You don't need RN experience to get an NP job

[FullGlass]

I'm a new grad Adult and Geri Primary Care NP. I do not have RN experience. Since I started seriously pounding the pavement in my job search, I have had numerous phone and in person interviews. I've also received multiple job offers.

Has anyone asked me if I had RN experience? Yes. When I answer that I have none, here are the 2 responses I've received:

"Good for you!"

"You must be very smart."

This will probably upset some readers, but it's the truth.

There are some job postings for new grad NPs for outpatient specialty positions that do require RN experience - oncology is one.

Conclusion: if you want to be a Primary Care NP, you are fine going straight from BSN to MSN. There are plenty of employers that will be happy to have you, at least in the Western U.S.

[Dodongo, APRN, NP]

When I get an email notification for a thread, there is a blue clickable unsubscribe right next to the read topic option.

edited to say: also at the top of this page, there should be a blue button that says bookmark and has a minus sign on it. Try clicking on that.

Ah, it's in the email! Nothing on the thread/page itself, oddly enough.

[BCgradnurse, MSN, RN, NP]

What exactly is a "provider trainee role"? My jobs were paying me top dollar and expected me to be able to carry a full load from day one.

Maybe the poster is referring to a residency?

[handmaiden08]

From working with PAs who do not know nursing and NPs who have nursing experience...NPs with nursing experience are much more pleasant to work with because they write orders as if there is a person on the other end fulfilling them! But I guess work relationships, efficiency, work flow, and nurse satisfaction don't matter as long as the patient is happy.

[traumaRUs, MSN, APRN]

In an attempt to get this thread back on track: I wanted to check this out and found this published in 2016:

State Level Projections for Supply and Demand of PCP 2013-2025:

Primary Care Nurse Practitioners

Projected differences between supply and demand for primary care NPs vary across states.

Looking at each state's 2013 primary care NP supply minus its 2013 NP demand again reveals both shortages and surpluses.

These range from an estimated shortage of 1,900 FTE primary care NPs in California to an estimated surplus of 1,090 FTE NPs in Tennessee. Twenty-three states had an estimated shortage of primary care NPs in 2013, but only California had a deficit of more than 1,000 FTE NPs. Only Tennessee had a surplus of more than 1,000 FTE primary care NPs.

In 2025, no state is projected to have a shortage of primary care NPs. Projected surpluses range from less than 100 FTE NPs (4 states and the District of Columbia) to 5,350 FTE NPs (Texas). Thirteen states are projected to have a primary care NP surplus in excess of 1,000 FTEs in 2025.

[SpankedInPittsburgh, DNP, RN]

Well, Well, Well a post that just doesn't basically say "you are a poopy-face". How completely refreshing. Any shortage in any market will usually be filled or over-filled by supply. This is what is happening with NPs. There was a great shortage of PCPs as docs didn't want to take up low-paying specialties in med school because (among other thing) of carrying immense student loans around. This being the case capitalism responded and many, many NP programs were set up. Nurses jumped into these programs for whatever individual reason they had and sooner or later a glut will occur. How does one control the glut? All of these programs are subject to accreditation for licensing in states. It seems from some of these threads that quality educational experiences are not being offered at some institutions and grads are coming out of them that can't do the job. Simply put perhaps some of these programs should be looked at and shut down. If the market will not accept this level of NPs being produced then less & more high quality ones should be the only ones on the market. However, we show no signs of doing this. It seems that nursing has made a decision to vastly expand its role in numbers in primary care and mid-level providers. Furthermore, our desire to raise nursing education standards has lead to the implementation of DNP programs that have a CAPSTONE focus which has little to do with the actual role the new NP will play. I agree with many posters who state that program standardization should occur and these programs should have a strong clinical backbone with perhaps the last year of a DNP program serving as a residency of sorts instead of doing statistical analysis which most grads will never, ever do again. Anyway, good morning and that's my 2 cents for now

[Jules A, MSN]

Maybe the poster is referring to a residency?

Which would be a beautiful thing but I rarely hear of them. Not that this is especially noteworthy but I haven't ever known a NP who attended one.

I do know a local hospital that stopped hiring new grad psych NPs and eventually started an extended orientation program due to the lack of preparedness. While I view this as a plus in one respect I'm also embarrassed that our expensive and lofty programs appear to shirk responsibility in ensuing we are able to practice to our full scope upon board certification without a significant time and financial commitment on the part of employers.

[Oldmahubbard]

There is no substitute for experience in Psych.

I had a call recently from our practice manager about a fairly new employee in another part of the state, a Psych NP, who is having difficulty.

She graduated last May.

