MD's who are greedy/in areas without many MD's use DNP's/PA's to run large practices that would otherwise be impossible with a single MD.
So the people who are doing a lot of work autonomously feel like they should be able to run their own practices. This seems fair to me in that regard.
But at the same time, it cannot be denied that nurses have much less training than doctors. So, when a patient goes to a clinic run by a DNP, what kind of care will they get? Should these clinics be limited to small procedures that even a nurse can do without insane knowledge?
I personally feel like there is a role for DNP's having independent clinics as it will allow rural areas to get medical care but at the same time, it can be dangerous as their knowledge base is much smaller than doctors.
the same time, it can be dangerous as their knowledge base is much smaller than doctors.
And yet, if you look at studies comparing outcomes of patients of MDs and patients of NPs, the outcomes are comparable. Here's one article as an example; you should be able to find plenty more. Medscape: Medscape Access
I don't really agree that NPs have a smaller knowledge base. It's a different knowledge base. Different doesn't mean inferior. Let's compare education of two of my friends. One friend is a new MD, one is a new DNP, both graduated around the same time. The MD didn't get a BS degree, they got their school's requirements and were a few credits short of it. The DNP had a BSN, B.S. Biology, and B.S. Chemistry. The MD student didn't see patients outside of volunteer work until her second year. The DNP started clinical his first semester. The MD only did school. The DNP practiced as a CNA, then an LPN before becoming an RN. They worked as a floor nurse while going after their DNP. In the end, they had a lot more experience with patient interaction, and it shows. It bothers the DNP when people ask them why they didn't just go to medical school, because he likes being an NP, and feels he gets to know his patients on a more personal level. The MD, she's very good at what she does but has a very different mindset.
I live in a state that allows independent practice for NPs. It's working out pretty well for us. We have NPs who work in the ER. They are important parts of the team. We have NPs who work in clinics. We have FNPs who have their own practices. We have NPs who round in our hospitals. I really like working with them, because most of them have been nursing assistants and they've all been nurses at some point. It helps to integrate the healthcare team when you have someone who relates to both the nurse and provider side.
AT least for primary care I would not really be against NPs having the ability to gain autonomy. I am still on the wall about it but after a few years experience they should be able to sit for some sort of exam and be able to, especially in rural areas. But without having a few years under their belt and passing at least one additional exam and possibly an oral exam it should not happen. It would fill primary care gaps and also weed out those who should be continually supervised by physicians, but would give those who shine a chance to do it on their own.
I live/work in a state where NPs are supervised, but I do not feel like I am supervised. They see their own patients and I see mine. They will tell me if they see something particularly interesting just to share, but never get involved with any decisions or care provided. They are available for questions and generally tell me what they may do, but always express that it is my decision how I treat. I enjoy being part of a group and learn so much from them but never feel restricted by my states approach.
I live/work in a state where NPs are supervised, but I do not feel like I am supervised. .
In no way directed at you or your skills however if the point of allowing NPs to go through a short program based on the criteria in some states to have supervision it is concerning to me that this rarely happens. It was my experience also prior to gaining full practice authority. Nothing changed except I didn't need an attestation agreement and although I'm happy for the autonomy the truth is its kind of scary that it didn't really make any difference in my day to day operations.
if the point of allowing NPs to go through a short program based on the criteria in some states to have supervision it is concerning to me that this rarely happens. .
I think the whole supervision issue has more political ties than anything else. The AMA does not want NPs creeping into their territory. As long as they control the medical care by not allowing independent practice my NPs they keep us in check.
I have other friends in other states where they are micromanaged by their collaborating physician. I am thankful I do not have that. I am however glad to have my docs around to provide advice and teach because they really are smart cookies and my patients benefit by the association.