like this? I mean, especially if they are well-seasoned nurses who more or less have memorized the protocols for virtually every common sort of thing, sometimes they get a little pushy and it's quite clear they're out of their depth yet they are still expecting you to go with what they think is best. Usually they say thing like, "This is what we always do for this" and think you are incompetent and/or just a control freak for not simply signing off on their treatment plan. I've yet to have a resident explain to me the most effective way of dealing with this, especially since the nurses who do things like this typically only do it to younger residents (from what I've seen or heard).

For the ambien thing specifically - I just go talk to the patient.

If they take ambien at home I don't mind prescribing it. If they are fresh post-ops I will explain to them that I don't think it is a good idea to mix in a new medication when they are on narcotics and still recovering from anesthesia. If they are a long term player and have been having real sleep trouble, and there aren't other contraindications I'm willing to try some medications but ambien is like my third line choice.

In general - it's tough. A lot of it unfortunately is just about experience and feeling comfortable enough in your own skin to stand up and explain your rationale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
For the ambien thing specifically - I just go talk to the patient.

If they take ambien at home I don't mind prescribing it. If they are fresh post-ops I will explain to them that I don't think it is a good idea to mix in a new medication when they are on narcotics and still recovering from anesthesia. If they are a long term player and have been having real sleep trouble, and there aren't other contraindications I'm willing to try some medications but ambien is like my third line choice.

In general - it's tough. A lot of it unfortunately is just about experience and feeling comfortable enough in your own skin to stand up and explain your rationale.
what are your first and second line? anti-histaminics ? benzo?
 
When you have people coming in all the time for meds and vitals, no amount of ambien is going to help you
 
In all seriousness, how does one go about responding to members of the nursing staff who are like this? I mean, especially if they are well-seasoned nurses who more or less have memorized the protocols for virtually every common sort of thing, sometimes they get a little pushy and it's quite clear they're out of their depth yet they are still expecting you to go with what they think is best. Usually they say thing like, "This is what we always do for this" and think you are incompetent and/or just a control freak for not simply signing off on their treatment plan. I've yet to have a resident explain to me the most effective way of dealing with this, especially since the nurses who do things like this typically only do it to younger residents (from what I've seen or heard).

The first step is to remember the words of The Fatman--"they can always hurt you worse." If you go and assess the patient and apply your white coat placebo to any situation you may solve it right there. A lot of times a nurse feels s/he has to do a certain thing to cover their own butt. So they might be paging you stupidly knowing that they're paging you stupidly. If you roll with these and always respond quickly to your page despite how busy you are and tell them when you'll be able to make there to see the patient then you've done your due diligence. Most times there's no clinical disagreement. In the event that there is. You're the doctor. They can take it or leave it. Assess the patient, drop a brief note documenting you're reasoning and nobody can F with you. Get support from your resident and then you're attending.

The attending sqaushes all. So if there's a problem just work it up the chain. Never make it personal between a nurse and yourself if there's disagreement.

You don't have luxuries of dropping law as matter of fact until you're an attending or in some cases a fellow or a very confident senior resident.

For interns it's pleasant customer negotiations with hostiles and friendlies alike. No matter what pretzeled contortion you have to put yourself through to do it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
In all seriousness, how does one go about responding to members of the nursing staff who are like this? I mean, especially if they are well-seasoned nurses who more or less have memorized the protocols for virtually every common sort of thing, sometimes they get a little pushy and it's quite clear they're out of their depth yet they are still expecting you to go with what they think is best. Usually they say thing like, "This is what we always do for this" and think you are incompetent and/or just a control freak for not simply signing off on their treatment plan. I've yet to have a resident explain to me the most effective way of dealing with this, especially since the nurses who do things like this typically only do it to younger residents (from what I've seen or heard).

While I don't disagree with you to some degree, I have to say, however, to be careful about generalizing.

