Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP): My Personal Pro's and Con's

Nursing opens a wealth of opportunities through academic advancement. One such option is the Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP). This article does not aim to endorse or discredit this degree, rather, it attempts to explain the author's thoughts on how the degree fits in with his professional goals. Specialties Doctoral Article

Updated:  

The Doctor of Nursing Practice or DNP degree has been one of the biggest buzzwords in Advanced Practice Nursing. The mere mention of it creates a stir of emotions and strong opposing opinions perhaps of the same magnitude as the liberal versus conservative views prevalent in our current political climate. Unlike nursing buzzwords that come and go depending on what is en vogue at the moment, current Advanced Practice Nurses (APN's) who hold stronger feelings of opposition rather than agreement with the degree would be foolish to ignore the issue. There are strong indicators that support the argument that this degree is here for good.

For one, Advanced Practice Nursing while a smaller subgroup within the larger nursing milieu has shown tremendous ability to self-regulate and adapt to change. Indeed, the speed at which change have occurred in the APN environment is astonishing. The Nurse Practitioner movement, for instance, borne out of an idea in the 1960's, have now blossomed into a membership of more than 180,000 professionals (Pearson Report, 2011). In that period of time, Nurse Practitioner (NP) training completely transitioned to post-licensure nursing programs leading to a certificate to the current graduate degree offerings at the Master's and Doctoral level. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have even kept up with this change and will only grant provider status to NP's who are trained in a graduate degree program.

One can argue that the number of DNP programs have consistently grown in numbers since the first discussion on building a practice doctorate in nursing began in 2002. The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) lists 139 institutions with DNP programs around the country, roughly 20% of the total number of member institutions totaling 670 (AACN Program List). Twenty percent may seem small but bear in mind that not all AACN member institutions are offering graduate-level programs that have a potential to be transitioned to DNP. Also, the current program list does not include online DNP programs offered by for-profit institutions that have various locations in different states of jurisdiction. My take home message from these data is that while the recommendation for making the DNP a requirement for entry to practice as an APN is farther from becoming a reality by 2015, the pace at which programs are opening up will continue and the degree is here to stay whether we like it or not.

The DNP was just an idea when I finished my training as an Acute Care Nurse Practitioner (ACNP) in 2003. At the time, academic options were clear to me: pursue a Master's degree with my preferred nurse practitioner focus; get certified in the specialty, and voila, I am all set to practice as an ACNP. The option for further academic advancement at the Doctoral level was also very clear: the next step is a PhD or a DNSc both of which have become identical in content. In fact, numerous faculty members encouraged us to consider returning to the halls of the same university (or maybe even another institution) as a PhD student at some point in our career. The idea had a glamorous appeal to it in my mind at the time and I did entertain the thought of following through. Even to this day, I still struggle with the idea and have not come to a conclusion on what the right Doctoral education path to take. What's worse, this whole DNP agenda threw a curveball in my decision-making process.

As an Acute Care Nurse Practitioner since 2004, I have matured and continue to grow professionally in my knowledge and skills as a clinician. I have stayed in the field of Critical Care as an NP since 2005 and have felt this to be my niche early in my career. In my personal quest both for academic advancement and to grow as a healthcare provider, I do not share the sentiments that the ideal MSN to DNP Bridge should be loaded with clinical content by adding so called "residencies". Don't get me wrong, I feel strongly that clinical content could undeniably be improved in the current manifestations of BSN to MSN or BSN to DNP programs for NP's. But I'm being selfish in my personal goals: since I already practice in a heavily patient care-based setting where knowledge and skills already get tested daily, my needs are different. In other words, I do not need a DNP to get a "residency" in Critical Care because I live and breathe in this specialty day in and day out.

DNP courses that deal with leadership, management, the politics of healthcare, and the financial aspect of providing healthcare can be appealing to individuals in my professional level. This is the reason why there already exist multidisciplinary degree options outside of nursing that addressed this content even before the DNP was conceived. I remember a Cardiothoracic Surgeon I knew who went to a prestigious graduate school of business for a Master's degree in Healthcare Administration. The guy had big dreams of being a division chief or a CEO. A nurse manager in one of the units pursued a Master's degree in Nursing Service Administration because she had high hopes of climbing the ladder ultimately as a Chief Nursing Officer one day. Though I consider myself a clinician foremost, a business degree is a must should I decide to pursue a role in administration. That said, I do not think a DNP is necessary if I was to pursue this direction in my career given the other degree options that already exist.

