Published
The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) is calling for the requirement of doctorate in nursing for advanced practice nurses, such as nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, clinical nurse specialists, and nurse anesthetists. This new degree will be called a Doctor of Nursing Practice and, if the AACN has its way, will become the entry level for advanced nursing practice.
AACN Position Statement on the Practice Doctorate in Nursing
So you receive an MSN after 2 years and DNP after the third? My mistake, then. Your post implied that you would not receive an MSN on your way to the DNP.David Carpenter, PA-C
No biggie....I don't think I made it that clear. I am always under the assumption that people know how the DNP program works, but I need to remember it's still new, and there are many misconceptions about it as well. What type of medicine do you practice?
Kristen
No biggie....I don't think I made it that clear. I am always under the assumption that people know how the DNP program works, but I need to remember it's still new, and there are many misconceptions about it as well. What type of medicine do you practice?Kristen
I think that all of the dnp programs are still feeling their way through this. Unfortunately some program will probably give their students a DNP with a non nursing masters or no masters as part of their experiment. It pays to pay attention.
I work in liver transplant surgery.
David Carpenter, PA-C
I think that all of the DNP programs are still feeling their way through this. Unfortunately some program will probably give their students a DNP with a non nursing masters or no masters as part of their experiment. It pays to pay attention.I work in liver transplant surgery.
David Carpenter, PA-C
I agree with you about them "feeling their way through", as this is the first year the DNP has been offered through ASU. So far, it has been okay, but I'm awaiting glitches along the way. I am curious, what are your personal views on the whole DNP degree to become an advanced practice nurse? I am actually doing an issues topic paper on the pros/cons of it, and your insight would be appreciated!
Kristen
I agree with you about them "feeling their way through", as this is the first year the DNP has been offered through ASU. So far, it has been okay, but I'm awaiting glitches along the way. I am curious, what are your personal views on the whole DNP degree to become an advanced practice nurse? I am actually doing an issues topic paper on the pros/cons of it, and your insight would be appreciated!Kristen
I think my views are fairly well known. I think that for many NPs the current educational model is flawed (something that some members of the state BONs agree with at least in part). I am in support of increased educational requirements.
As far as the DNP I think that it will be an interesting experiment. Other experiments with this have met with mixed success. The ND was a failure in Colorado and somewhat of a success at Case. It is interesting that a profession would move to a new degree without finding out if the degree meets their needs. With so few DNPs out there it is very unclear if this is what the profession needs. I think that this alone shows that their are other forces at work here.
I am also interested in seeing what this does to NP ranks. The data from other graduate degrees shows that for part time programs, every year after the second leads to a 10-15% drop out rate. There is some evidence that the failure/dropout rate for NP programs is around 25% already and higher in part time programs. If the data holds true that that would imply a 50% failure/dropout rate for dnp programs. This would result in less NPs which I would assume is not the goal of the program.
I also think that the link between the DNP and true independent nursing practice is unfortunate and ill considered. It is unfortunate because it is being associated with the CRNA attempts for independence and many needed changes to NP practice are being opposed by physician groups because of this. Ill considered because there will hopefully be data coming out next year that shows that non-residency trained physicians have a very high rate of malpractice and medical negligence. If there is a move to restrict physicians from practicing without completing a residency then I think there will be a further look at other professions that want independent practice. This is probably the wrong time to push for independence (in my opinion).
David Carpenter, PA-C
I personally take offense to this posting. Let me start by saying that each person has a right to his or her own views. I for one am a proponent of the mandating of this initiative. I do not see the need to have an entry level educational preparation at a doctoral level as dogma. I see it as a progressive move for nursing.
Advanced practice is just that...advanced practice. Currently nurse practitioners are restrained by enforced and required collaborative physician agreements because the AMA and the general public do not feel that we have the educational background/preparation or experience to care for patients independently. Masters prepared nurses are obviously capable of caring for patients; however, to add credence to our continual desire to be viewed for our worth, the addition of this educational requirement is prudent and practical.
All change comes with resistance. I am well aware of this. However, stating that the requirement of this is dogma is rather harsh and not well received. I am currently enrolled in the DrNP program at Columbia University and am quite happy with my decision to pursue this endeavor. My practice has been centered around critical care for several years. Prior to my entry to the program, I was unaware of the need to view the whole patient continuum more as a generalist rather than a specialist. I work with hearts. I focused my attention on heart related subjects: heart failure, LVADs, etc. I am now more cognizant of the need to look at the overall picture.
How can we stand in front of our peers who are making swift educational requirement changes and say that we do not think we should be included in this trend? I do not see the rationality of that at all. Nursing is STILL regarded as a handmaiden career. Do you want that to continue? I surely do not. Do you know how many times I have told people that I'm a nurse practitioner and they ask me if I'm going to be an RN soon? The only way to change public perception is through proactive measures to add credibility to ourselves. Why should we care about public perception? They're your clients.
In summary, I agree with the initiative. I think that this will add credibility to our field and will attract more qualified candidates to nursing. Thank you.
I'm currently enrolled in the DrNP program. Yes there is a lot of research involved; however, you must realize that research is ESSENTIAL for clinical practice. Research is what evidenced based practice is founded upon. You must be able to sort through all of the hubbub to be able to tell which practices are truly helpful for your patient population and which have deleterious effects (ie digoxin usage). The clinical doctorate program has several clinically relevant components. My program has genetics, research, ethics, informatics, a clinical residency, etc. I am very satisfied with the program.
I don't think proponents of the DNP are asserting that master's prepared NPs are unsafe or 'detrimental.'
More education certainly won't make someone a worse practitioner.
Why more? Perhaps so that there's more commonality between the training of APNs such that when someone says they're a DNP, it's like when someone says they have a bachelor's degree. You know the person took a whole slew of gen ed courses as well as courses for their major up to a minimum number of credit hours. Currently, a master's in nursing could mean lots of things - it could be administrative in focus or research focused. Some master's programs can be completed in a year. Others take several years. Some require a thesis, others do not.
The DNP is supposed to clearly indicate substancial post-baccalaureate "professional" training. By professional here I mean training for application and practice as opposed to training up researchers or administrators (though one might later move on to one of those roles, that's not what the training is for). That's my understanding thus far. And even if that is the goal, that doesn't necessarily mean that's that how they are working.
Does public perception affect the well being of patients? And where is the evidence that suggests that nursing preparedness is lacking in masters programs?
It seems to me part of the push for required Dr level training is based on ego and wanting more esteem.
Additionally, the masters program at UCSF is the best in the nation and I trust that they adequately prepare NPs,
J
I respectfully request that "entry level into nursing" not be discussed within this thread. The topic of this thread is: Doctoral Degree to Become an NP???
Please discuss entry level topics in the following forum:
Registered Nurses: Diploma, ADN or BSN?
Thank you.
I was quoting the OP who spoke of "entry level into nursing". I also found an article that may be of interest to some:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/514544
And I also think "entry level into nursing" with respect to NP practice is contained within the DNP topic. The person I quoted claimed that DNPs should be required to practice. I am asking for specific evidence that this should be the case if that is possible.
I mean no disrespect in my posts, just trying to find evidence of the need for DNP. Thanks,
J
core0
1,831 Posts
So you receive an MSN after 2 years and DNP after the third? My mistake, then. Your post implied that you would not receive an MSN on your way to the DNP.
David Carpenter, PA-C