I have learned much from residents, fellows, and attendings who were not afraid to share and discuss. But you know, there has also been a give and take dynamic. If I acted the way you described, I wouldn't have learned anything, and also, my patients would not have gotten certain things they needed.

Residents and fellows get super busy. Sometimes they may look at hemodynamic indices while being terribly exhausted--so they might look at wanting to up a particular gtt to solve a problem. Now, you the critical care RN come on shift fairly well rested and review things, and then you carefully point out the elevated SVRI w/ the decreasing CI--if you are lucky enough, you may even have a low colloidal protein level to show the resident--and perhaps this helps get them to move on colloid fluid to increase CI and decrease SVRI. (It's merely one example.)

Finally, you are able to get something more than 'titrate up on this while titrate down on that.' Mind you, it had taken you a good period of time to get the right "recipe" for that patient--but now the person is getting on the dry side and the crystalloids just go out or third space to the extremities. Amazing how colloids can even things out and give you a much improved (reasonably decreased) SVRI and increased CI. Of course you have to be careful w/ them--especially in certain patients.

But what the nurse may also find are some very new residents, who are also very sleep deprived, and so they may tend to be so conservative, that conservative is way TOO out there. Then the fellow comes along and agrees with you, the CCRN, and low and behold, we can move the patient forward. Sometimes the newer docs go the other extreme. They haven't had the clinical experience and application to balance their thinking. If you think most of medicine can function purely on EBP, well, you are in for quite an awakening.

At any rate, sometimes the docs covering are just damn tired and your patient is the umpteenth post-op. So yea. You need some insightful, experienced CCRN to carefully make a point--FOR THE PATIENT. But if the CCRN is an azz about it, it could be your pt that loses out. Sadly I have seen a number of bad choices or delays that came out of pride. The docs that keep the patient first, in light of both the science and art of medicine, IMO, make the best physicians.

In surgical recovery, a nurse that acted as you described probably wouldn't last long. There is a way to get together and get the patient what he needs. Now there are number of Ahole nurses that don't know sh!% from Shinola. But a number do know, and since they are there trending every aspect of the patient's progress, it makes sense to listen to them, and if you have time and they are interested, share the rationale for your approach. I always respect and appreciate this.

Here is something important to learn before residency: You catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Yes, from time to time, you may still get some lazy, could-care-less, or attitude-problem nurse. Many of us nurses ALSO HATE working with these nurses!!! But there are a number of nurses that do actually care about patients and outcomes and they may know a bit more than you might expect; but this depends upon the individual nurse.
 
Last edited:
Residents and fellows get super busy. Sometimes they may look at hemodynamic indices while being terribly exhausted--so they might look at wanting to up a particular gtt to solve a problem. Now, you the critical care RN come on shift fairly well rested and review things, and then you carefully point out the elevated SVRI w/ the decreasing CI--if you are lucky enough, you may even have a low colloidal protein level to show the resident--and perhaps this helps get them to move on colloid fluid to increase CI and decrease SVRI. (It's merely one example.)

Haha... You better have some filling pressures with that Index and SVR otherwise you may be telling your resident to order fluids in cardiogenic shock when that's exactly what the patient doesn't need... and then get the resident made fun of by their cardiology consultant.
 
Haha... You better have some filling pressures with that Index and SVR otherwise you may be telling your resident to order fluids in cardiogenic shock when that's exactly what the patient doesn't need... and then get the resident made fun of by their cardiology consultant.

That is why you get the whole set of hemodynamic indices/profile, which includes RA, CVP, etc. You can get the whole profile without putting in relevant pressures--or rather, having the computer capture them--and then it calculates. No one should ever look at one or two numbers, but the whole picture w/ the full assessment of pt, labs, gases, etc. If needed, you recheck. . .but always look at the whole picture. And I wrote this as one example, b/c in general, I am referring to relatively stable, direct, post-op heart pts--adults. Of course in peds the gold standard of hemodynamic profile/indices gets tricky--especially in baby hearts--looking at RA, LA pressures, but nothing, in general, as quantified by standard hemodynamic profiling in post OH adults. There is what is seen when baby/child is on the pump, but if they are not brought out on ECMO, you look at RA and LA pressures maintain close, continuous physical assessment and labs and blood gases, etc. So, there it becomes even more necessary to look at the whole patient/picture very critically. But in all situations, you have to look critically at all that is relevant. This, as you know, gets tougher, as the eyes, mind, and body becomes weary and inundated with cases.
 
