DNP/PHD Dual Program Opinions

[rchembunny]

Hello,

I noticed that a number of nursing schools are now offering dual DNP/PhD programs (The University of TN Health Science Center, Case Western Reserve University Frances Payne Bolton SON, & The University of Arizona College of Nursing).

With an interest in being both a clinician and scholar/educator, I think that this option would work well for me.

HERE ARE MY BIG QUESTIONS:

1. Is anyone out there pursuing both a DNP/PhD and, if so, why did you decide to do both?

2. Also, what are people's opinions about this dual degree option?

Thanks!!!

[matthewandrew, NP]

Sounds like a nightmare, I would just do PhD (non-nursing) to research and teach. I don't understand what the point of the DNP is in addition to a PhD. I have seen combined MD/PhD programs, and that makes much more sense to me as they are physicians who conduct medical research. What does a DNP/PhD do exactly, develop new nursing theories?

The DNP is about practice application using the best evidence out there. The PhD allows the nurse to generate new knowledge. The 2 are very different but complimentary.

[victrauma1]

It is quite clear that the DNP is not well understood in this thread. Just to shed some light on how the degree evolved: nursing has been for decades clamoring to be accepted in the academic realm. Hence, there is a lot of effort for nursing knowledge expansion and nursing theory generation. The DNP came into fruition as a solution to legitimize the burgeoning need for doctorally prepared advanced practitioners who do not necessarily engage in academic, pedagogical, or scientific pursuits. In comparing the other allied health professions such as MD, DO, PharmD, PsyD, DPT, OTD, etc., these collectively are "practice doctorates" and not PhD's, implying that research and teaching are not emphasized in their various curricula. The DNP is the nursing movement's version of a practice doctorate. Because the aforementioned degrees (including the DNP) are practice doctorates, a PhD will provide the necessary background and academic armamentarium to discover new knowledge. In other words, PhD's attempt to discover new evidence while "practice doctorates" tend to translate evidence. One is no better than the other...it is a matter of career focus.

(I am an Intensivist DNP in Northeast Florida)

[Bluebolt]

It is quite clear that the DNP is not well understood in this thread. Just to shed some light on how the degree evolved: nursing has been for decades clamoring to be accepted in the academic realm. Hence, there is a lot of effort for nursing knowledge expansion and nursing theory generation. The DNP came into fruition as a solution to legitimize the burgeoning need for doctorally prepared advanced practitioners who do not necessarily engage in academic, pedagogical, or scientific pursuits. In comparing the other allied health professions such as MD, DO, PharmD, PsyD, DPT, OTD, etc., these collectively are "practice doctorates" and not PhD's, implying that research and teaching are not emphasized in their various curricula. The DNP is the nursing movement's version of a practice doctorate. Because the aforementioned degrees (including the DNP) are practice doctorates, a PhD will provide the necessary background and academic armamentarium to discover new knowledge. In other words, PhD's attempt to discover new evidence while "practice doctorates" tend to translate evidence. One is no better than the other...it is a matter of career focus.

(I am an Intensivist DNP in Northeast Florida)

As a student in a CRNA DNP program I'm glad to see someone break it down for others who seem confused in this thread.

My brother is working on his PhD in education while I'm working on my DNP, we compare course work and progress often. He has very minimal practical implementation to his degree, it is roughly 3 years (part time post masters) of theory and research. He does lots of online forums and discussion boards with classmates, citing sources, etc. He writes papers weekly and has been formulating a large thesis project for about 1.5 years. He can finish all his coursework but if his thesis isn't finished he isn't awarded the degree until it's done. He works a full time job/travel/vacation while doing this coursework in the evenings online.

