Hello. I am considering NP and PA school. I have a few years of experience as an ED Tech in a Level 3 Trauma Center in California (busy, but not too intense). Our ED is staffed with PA's no NP's.
I have a few questions about clinical differences between NP's and PA's. I know that PA's seem to have a great ability to work in surgery specialties like ortho, neuro, peds, and cardio surgery. They do pre and post surgery exams, order interprets tests, and prescribe meds (at least in 47-49 states). Are there any NP's on this forum who do this? Are there any in California who can comment?
Second. I know that most PA schools have a much longer clinical component than do NP schools. I have been told it is because NP's already have so much clinical experience as nurses. But can you really compare the two? In our ED, the nurses are not making differential diagnoses, determining etiology of disease, etc. etc., they are monitoring the pt's overall state and response to the treatment ordered by the Physician (or sometimes PA). Therefore, does this experience compare to the rigorous training PA's get in diagnosing?
Part of my interest in medicine is the actual procedures themselves. I want to do chest tubes, central lines, suturing, first assistant surgery, etc. etc. Are there any NP's out there who are doing this?
Finally, I know some people (including some nurses) who deride the "nursing diagnosis" concept. Can anyone offer up a brief rationale for how nursing diagnoses are of value to an NP in clinical practice?
Two year program. The whole first year of didactic is online. The second year consists of one month at the university followed by 3 months in your home town with a MD preceptor X3. So only need to be at the university for three 1 month stints out of a two year program.
Two year program. The whole first year of didactic is online. The second year consists of one month at the university followed by 3 months in your home town with a MD preceptor X3. So only need to be at the university for three 1 month stints out of a two year program.
I always forget about the UND program. Partly because it is such an outlier. It is the only program to require you to have a physician preceptor. It is the only program to have a substantial online program. In PA educator circles it is not looked at particularly well.
That is also the reason that ARC-PA has passed three rule changes in the last two years that directly affect that particular school. There are programs that are experimenting with distance learning but it primarily involves class rooms with telemedicine capability. What I would really like to see is the dropout rate in that program. The normal attrition for a PA program is about 10% over two years. Considering the volume of material that you have to take I would guess it is higher than that. Also I don't see their PANCE scores posted as required. This is where PA educators need to make their next move. We already require schools to publish their first time pass rates. We need to require them to publish the size of admitting and graduating classes. That information is just as important when assessing programs. You can find out this information but it takes time and effort.
I always forget about the UND program. Partly because it is such an outlier. It is the only program to require you to have a physician preceptor. It is the only program to have a substantial online program. In PA educator circles it is not looked at particularly well.
That is also the reason that ARC-PA has passed three rule changes in the last two years that directly affect that particular school. There are programs that are experimenting with distance learning but it primarily involves class rooms with telemedicine capability. What I would really like to see is the dropout rate in that program. The normal attrition for a PA program is about 10% over two years. Considering the volume of material that you have to take I would guess it is higher than that. Also I don't see their PANCE scores posted as required. This is where PA educators need to make their next move. We already require schools to publish their first time pass rates. We need to require them to publish the size of admitting and graduating classes. That information is just as important when assessing programs. You can find out this information but it takes time and effort.
David Carpenter, PA-C
UND has been discussed before. As I recall their passing rates were above the national average. Although the class sizes are now smaller around 20-30 I think, historically the class size was 80 graduates per year. I wonder how many UND PAs are working? I am guessing well over a 1000, a huge number for a program that is such an "outlier".
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
[quote=core0;2241941 In PA educator circles it is not looked at particularly well.
That is also the reason that ARC-PA has passed three rule changes in the last two years that directly affect that particular school. There are programs that are experimenting with distance learning but it primarily involves class rooms with telemedicine capability. What I would really like to see is the dropout rate in that program.
*** I am wondering why the ARC-PA is so hostile to such a unique program? Is is because until last year they only admitted RNs? WHat is ARC-PAs interesting in reducing PA educational opportunities? The way you say it, it sounds like a good old boys club that simply isn't going to accept such a non-traditional program.