Last edited:
Also, no. Usually in these areas, coverage for cardiac patients is by way of the cardiac surgical fellow; but at learning centers, others in training can get some sort of crack at these patients. It depends on a number of things. Generally, where I am speaking from example, it's a lot of cardiac surgery, and the CT surgery fellows report to the CT surgery attendings. But there are other players at various times. CT surgery is pretty protective of their patients, and the good CT surgeons can be picky about which nurses recover their patients.
 
Last edited:
The first step is to remember the words of The Fatman--"they can always hurt you worse." .......... You're the doctor. They can take it or leave it. Assess the patient, drop a brief note documenting you're reasoning and nobody can F with you. Get support from your resident and then you're attending.

The attending sqaushes all....... So if there's a problem just work it up the chain. Never make it personal between a nurse and yourself if there's disagreement.


I spoke with a nursing student the other day who was doing clinicals, and heard: "We're taught that healthcare is a TEAM sport, and to also ask ourselves, 'Why should the doctor be the boss?' We're a team, and no one person should have the say".

This is what they're taught, apparently, and therefore, it's no surprise that often there is bashing/ confusion over decision-making.

And way to go, quoting my bible ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I spoke with a nursing student the other day who was doing clinicals, and heard: "We're taught that healthcare is a TEAM sport, and to also ask ourselves, 'Why should the doctor be the boss?' We're a team, and no one person should have the say".

This is what they're taught, apparently, and therefore, it's no surprise that often there is bashing/ confusion over decision-making.

And way to go, quoting my bible ;)
To which you should respond " Because [my dear,] the best teams have captains."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
I spoke with a nursing student the other day who was doing clinicals, and heard: "We're taught that healthcare is a TEAM sport, and to also ask ourselves, 'Why should the doctor be the boss?' We're a team, and no one person should have the say".

This is what they're taught, apparently, and therefore, it's no surprise that often there is bashing/ confusion over decision-making.

And way to go, quoting my bible ;)

Well certainly some would take it and teach it that way, but only idealistic idiot nurses w/o strong clinical experience would take that attitude. It could be, however, that what the nurse was trying to communicate is that all perspectives/disciplines should be respected--especially if the ideal is everyone working towards the same ultimate goals for the patients. And neither the law, nor hospital policies would let any nurse take the perspective your yet to be experienced nurse-student may have presented. Any nurse with an ounce of experience knows that you need an order for just about anything. You can think XY&Z. You can share with doc, XYZ, and at the end of the day, the giving of the medical orders and the responsibility thereof, rests with the attending physician/s and those to which have been given some authority with re: to the pt. So, if things start looking bad enough, and if there is controversy, people are getting the attendings on the phone if need be. Hierarchy movement may be in place; but docs that have worked with X surgical-recovery CCRNs for X amount of years, who know he or she is not going to step in a potential land mind without good cause. And once more, he or she has proven her/himself to the attending. They will often hear that nurse out. No one likes to get into these kind of battles--so, it's got to be a damn good reason to do so--or the nurse doesn't have enough gonads to advocate for the patient. If he or she is making a mountain out of what turns out to be a molehill, s/he is going to be astoundingly disrespected and reprimanded--and that will go on their file notes, forms, and letters. Also, do not underestimate how badly nurses can get beaten up.