It seems to me like the DNP marketing machine has been trying to convince NP's like me to think that we need a DNP in order to learn from courses that focus on translating research evidence into clinical practice. I find this to be untrue and insulting to currently practicing NP's trained under the Master's degree model who use evidence-based practice in providing care to their patients every day. However, a Capstone Project utilizing Translational Research is a great idea in itself and though such an activity can be accomplished outside of academia, the DNP student who conducts this endeavor is provided with structure and mentoring from experts in any field of inquiry they are interested in. This particular aspect of the DNP convinces me of the value in getting this degree.

The last argument I have been trying to contend with is the DNP's future in terms level of acceptance in academic roles in schools and colleges of nursing. There has not been a straight answer on how universities determine academic ranking for DNP-prepared faculty as this continue to vary depending on the institution. In the years I've been at the bedside as a nurse and as an Advanced Practice Nurse, I have acquired a great deal of past experiences and lessons learned that are worthy of being passed on to new generations of nurses who wish to follow the path I took. A role in the academia, though not attractive at the present given the low earning potential, is inevitable in my future. However, I seek assurance that the degree I pursue is held at the highest regard in terms of advancement in the field of nursing education. It is still tempting to forego the DNP for the much respected PhD in Nursing.

Will352nd said:
But it has little to do with being "better" or being more "competent", and everything to do with having a better lobby that is independent of the BOM.

I hear this quite a bit from people outside of nursing in a variety of contexts (not just related to NP practice), and I'm always amused. Where on earth did you get the idea that the "nursing lobby" is powerful or effective? If that were true, the entire face of US healthcare would be v. different from what it is now. Just as one example, TPTB in nursing have been pushing for close to 40 years to make the BSN the minimum eligibility for licensure, and they are no closer to getting that mandated than they were then. They've only convinced one state to try it, and that state rescinded the legislation several years later. The ANA has been advocating for some version of a single-payer system for healthcare in this country at least since the '90s, and they're no closer to getting that implemented than they are to flying to the moon. Any political/professional advances made by nursing happen not because of the power or know-how of the "nursing lobby," but because other, more powerful, stakeholders on a particular issue see it as a benefit for them and/or their constituents. And nursing is very rarely able to get anything passed/implemented/changed if the physician community isn't willing to go along with whatever it is.

elkpark said:
I hear this quite a bit from people outside of nursing in a variety of contexts (not just related to NP practice), and I'm always amused. Where on earth did you get the idea that the "nursing lobby" is powerful or effective? If that were true, the entire face of US healthcare would be v. different from what it is now. Just as one example, TPTB in nursing have been pushing for close to 40 years to make the BSN the minimum eligibility for licensure, and they are no closer to getting that mandated than they were then. They've only convinced one state to try it, and that state rescinded the legislation several years later. The ANA has been advocating for some version of a single-payer system for healthcare in this country at least since the '90s, and they're no closer to getting that implemented than they are to flying to the moon. Any political/professional advances made by nursing happen not because of the power or know-how of the "nursing lobby," but because other, more powerful, stakeholders on a particular issue see it as a benefit for them and/or their constituents. And nursing is very rarely able to get anything passed/implemented/changed if the physician community isn't willing to go along with whatever it is.

It's interesting to the hear that you don't think the AANP and the ANA as a whole, don't have clout. You described that change is difficult...yes, it is. You won't get it all and there will always be push-back from other organizations. But change happens....eventually.

The AAPA is subset of the AMA that has little interest in pushing the needs of the AAPA. The AANP has the backing and clout of the ANA, which is a beast. Power and numbers = money.

The AANP has an organization within that is dedicated to State and Federal legislation...the AAPA can't even get their foot in the door. Again, it's power in numbers....money talks.

AANP - Legislation/ Regulation Have a look, I cruised this for about 5 mins and saw more legislative initiatives being pushed now than the AAPA has been able to accomplish in ten years.

Really, you guys should be proud of your organization. I'm sure it's not perfect, but there are tangibles that you can see.

Will352nd said:
It's interesting to the hear that you don't think the AANP and the ANA as a whole, don't have clout. You described that change is difficult...yes, it is. You won't get it all and there will always be push-back from other organizations. But change happens....eventually.

The AAPA is subset of the AMA that has little interest in pushing the needs of the AAPA. The AANP has the backing and clout of the ANA, which is a beast. Power and numbers = money.

The AANP has an organization within that is dedicated to State and Federal legislation...the AAPA can't even get their foot in the door. Again, it's power in numbers....money talks.

AANP - Legislation/ Regulation Have a look, I cruised this for about 5 mins and saw more legislative initiatives being pushed now than the AAPA has been able to accomplish in ten years.