I think that their drop out rate should be weighed against the unique opportunity UND provides to people who other wise would have not chance at PA school. I will give you an example of what I am talking about. When I took microbiology for my RN program there were 37 people in the class the first night of class. At the end of the semester there were 11 people and only 9 of them received a passing grade. So for that class the drop out and failure rate is very high. This must be weighted against the fact that the community college allows just anyone to walk in off the street at take the class for a couple hundred bucks. Some of the people in the class could never have gotten admitted to the UW Madison microbiology class (me included) though I know for a fact that the drop out and failure rate for the UW class is WAY less, but they only take the cream of the crop for students.
I know nothing about the ARC-PA but they sound ridged and behind the times that is unless there is some concern with the UND program You haven't shared.
*** I am wondering why the ARC-PA is so hostile to such a unique program? Is is because until last year they only admitted RNs? WHat is ARC-PAs interesting in reducing PA educational opportunities? The way you say it, it sounds like a good old boys club that simply isn't going to accept such a non-traditional program.
I think that their drop out rate should be weighed against the unique opportunity UND provides to people who other wise would have not chance at PA school. I will give you an example of what I am talking about. When I took microbiology for my RN program there were 37 people in the class the first night of class. At the end of the semester there were 11 people and only 9 of them received a passing grade. So for that class the drop out and failure rate is very high. This must be weighted against the fact that the community college allows just anyone to walk in off the street at take the class for a couple hundred bucks. Some of the people in the class could never have gotten admitted to the UW Madison microbiology class (me included) though I know for a fact that the drop out and failure rate for the UW class is WAY less, but they only take the cream of the crop for students.
I know nothing about the ARC-PA but they sound ridged and behind the times that is unless there is some concern with the UND program You haven't shared.
There are a couple of issues here. One is that ARC-PA does not have a mission to promote PA educational opportunities. Their interest is to protect the public and the PA profession by defining and and evaluating PA education programs.
They are probably more rigid than you would expect but the price is higher. Traditional programs that I am familiar with have around a 10% dropout rate. People know what they are getting into when they go in. I believe this is similar to the dropout rate in medical school. The difference between your chemistry class and PA school is dropping your chemistry class does not leave you at least several thousand dollars in debt. Also with the current competitive nature of PA school, every student that drops is one student who was not offered the chance. There should be an incentive to pick students capable of finishing the course of instruction - as there is in any graduate school. That is one of the major differences between a full time and part time program. Either you are fully committed or you are not. There is really no time to test the waters.
As far as educational practices there are two issues here. The first is having taken online classes, it is difficult to assess who is capable of doing self paced study. The drop rates for online courses compared to traditional class room courses bear this out. The second is the nature of medical education. ARC-PA is limited in the information they have to assess programs. For example the movement by some programs to PBM was well documented by various PA schools and medical schools. There is no comparable experience for internet based learning for medical instruction outside of a few non core courses. Most of the programs medical models use are based on educational requirements during residency or Immersive and simulation bases learning. For a program to do 75% of the didactic portion over the internet remains unproven. Left unsaid is the perception that internet based learning lacks the academic rigor of class based learning (whether that is true or not).
Finally the penalty for non-compliance is severe both to the students and the program. The ARC-PA can and will close programs that do not follow standards. If your program has its accreditation revoked while the student is in the program that student cannot get certified. This has happened several times in the last 10 years. More likely a program voluntarily closes if they cannot meet the requirements.
The movement within the ARC-PA in the last five years has been to protect the students also. Most of the requirements in the last five years have been around academic support structures and student grievance procedures. Programs now must put this in writing as well as put out publicly measurable items like the pass rates.