I don't like this midlevel overstep as much as most others here. It pizzes me off big time. But let's not get ridiculous and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Experienced, bright nurses see the value/importance of the physicians--and if they don't--give them a while. They will. If they refuse to see the obvious, I have to wonder about them overall as nurses. Any nurse or doc worth their weight in gold can comprehend the value of best practices in care as their pertain to each, individual patient--and best practices in medicine, in general, go to physicians that have been well-educated and trained and carefully supervised/evaluated/mentored.
Frankly I am tired of the overstepping issue and I am tired of the nurse-bashing. Some nurses may deserve it. Many do not. Everyone needs to really switch sides for a second to try and see what each other does and what is required. Most nurses I know of aren't crazy militant about the said issues. They have eyes, hears, brains. They can see.
 
Well certainly some would take it and teach it that way, but only idealistic idiot nurses w/o strong clinical experience would take that attitude. It could be, however, that what the nurse was trying to communicate is that all perspectives/disciplines should be respected--especially if the ideal is everyone working towards the same ultimate goals for the patients. And neither the law, nor hospital policies would let any nurse take the perspective your yet to be experienced nurse-student may have presented. Any nurse with an ounce of experience knows that you need an order for just about anything. You can think XY&Z. You can share with doc, XYZ, and at the end of the day, the giving of the medical orders and the responsibility thereof, rests with the attending physician/s and those to which have been given some authority with re: to the pt. So, if things start looking bad enough, and if there is controversy, people are getting the attendings on the phone if need be. Hierarchy movement may be in place; but docs that have worked with X surgical-recovery CCRNs for X amount of years, who know he or she is not going to step in a potential land mind without good cause. And once more, he or she has proven her/himself to the attending. They will often hear that nurse out. No one likes to get into these kind of battles--so, it's got to be a damn good reason to do so--or the nurse doesn't have enough gonads to advocate for the patient. If he or she is making a mountain out of what turns out to be a molehill, s/he is going to be astoundingly disrespected and reprimanded--and that will go on their file notes, forms, and letters. Also, do not underestimate how badly nurses can get beaten up.

I don't like this midlevel overstep as much as most others here. It pizzes me off big time. But let's not get ridiculous and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Experienced, bright nurses see the value/importance of the physicians--and if they don't--give them a while. They will. If they refuse to see the obvious, I have to wonder about them overall as nurses. Any nurse or doc worth their weight in gold can comprehend the value of best practices in care as their pertain to each, individual patient--and best practices in medicine, in general, go to physicians that have been well-educated and trained and carefully supervised/evaluated/mentored.
Frankly I am tired of the overstepping issue and I am tired of the nurse-bashing. Some nurses may deserve it. Many do not. Everyone needs to really switch sides for a second to try and see what each other does and what is required. Most nurses I know of aren't crazy militant about the said issues. They have eyes, hears, brains. They can see.


Sure, I agree. I'm not being ridiculous, nor throwing out the baby with the bath water, nor am I saying that all nurses are dumb, or that they are not capable of growing with experience, or that their insights are not warranted/valid. I pointed out one specific instance, with this inexperienced nurse student, with the talking point that she did not learn this only on her own, as told to me directly by none other than her. She communicated to me that she had been encouraged by her instructors to ask why doctors get to make the decisions, and not in a "let's understand why" sort of way, but in a, "why do they get to be the boss" way. Yes, I'm sure she misunderstood (I hope that's what happened), but she was very firm and passionate in her statements. It's not unreasonable to assume that she isn't the only one, and that is doesn't have an effect on the mentality towards physicians.

I agree that both sides should be looked at. I have experienced both sides. I have made no claims of underestimating how nurses are treated. In fact, I've made no claims about their conditions at all.

There are good and bad nurses and doctors. Also, never was it stated that input from nurses is never welcome, because they can't handle it, or that medicine isn't a team sport. Only pointing out that she, and likely many of her classmates, if either due to inexperience or false information, don't yet understand the importance of order and hierarchy. It's not invalid to make the statement (as I did) that often, confusion arises from this, just as saying "all nurses are stupid, they don't know anything, blah blah blah", results in the rise in, and misunderstanding of, nurses, that comes from these types of debates from our side, which is also not fair.