Really, you guys should be proud of your organization. I'm sure it's not perfect, but there are tangibles that you can see.

Sure, all the national nursing organizations have divisions that are "pushing" state and federal initiatives -- but how many of those ever get passed?? I stick by my belief that, if the nursing "lobby" were as powerful as many non-nursing people seem to believe it is, the entire healthcare system in this country would look and function radically different than how it does now. I'm sorry you're unhappy with your own professional organization(s), but we (nurses) are not calling the shots or getting what we want. The very idea is laughable.

I am comparing and contrasting the AANP and the AAPA....this isn't a pi@#ing contest.

This a very interesting article. I always thought that getting my BS in Business and MBA wouldn't help my furture nursing career at all, but this article made me think it might not be so bad to have after all. It gives me hope for the furture. I plan on becoming a Nurse Pracitioner. I just love having options!

Specializes in Family Nurse Practitioner.

This is an old article so I'd be interested to see if the OPs opinion stands.

The DNP would be very attractive to me if it was a selective admissions program with a focus on enhancing my skills and knowledge as a clinician which it does not. It appears the cow is out of the barn so very soon everyone and their Mother will feel entitled to be called "Dr." with minimal to no expectations that the person is actually a skilled clinician on any level. It makes me both sad and embarrassed to be a nurse although on the flip side the really amazing NPs are usually recognized as such in local circles.

I agree with Julie A. The "standards" to raise nursing practice are all great, but what really IS the value of a DNP? It should reflect skills with clinical practice yet I hear the students I work with tell me, 'The nurses that teach us with Doctorates are clueless. I'd rather have an MSN be my clinical educator because they often have been at the bedside." Just because you have a doctorate does not make youa clinical expert. And yes, I also think NPs and PAs are an asset to all of us. I thought about getting my PA because I was more interested in the hands on type thing. But there is a fine line between NP's and PAs and in our Academic institution they do the same thing.

Specializes in Outpatient Psychiatry.

Before I go further, let me qualify that I'll receive my MSN on 5/16/15. I chose Psych advanced practice a career and not "nursing" as a career so I don't have anything directly invested in nursing. Nursing was merely the path to do the job of a psychiatric evaluator, prescriber, etc. Does that make sense?

I am of the opinion that for an APRN to move into healthcare management the most obvious route is that of a graduate certificate in healthcare administration focusing on such content as healthcare finance and economics, personnel management, and healthcare policy as those things are deficient in MSN programs for APRNs. However, the MSN is sufficient (sometimes too much) in breadth to need more training in research, public health, nursing theory, etc. Frankly, I feel like MSN administration degrees are meritless. If I were going to spend 42 semester credits on a master's degree in an area of healthcare administration I would rather pursue an MHSA or MBA of any focus.

With respect to the PhD, I must attest that I have of recent months been mulling over the idea of a PhD. It would not do anything whatsoever for me clinically, but it would certainly add to my knowledge base and give me the clear opportunity to pursue academia. My personal interests for a PhD lend towards experimental psychology, and must of the research I've done for my last year of a three year MSN has not been drawn from any nursing research. Put bluntly, I am not interested in studying or furthering the theories of nursing. However, I fully understand that a PhD in nursing has merits, and if I were not constrained by nursing-heavy research and theory I would likely pursue a much shorter nursing PhD.

The DNP is another option I've given cursory regard. However, it is merely 33 semester credits, and they are geared towards application and translation of research into practice. Clearly, this isn't worthwhile for me referring to the previous paragraph. The remainder of the courses are business-esque while the PhD at the same state university includes one "healthcare as a business" type of course. I'm not presently ready or interested in healthcare administration. I don't believe in many of the current policies nor am I in favor of satisfaction-driven reimbursement thus I will not administer a program based on those demands.

I think a knowledge gap is still in place. I would prefer a master's program for NPs more aligned with PA programs yet maintaining the inclusion of a specialty focus. For the soon to be master's grad or the NP already in practice it would be foolhardy to enter such a fictitious master's program. That leads me back to existing norms, and I feel that a "midlevel" or physician extender does not need to match degrees with a physician. If that be the case, why even have mids or extenders in practice? In summary, if you want research go for a PhD, if you want admin, get a cert or another master's. I think the DNP is, unfortunately, a folly.

Specializes in ACNP-BC, Adult Critical Care, Cardiology.

Glad to see the discussion still going...

I didn't make the plunge to the DNP and have no plans to do it in the near future. I work in an environment where there aren't a lot of NP's with DNP's. That is partly because we are part of an institution that even in this year 2015, had not started to offer a DNP program. Not sure what the reasoning behind that is...elitism, funding, the fact that the Master's programs are flourishing with many applicants, it's probably all of those.