Overall we seem to have differing views of how accrediting organizations should work. The PA profession is set up with a fairly classic Triumvirate. The AAPA is the voice of the profession, the ARC-PA is in charge of accrediting programs to protect the public and the profession. The NCCPA is in charge of certifying graduates to minimal clinical competency to once again protect the public and the profession. The only group that advocates for the profession (the AAPA) very deliberately has a minimal role in directing the NCCPA and ARC-PA. When credentialing organizations advocate for the profession they are doing the public and the profession a disservice.
UND has been discussed before. As I recall their passing rates were above the national average. Although the class sizes are now smaller around 20-30 I think, historically the class size was 80 graduates per year. I wonder how many UND PAs are working? I am guessing well over a 1000, a huge number for a program that is such an "outlier".
They still list their class size as 70. But it is listed as 70 students every other year, so I would interpret this as 35 per year. I am not sure if they take all 70 at once and some finish the distance learning at different times of they take all seventy at once and some start one year and some another.
Also the current listing in the program information for the curriculum has changed. The new curriculum lists 7 months of online courses followed by 5 months of didactics there.
UND has been discussed before. As I recall their passing rates were above the national average. Although the class sizes are now smaller around 20-30 I think, historically the class size was 80 graduates per year. I wonder how many UND PAs are working? I am guessing well over a 1000, a huge number for a program that is such an "outlier".
I dont know how YOU define "outlier" BUT.. to most, being the ONLY PA program with a significant portion of classes online out of over 100 programs would make the statement that this program is an "outlier" VERY acurate. Do you consider something that happens in
I dont know how YOU define "outlier" BUT.. to most, being the ONLY PA program with a significant portion of classes online out of over 100 programs would make the statement that this program is an "outlier" VERY acurate. Do you consider something that happens in
That is my point, the UND program is clearly an "outlier" yet has produced a significant number of PAs. What % of practicing PAs are UND graduates? Maybe 3-4%?
That is my point, the UND program is clearly an "outlier" yet has produced a significant number of PAs. What % of practicing PAs are UND graduates? Maybe 3-4%?
Less than 2%. If you take 35 per year x 35 years you end up with around 1000. There are around 75,000 total PAs ever trained. I would also guess that like most PA programs the early years of the program had many future students than programs today. That also implies that all those PAs were trained with distance based education. Quite a trick in 1970. I would guess that well less than .5% of PAs have been trained there with the distance education. Maybe less.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
Less than 2%. If you take 35 per year x 35 years you end up with around 1000. There are around 75,000 total PAs ever trained. I would also guess that like most PA programs the early years of the program had many future students than programs today. That also implies that all those PAs were trained with distance based education. Quite a trick in 1970. I would guess that well less than .5% of PAs have been trained there with the distance education. Maybe less.
David Carpenter, PA-C
*** I have no way of knowing the stats for UND but it's not as if distance education is an unknown factor. Seem pretty well established to me that very complex and rigorous subjects can be successfully taught via distance learning. I think it would be silly to argue otherwise given the huge number of mechanical engineers, NPs, and other professions with large portions of their didactic portion via distance. Currently many of the one year Accelerated BSN programs for college grads are all online except for clinicals and skills labs and they are turning out nurses at least as competent as graduates from the regular programs.
Less than 2%. If you take 35 per year x 35 years you end up with around 1000. There are around 75,000 total PAs ever trained. I would also guess that like most PA programs the early years of the program had many future students than programs today. That also implies that all those PAs were trained with distance based education. Quite a trick in 1970. I would guess that well less than .5% of PAs have been trained there with the distance education. Maybe less.
David Carpenter, PA-C
My understanding was that they admitted 80 PA students per year until 2005? when they reduced to 35. Which would be 30 X 80 (2,400)+ 5 X 35 (165) or 2,565. Which would be closer to 2%. As I understand the UND program Distant Ed wasn't part of the program until the last few years.
PMFB-RN, RN
5,351 Posts
***Here's one:
http://www.med.und.nodak.edu/physicianassistant/objectives.html
Two year program. The whole first year of didactic is online. The second year consists of one month at the university followed by 3 months in your home town with a MD preceptor X3. So only need to be at the university for three 1 month stints out of a two year program.