All apologies, if my original post came off as perhaps condescending. Certainly not the intention.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Haha... You better have some filling pressures with that Index and SVR otherwise you may be telling your resident to order fluids in cardiogenic shock when that's exactly what the patient doesn't need... and then get the resident made fun of by their cardiology consultant.

When I was an intern, I admitted a patient to telemetry who was clearly in cardiogenic shock and volume overloaded. He also had **** for renal function. He was hypotensive and the nurses began talking **** about me to each other (it was my first or second week) and continue talking **** about me to the cardiology attending who showed up for consultation, because I refused to "push fluids" at their demand.

The cardiologist was one of the nicest guys in the hospital, but he tore into them when he heard this, and accused the nurses of trying to "kill the patient with ignorance." Maybe he was just having a bad day, but it was pretty amusing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Sure, I agree. I'm not being ridiculous, nor throwing out the baby with the bath water, nor am I saying that all nurses are dumb, or that they are not capable of growing with experience, or that their insights are not warranted/valid. I pointed out one specific instance, with this inexperienced nurse student, with the talking point that she did not learn this only on her own, as told to me directly by none other than her. She communicated to me that she had been encouraged by her instructors to ask why doctors get to make the decisions, and not in a "let's understand why" sort of way, but in a, "why do they get to be the boss" way. Yes, I'm sure she misunderstood (I hope that's what happened), but she was very firm and passionate in her statements. It's not unreasonable to assume that she isn't the only one, and that is doesn't have an effect on the mentality towards physicians.

I agree that both sides should be looked at. I have experienced both sides. I have made no claims of underestimating how nurses are treated. In fact, I've made no claims about their conditions at all.

There are good and bad nurses and doctors. Also, never was it stated that input from nurses is never welcome, because they can't handle it, or that medicine isn't a team sport. Only pointing out that she, and likely many of her classmates, if either due to inexperience or false information, don't yet understand the importance of order and hierarchy. It's not invalid to make the statement (as I did) that often, confusion arises from this, just as saying "all nurses are stupid, they don't know anything, blah blah blah", results in the rise in, and misunderstanding of, nurses, that comes from these types of debates from our side, which is also not fair.

All apologies, if my original post came off as perhaps condescending. Certainly not the intention.

You're not being condescending at all. There is a pervasive cultural undermining of expertise and hierarchy in the general public which nursing dogma has harnessed and maximized for its own objectives.

For medical students if you have one thought in your head that you'll fix all this as an intern, you pull your car over right now, hold a gun to its head and tell it to get the F out.

Instead you utilize their mindset and direct it at decisions of no clinical consequence. Gee whiz, I'd hate to have to do an enema...what do you like to use for your constipated patients? And so on.

Also, the wider cultural impulse often goes belly up in the practical world. Most nurses want you to be The Doctor when a family is pestering them to speak to one. Or when the **** is hitting the fan or for whatever other reasons.

Also there's a lot of foreign born nurses that work harder and respect hierarchy that serve to rudder against the tide of Bolshevism.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'm sorry @GomersGoToGround. I didn't mean to make it sound like I was singling out your comment. The thing is, I think you are probably an experienced physician. So, if you are a balanced thinker, you realize the stupidity of such extremes. The thing is, it seems that people that are say med students or those without enough clinical experience, may be more adversarial toward nurses. That's problematic, b/c both disciplines need each other for the sake of patients and progress.

I fear some newer nurses may be fed the kind of garbage that you describe. All they need to do is get some serious experience--see how quickly some patients swirl the bowl. Then they need to spend time working with residents, fellows, and attendings. After that, it would probably be a good idea for them to spend time talking with some NPs turned MDs or DOs.

But I think both extremes in thinking are problematic. There really is no place for this whole “Us vs. Them” mentality in healthcare. You are right. Everyone has their role and needs to respect others in their roles. The midlevel overstep needs to be challenged based on, what to me is obvious, and that is the depth, rigors, time, and evaluation processes that go into the role of becoming a physician. If you can't match any of that, then to be working as completely independent is to be exposing the patient/s to eventual risks.