I can talk to her on the phone, I'm glad to do so, but mostly it's experience. Which she won't get much of in the LTC setting.

[djmatte, ADN, MSN, RN, NP]

Well, Well, Well a post that just doesn't basically say "you are a poopy-face". How completely refreshing. Any shortage in any market will usually be filled or over-filled by supply. This is what is happening with NPs. There was a great shortage of PCPs as docs didn't want to take up low-paying specialties in med school because (among other thing) of carrying immense student loans around. This being the case capitalism responded and many, many NP programs were set up. Nurses jumped into these programs for whatever individual reason they had and sooner or later a glut will occur. How does one control the glut? All of these programs are subject to accreditation for licensing in states. It seems from some of these threads that quality educational experiences are not being offered at some institutions and grads are coming out of them that can't do the job. Simply put perhaps some of these programs should be looked at and shut down. If the market will not accept this level of NPs being produced then less & more high quality ones should be the only ones on the market. However, we show no signs of doing this. It seems that nursing has made a decision to vastly expand its role in numbers in primary care and mid-level providers. Furthermore, our desire to raise nursing education standards has lead to the implementation of DNP programs that have a CAPSTONE focus which has little to do with the actual role the new NP will play. I agree with many posters who state that program standardization should occur and these programs should have a strong clinical backbone with perhaps the last year of a DNP program serving as a residency of sorts instead of doing statistical analysis which most grads will never, ever do again. Anyway, good morning and that's my 2 cents for now

It's a fascinating report that has been referenced multiple times through this thread. It should concern anyone considering going to an NP program in the next few years for sure as they may not have a job to go to. Those licensed now should make sure they are in a solid clinic and make themselves in-disposable to minimize the impact down the road. I see some of the signs right now where reputable clinics are demanding 2 years experience before they even consider you.

I agree with ditching useless capstone projects. Where I think education needs to go is to utilize the MSN as a general nurse practitioner training while using the DNP as an area of focus. At the very least it can double the clinical hours, broaden knowledge of the different areas of advance practice, and allow a more educated decision when someone finally decides what kind of NP they want to be when they grow up.

[BCgradnurse, MSN, RN, NP]

It's a fascinating report that has been referenced multiple times through this thread. It should concern anyone considering going to an NP program in the next few years for sure as they may not have a job to go to. Those licensed now should make sure they are in a solid clinic and make themselves in-disposable to minimize the impact down the road. I see some of the signs right now where reputable clinics are demanding 2 years experience before they even consider you.

I agree with ditching useless capstone projects. Where I think education needs to go is to utilize the MSN as a general nurse practitioner training while using the DNP as an area of focus. At the very least it can double the clinical hours, broaden knowledge of the different areas of advance practice, and allow a more educated decision when someone finally decides what kind of NP they want to be when they grow up.

Although I agree that NP education is lacking and needs to be shored up, I'm not sure I'm on board with the whole degree inflation that seems to be prevalent in healthcare. I'd rather see the MSN programs become more robust and require additional clinical hours. I have yet to see a DNP program that was clinically focused and pertinent to a provider who only wants to see patients.

[djmatte, ADN, MSN, RN, NP]

Although I agree that NP education is lacking and needs to be shored up, I'm not sure I'm on board with the whole degree inflation that seems to be prevalent in healthcare. I'd rather see the MSN programs become more robust and require additional clinical hours. I have yet to see a DNP program that was clinically focused and pertinent to a provider who only wants to see patients.

That's why I feel they need to change it. Nothing in the DNP improve our clinical abilities. At most it's a glorified PhD. It's the difference of an ADN vs bsn. Both can effectively care for patients with the same license... One has a bunch of extra courses on research and nursing theory.

[BCgradnurse, MSN, RN, NP]

That's why I feel they need to change it. Nothing in the DNP improve our clinical abilities. At most it's a glorified PhD. It's the difference of an ADN vs bsn. Both can effectively care for patients with the same license... One has a bunch of extra courses on research and nursing theory.

Nursing theory...noooooooooooo!

[SpankedInPittsburgh, DNP, RN]

It's actually a watered down PhD. It's called "clinical research" so the standards aren't nearly as robust as they are for PhD's. I think the real purpose of the DNP is to allow educational facilities to bill for another year of instruction with very little output of resources. After all the DNP fits in with the existing fixed costs of the facility. The fulltime faculty, the buildings... Whereas supervised clinical hours take time and money to implement. First you need to invest in making connections in the community with providers who are willing to precept & then you need on-site follow up. It's cheaper and easier for them to have their students do research without expending time ad effort. In short the powers that thought the DNP was a good idea got sold a bill of goods.