I'm in a BSN-DNP CRNA program that is mandatory full time, no breaks, year round. It takes 3 years and demands you don't work a job because you won't be able to keep up with the coursework. It includes years of extensive structured clinical rotations and skills. We have gross dissection, advanced pathophysiology, 2 advanced A&P courses, advanced organic chem, tons of anesthesia courses, etc. All these courses require you to be in lecture for many hours weekly. Now everything I listed so far is included in masters level CRNA programs, so how does the DNP change things? On top of all this listed you will have roughly two courses every semester that will be very similar to my brothers PhD coursework. You will be required to read hundreds of pages weekly of theory and research books, write numerous APA papers, weekly scholarly discussion board posts with APA citations and sources, dissect research. It goes much deeper than you'd think, figuring out if they are using descriptive statistics or inferential statistics, standard deviations, etc. You work on your DNP project (thesis) for over a year and the goal is to get it published in a scholarly journal after you present it in a conference senior year.

Now I'm not saying with your DNP you're doing 100% of research and theory that a PhD is doing because that is their entire focus. My point is that your DNP should more than enough prepare you to write scholarly papers, get published, do research and teach in academic settings.

Anecdotaly, two of my professors got their PhD many years ago when the DNP was new and unknown, later went back to get their DNP once it was more common. I've also never known or heard of a DNP nurse who applied to an academic instition and was turned away because it wasn't a PhD.

[Null]

I have a DNP and am in the process of completing my PhD. In my humble opinion, there is no comparison between the DNP and PhD in regards to the academic load, rigor, and scholarly intent. In my experience, the PhD is by far the more rigorous of the two. I do not regret obtaining my DNP and believe it serves a purpose. However, the DNP did not prepare me adequately to translate research to practice, which is the primary aim of the degree. To do this well, one really needs more exposure to the research process than what is typically offered in a DNP program. Additionally, many universities limit the career progression (e.g. tenure) of DNP faculty. At least in my area, DNP faculty are relegated to clinical track.

[ShayRN0217]

Null, thank you for your post. I am currently applying to start the PhD program this Fall. I am very interested in health disparities in the minority (e.g. racial, cultural, geographical) communities. After obtaining my PhD, I would like to go back from either an MPH or DNP (my school's DNP has a focus on public health). Do you have any advise for me? I live in Texas and would like to be in a position to also provide care to those in need.

[MilesRN, BSN, MSN, DNP]

The best advice is selecting the right program for you. The DNP is a viable option to the extensive time commitment of a Ph.D. Additionally, if looking for a doctorate degree one must consider the end goal. Are you interested in a research career? Then, the PhD is a good choice. If you are more inclined to clinical or an applied approach, then select the DNP. Either will serve you well as both are terminal degrees. I would recommend if selecting a DNP, find one that offers a specialization such as leadership, administration, or a clinical track for APRNs. Do not believe the DNP is an inferior degree. I challenge anyone to dispute the rigors of doctoral study unless they have finished a degree program. Doctoral study requires an extensive time commitment, tenacity, and perseverance. Keep in mind only approximately 1.5 percent of the entire population has a doctorate for a reason, it's very challenging. Remember, many faculties hold clinical doctorates to include JD, MD, PsyD, PharmD, and the like. Persons with the DNP are now obtaining tenure and even administrative positions such as Deans at universities across the U.S. I would recommend searching the job board and reviewing educational requirements for facuilty. You will find the DNP is now accepted as a viable doctoral degree and may actually be preferred over the EdD. If one is interested in obtaining a PhD after finishing a DNP, then, you might consider Indiana University of Pennsylvania. They offer a DNP to Phd requiring 33 hours to complete. The program is distance mediated and requires attending on ground classes twice per semester. Good luck in your search for the right program

[Null]

Hello Shay,

Sorry I am late responding to your question. It sounds like the PhD is going to be well suited to meet your goals of research into health disparities. What is your final goal (academia, research, etc)? I am not sure how the DNP, even with a focus on public health, would translate into scholarly work surrounding health disparities unless you pursue advance practice. Even if you wanted to become an NP after your PhD, I would probably just encourage you to find a post-masters program that offered the degree in the fastest and cheapest manner possible.

I do find merit in the MPH as I think it provides an educational pathway that does open some doors even for clinicians with many years of experience. Some MDs go back and obtain an MPH to shift their clinical focus more broadly to the macro health level. Public health education provides a unique worldview that differs from nursing and is well suited for health disparities.