2015 DNP

You are demonstrating both stubborn ignorance and prejudice. I see no point in engaging you further.

You are demonstrating both stubborn ignorance and prejudice. I see no point in engaging you further.

I think of it as expecting more from an extra year or so of loans. If it is supposed to be a clinical doctorate, it should have more clinical courses and vastly more clinical hours than a masters. Otherwise why have a doctorate? Milk it's students for more money? Try to compete with physicians (ie all political)?

The research/statistic courses are somewhat helpful for reading literature but not at the expense a better foundation.

I realize people like the idea of having a doctorate for entry but if it's adding little to a clinical practice, what is the use?

I think students should speak up and expect more. Purely self directed learning is not the answer but without more basis in disease that is what it is coming down to. If self directed learning were adequate, we wouldn't need teachers and schools.

Dissent,

I have to reluctantly agree with you. Most DNP programs don't get it right. The good news on the DNP front is that most BSN to DNP programs are closer to what is needed than the post-masters programs. Even at that, things are still not what they should be. I am near 40. Is it worth almost double the cost and one to two years extra in time to get the DNP? Most BSN-DNP programs require 1,000 or more clinical hours, but not more foundation in patho, pharm or assessment. I have found some that do offer an additional physiology course and a diagnostics course, but is that worth it? I can do that on my own. Extra stats classes and tons more time researching and writing is not what I want. I would love to have a doctorate, but just don't see that happening. If I were teaching, yes it would be worth it, but as it is, I can get a masters in advanced practice and get a post-masters cert in a completely different population in the same amount of time, a little more clinical hours and way less money than a DNP. I am happy for (and a little jealous of) anyone who gets a DNP, but just don't see where its worth it for me. I think the flood of schools dumping their MSN programs for DNP's has slowed and I think a better focus for everyone would be promoting the APRN Consensus Model, defining parameters of independent practice. I must admit a little fear of the market being overly saturated and a MSN being devalued. Whether or not this happens is more threatened by direct entry to practice MSN's than DNP's. Some of these grads are rejected as NP's because they lack nursing experience. What happens then? They take a job at a lower wage just to get going. This could ultimately lead to lower wages for NP's. Just my fear. If the DNP train leaves the station maybe it'll slow the numbers growth. A doctorate degree is prestigious, but the DNP does not appear to be anymore useful than any other doctorate. The skills that people tout from a DNP can be gained from any doctorate. The fact of the matter is that most DNP programs don't get it right and for most people's practice, a DNP is simply not worth it.

You are demonstrating both stubborn ignorance and prejudice. I see no point in engaging you further.

*** Since you chose not to identify anyone I suspect you mean every other person engaged in this discusion when you say "you".

You are demonstrating both stubborn ignorance and prejudice. I see no point in engaging you further.

Sorry, I think you are drinking the DNP Kool-Aid.

Oldeibutgoodie

DNP is a joke!! Clinical hours and more sciences gosh knows more theory and crap isn't needed. If it doesn't help you treat the patient it should be eliminated imo.

I already took statistics and research as part of my MSN. I guess I don't understand why one would need MORE of it in a DNP. Advanced stats and research would more appropriately belong in a PhD program. The other stuff belongs in an MPH program.

My ideal DNP program would have separate courses (with their associated pharmacology) in:

1. Cardiology (with teaching how to read a 12 lead)

2. Radiology (extensive teaching on reading xrays and CTs/MRIs)

3. Pulmonology

4. Renal

5. Surgery (optional--pick one: general, ortho, etc)

6. Elective (OB-GYn, peds, pain, primary care, etc.)

Just my $.02 worth. I'm sure the AACN will be contacting me soon to ask me to elaborate on these great ideas.

Oldiebutgoodie

PS--Anybody else have great ideas for their ideal DNP program??

I already took statistics and research as part of my MSN. I guess I don't understand why one would need MORE of it in a DNP. Advanced stats and research would more appropriately belong in a PhD program. The other stuff belongs in an MPH program.

My ideal DNP program would have separate courses (with their associated pharmacology) in:

1. Cardiology (with teaching how to read a 12 lead)

2. Radiology (extensive teaching on reading xrays and CTs/MRIs)

3. Pulmonology

4. Renal

5. Surgery (optional--pick one: general, ortho, etc)

6. Elective (OB-GYn, peds, pain, primary care, etc.)

Just my $.02 worth. I'm sure the AACN will be contacting me soon to ask me to elaborate on these great ideas.

Oldiebutgoodie

PS--Anybody else have great ideas for their ideal DNP program??

I would be willing to sign up for that program! In addition, I would say add an advanced differential diagnosis course, a course dedicated to the prescribing of controlled substances (since some jurisdictions have a problem with this), a pain management course and an advanced psych course dealing with chemical dependency (re: drug seekers) and a specific course on when and how to make proper referrals. Add it all together and you get a practitioner who can handle most anything and would have the proper insight to protect their practice and their patients. I am not interested in Phd lite or MPH advanced, and that's what the DNP is. It's not bad, but it is not what is needed.

I would be willing to sign up for that program! In addition, I would say add an advanced differential diagnosis course, a course dedicated to the prescribing of controlled substances (since some jurisdictions have a problem with this), a pain management course and an advanced psych course dealing with chemical dependency (re: drug seekers) and a specific course on when and how to make proper referrals. Add it all together and you get a practitioner who can handle most anything and would have the proper insight to protect their practice and their patients. I am not interested in Phd lite or MPH advanced, and that's what the DNP is. It's not bad, but it is not what is needed.

What you guys are describing is a medical school curriculum, if that's what you're looking for then wouldn't going that route be better? My impression of the DNP is that aside from the rhetoric about "clinical focus", it's really a program that's focused on producing clinical leaders who have some knowledge of bedside management.

Unfortunately, those nursing leader pushing the DNP are stating that "Dr. Nurse" is equivalent to "Dr. Doctor". So we certainly need to have some of that material under our belts.

http://www.forbes.com/2007/11/27/nurses-doctors-practice-oped-cx_mom_1128nurses.html

Oldiebutgoodie

The bottom line with the DNP is that it is a back handed way to get more academics, not improve practice. It is an academic wolf in clinical sheep's clothing.

Again, not a bad degree, but certainly not what is needed.