Also, even when providers are truly on the same level, they need each other in the way that iron sharpens iron. There are many times when multiple medical professionals are needed in order to make an optimal decision about care--and, at least where I have worked, the CCRN's role and input was often considered a valuable part of the decision-making process. The reason is b/c we have to be like the eyes and ears of the physicians when they cannot be there. We can't afford then to practice in ignorance--and we shouldn't be allowed to do so.

I think midlevel practitioners are NOT putting the patients first when they insist on full independence, and in reality, no one, including physicians, functions in a vacuum. So physicians are not some kings on thrones making ultimate decisions--not usually anyway--not the wise ones. They may have their own styles or approaches, but if they need consults, they get them. If they are approaching a very problematic patient, they meet together and discuss the situation and the pros and cons of various approaches. If any practitioner isolates from the input of others on a regular basis, they are putting the patients they serve at risk. I would never want to be a NP in full independent practice. I want input and direction and to be challenged where necessary.

So Yes. I am scared about the extreme mentalities certain sectors of the nurse communities are spreading, I am scared when they put nurses with very little experience in NP programs. They nurses often haven't learned enough clinically, and they are not going to compensate for that loss in NP programs IMHO. But just try to stop schools from churning out advance practice nurses with limited clinical experience. We haven't seen the full fallout from this yet.
 
Last edited:
When I was an intern, I admitted a patient to telemetry who was clearly in cardiogenic shock and volume overloaded. He also had **** for renal function. He was hypotensive and the nurses began talking **** about me to each other (it was my first or second week) and continue talking **** about me to the cardiology attending who showed up for consultation, because I refused to "push fluids" at their demand.

The cardiologist was one of the nicest guys in the hospital, but he tore into them when he heard this, and accused the nurses of trying to "kill the patient with ignorance." Maybe he was just having a bad day, but it was pretty amusing.


Yea, I addressed this. That's not at all what I am talking about. You also have ignorant nurses that think that adding volume is necessarily bad, even when the hemodynamic profile and the full presentation of the patient demonstrates the value of adding the right kind of judicious volume. It's learning and experience with a variety of these kinds of patients that can make all the difference.

It's not a one size fits all kind of deal. And as the CCRN there, you had better have your numbers, labs, assessments, tight I&O's, etc before you talk up a cardiac surgeon. Nurse, intern, whatever, you will get your butt handed to you if you can't make the case. Even sometimes when you can, there are, sadly, times when you may watch a patient go needlessly down the toilet b/c of a person's sheer pride. Those situations are heartbreaking. You do what you can to advocate, and then you try to find a way to live with the outcome. The few times I have worked with such people, I did my best to limit how much I have to interact with them or pray for other surgeons' patients to recover. If it was a dangerous site or put patients at risk, I would leave. Luckily I have only had to leave such a place once in my career. That's why it is good to start out learning in stellar centers with great surgeons and great education systems; b/c you learn how things are done right. You don't have to unlearn a bunch of bad stuff.
 
Last edited:
No offense, but again Nas, I am not sure where you have worked, but your disdain for nursing is a bit extreme.
Presenting a polarizing philosophy/attitude makes things so much worse. And if you think that an experienced nurse doesn't know when he or she is being condescended to, well you are deceiving yourself. He or she may act like they missed it, but they are just letting it roll of their backs, b/c they too have stuff to do. Such attitudes just worsens the ability to optimally help patients. That nurse is going to have doubts about you and working with you and your ability to advocate for patients. Building trust is a big deal in this kind of work-setting.
It undermines the “cause” by continuing in the whole vein of an “Us versus Them” mentality. You get nurses and patients and others that say, “See! It’s all about a pissing and turf war with physicians!” Do you not see that acts as a catalyst for the very political mentality that needs to slow down and stop?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top