Doctoral degree to become an NP???

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

Specializes in Education, FP, LNC, Forensics, ED, OB.
Does anyone know -

Is there any difference in pay and/or responsibility between FNP and a DNP?

Besides the title what would be the advantage to getting a DNP over a FNP right now?

I've looked at the programs and all I see are classes on leadership, financial planning, statistics, etc... Silly me thinking that the "practice" part of DNP meant practice ... ...

Right now, there are no differences. FNP is minimum Masters prepared NP. The responsibilities and salary commands are no different. This could change later on...

Bear in mind, FNP is not a degree. It is a specialty track for the NP and the minimum education is MSN. The DNP is a degree.

If the DNP becomes the terminal entry for all APNs by 2015, the advantage would be to go ahead and secure that now.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
right now, there are no differences. fnp is minimum masters prepared np. the responsibilities and salary commands are no different. this could change later on...

bear in mind, fnp is not a degree. it is a specialty track for the np and the minimum education is msn. the dnp is a degree.

if the dnp becomes the terminal entry for all apns by 2015, the advantage would be to go ahead and secure that now.

there are dnp fnps receiving a higher salary than msn fnps. i know of at least 3 instances where having the dnp resulted in a higher pay scale as compared to the masters prepared fnp. this is the exception not the rule. i suspect in areas like the va the dnp will command additional salary as they can reward by educational levels.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

IMHO, I don't think the DNP will become the gold standard. Back in the 70s, they claimed the BSN was going to become the minimum degree for RNs. They also claimed at one point that LPNs were going to be a thing of the past.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

The DNP is a sham. The additional education adds nothing more than leadership and additional fluff classes. Can anyone show how this makes a current NP anymore capable of providing excellent patient care or preparing them for a solo practice? Why not add Patho, Pharm, and advanced physiology courses instead of classes on Transformational Health Care, Leadership, and of course, research. I completely agree with Mr Carpenter. The PA has MORE didactic and MUCH MORE clinical time. These are the things that advance practitioners in their field whether they are NPs or PAs.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

With all the extra time/money required to get the DNP and for the zero extra clinical time it gives you... might as well go PA, MD, or DO. I think the DNP will end up creating less advanced practice nurses.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ER; CCT.

I agree, there needs to be a corresponding practice component for a degree that's purported to be practice-oriented. I start Duke's DNP program next month and I see a continuation of theory, leadership, statistics, methods and analysis from my MSN but a drop off in clinical practice-oriented instruction.

No one is more of a staunch advocate for nursing or the intent behind the DNP to advance nursing practice than I, but to properly integrate best evidence into practice, one must have a balanced cirricula that addresses finding and critiquing best evidence and its implementation.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ER (PCT 2years).

I agree. I simply don't get how the dnp programs can say that they'll produce fully independent practitioners, Mary Mundinger saying that you'll get the knowledge of a physician with that of a nurse, etc. I'm all for doctoral degrees, and am definitely interested in pursuing a PhD or DNP (if revised, or if that becomes the standard by the time I apply for grad programs). The programs should offer more advanced pathophys related to the field you're in. With that, it will no longer be said that NP's/CRNA's can only do the "bread and butter"/"fast track", etc. type cases, and even though we know that they do not, with the Masters degree programs, more indepth sciences related to those professions would only be beneficial.

I've noticed that NP and CRNA programs use ND textbooks. With the DNP, there should be a push to fully understand such texts.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ER, ICU, Education.
Right now, there are no differences. FNP is minimum Masters prepared NP. The responsibilities and salary commands are no different. This could change later on...

Bear in mind, FNP is not a degree. It is a specialty track for the NP and the minimum education is MSN. The DNP is a degree.

If the DNP becomes the terminal entry for all APNs by 2015, the advantage would be to go ahead and secure that now.