I am not sure what an ideal DNP program would be in my case...I am a clinician foremost and I already learn everyday that I work by watching bench to bedside concepts come into action in my practice and updating myself of current evidence in day to day patient care decisions. If anything, I would pursue a doctoral degree to advance into leadership roles but I am afraid that would take me away from the bedside as a provider and that is not in line with my career goals.

Down the line, I could see myself in academia and research and the PhD is the path for that but I am friends with a few who are in that field and the more I talk to them, the more unappealing it sounds.

I am on par with juan. it does not seem to add much worth to ourselves to get a dnp. I love school and love to learn but i believe i can add more to my practice just by reading books written by MDs and focusing on studying uptodate.

Seems to just be another money sucking degree bloating scheme.

Specializes in Critical Care>Family Practice.

It is difficult to see the value in anything if you have not experienced it. In the same respect, it is difficult to see the value in the Doctor of Nursing Practice degree if you do not have it. I juxtapose this degree with the BSN degree. It is equally difficult for ADNs to see the value in the BSN degree from and ADN perspective. When the BSN came forth, everyone felt that it was idiotic and now it is commonplace. In my opinion, the DNP is similar. The DNP is definitely NOT a Ph.D. since the focus is on translation of existing evidence to improve patient outcomes and NOT generating new knowledge from scratch. The DNP degree, however, is a relatively novel one so it hard to predict the future benefits. How long did it take for researchers to determine that BSNs provide higher quality nursing care through enhanced critical thinking analysis and judgment?

Does the DNP change your state scope of practice? Not really. Will it make you a better clinician? Possibly-depends on individual attributes of clinicians. Do those interviewing a new or old NP for a position care about the fact that you have a DNP? Not yet. I say, not yet, because research on DNP outcomes is yet to be obtained and disseminated.

For those of you who doubt that the DNP will enhance your professional career for the cost of obtaining it, I can completely understand. At this point in time, the decision to get your DNP is a personal choice and empirical evidence to support the notion that DNPs provide better care is lacking. One of the greatest benefits that I can see from demanding that all schools conform to DNP model as the new standard for NPs is reduction of the number of NP graduates annually. This could go two ways. 1) The new standards truly produce the best and brightest while culling others...while reducing flooding of the NP market or 2) Institutions of higher education simply "water down" DNP curriculum so they can continue to make money off the massive NP market. The jury is still out.

If I had to make my decision to do a BSN-DNP program versus a BSN-MSN program, I would still choose the BSN-DNP program. The future is uncertain. I didn't want to be 60 years old and unemployed because I chose the quick route (not to say that will happen).

Specializes in Outpatient Psychiatry.

It makes no sense whatsoever to have a degree geared toward the translation of research into practice. I think it's stupid. We know that most nurses are merely task masters that do a variety of tasks throughout their day and go home with limited opportunity afforded to think. They rely, whether realizing it or not, on managers and policy makers to adopt new practice trends, and it makes no sense, coming from perspectives of time and money, for any type of clinical nurse to hold a doctorate in research translation. There's not going to be money for it, and any amount of degrees aren't going to change unit practices. For APRNs, the same applies. Read books. Read journals. Reference databases. Apply what you learn. A degree in research translation really doesn't broaden one's education. I have now taken three courses in research methodology and utilization and feel I can scrutinize any number of research articles to determine efficacy for my practice. A doctorate in nurse practice to me suggests one will receive advanced study in nursing practice. How is research translation direct nursing practice? I personally feel that APRNs could be better clinically prepared with most study of the -ologies and subspecialties. For example, I would LOVE to have taken specific coursework in medical biochemistry, neurobiology, neurology, etc, but instead I took a few research classes, nurse theory, advanced community concepts (whatever that was?!), and a myriad of other crap that doesn't help my practice. To be a psychiatric provider I don't need a doctorate in research translation, but I do need training in all the many areas that ultimately comprise my field.

Any number of the following would have been much more welcomed:

Neuroscience

Neurobiology

Neuroanatomy

Neurology

Personality Theory

Psychoanalysis

Interpersonal Psychotherapy

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

Social Psychology electives even

Psychometric interpretation

Medical biochemistry

Physiology

Pathophysiology

Pathology

Pharmacology

Psychopharmacology

As it is, I had a course in "advanced physiology and pathophysiology" that was really a junk course (a topic of another discussion), clinical pharmacology (which was the best class I had), and psychopharmacology (which was the second best class I had).