Thanks for the information but I already know what msn/fnp is because I am currently in a program. I just wanted to know if it would be worth it at my age to continue on to get a DNP. And quite honestly I see know reason too at this point. I want to practice

and work with the patients and have no aspirations at this time to teach or do research.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I fully support the DNP direction but we have to make sure we ADD SIGNIFICANTLY more value to the doctorates. The courses can't be just a bunch of fluffy research courses and nursing theories. The more valuable courses would be more super-advanced pharmacology, clinical research, clinical hours or clinical knowledge not taught in Master level.

If nurses want more political/financial power and respect, DNP is a way to go.

Look at pharmacy profession, the progress from BSPharm to PharmD significantly boost their earning potential by suddenly stagnate the supply.

Despite market saturation of pharmacists in big cities, their salary will never went down as low as 70,000.

They earned more respect and become more specialized than when BSPharm is the minimum requirement. If nurse want to same result, this could be good route.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
If nurses want more political/financial power and respect, DNP is a way to go.

Look at pharmacy profession, the progress from BSPharm to PharmD significantly boost their earning potential by suddenly stagnate the supply.

Despite market saturation of pharmacists in big cities, their salary will never went down as low as 70,000.

They earned more respect and become more specialized than when BSPharm is the minimum requirement. If nurse want to same result, this could be good route.

But the point of the PharmD move is that all licensed pharmacists get the degree; it is the entry level to practice. Whether advanced practice nurses are prepared via Master's or doctoral degrees, the fact will remain that only a tiny percentage of RNs ever move into an advanced practice role, and the majority of US RNs are ADN prepared (and that's not likely to change any time soon, despite >30 years of debate within the community). I don't see how a tiny percentage of nurses having a doctoral degree no one else has heard of or understands instead of a Master's degree will change anyone's perception or opinion of nurses as a group.

I'm also not sure how the political/financial power and respect of nurses, even "just" the tiny subset of advanced practice nurses, is advanced by a degree that even much of the nursing community considers highly dubious.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
But the point of the PharmD move is that all licensed pharmacists get the degree; it is the entry level to practice.

Yes. correct. However, DNP will eventually move into the same direction (DNP as entry-level) as more or more schools offer DNP. Pharmacy's movement towards PharmD is the same way. The AACP did not just suddenly require PharmD as an entry-level but waited until many schools starts to offer doctorate level program.

Whether advanced practice nurses are prepared via Master's or doctoral degrees, the fact will remain that only a tiny percentage of RNs ever move into an advanced practice role, and the majority of US RNs are ADN prepared (and that's not likely to change any time soon, despite >30 years of debate within the community).

I didn't mean to refer to the public's perception toward as all level of nurses.

I am a bit confused. I don't know how the issue of ADN-prepared nurses is related to DNP movement.

In fact, the shortage for NPs is not as severe as RNs. Therefore, there're less reasons for not moving toward the new direction.

It may not change the public perspective of the "nurses" (RN in general) as a whole but it would change the attitude toward APRNs, NPs, especially, more and more people are now keenly aware of the difference between NPs and bedside RNs.

I think you try to mention about entry-level for licensed RN. I think the roles of NP and RN are significantly different and should not be compared. They work under different legislations and have different scope of practices/job descriptions.

I don't see how a tiny percentage of nurses having a doctoral degree no one else has heard of or understands instead of a Master's degree will change anyone's perception or opinion of nurses as a group.I'm also not sure how the political/financial power and respect of nurses, even "just" the tiny subset of advanced practice nurses, is advanced by a degree that even much of the nursing community considers highly dubious.

Yes, it is tiny for NOW. Of course, because DNP is relatively new and offered by limited number of institutions. However, the percentage of doctorate-level APRN to overall APRN (not BSN/ADN) will gradually increase over time as the colleges/universities across the US discontinue their Master-level programs and replace them with DNP. I guess it's up to people in the academia to decide whether these changes are necessary. As this changing process evolved, the perception and opinion of nurses will change over time. This change will not be immediate. It will take time just like the PharmD. The pharmacy boards did not stop recognizing BSPharm until many schools offer PharmD curriculum.

I think the your main point is that the percentage of APRN is tiny in overall 2.9 millions nurses. Yes, of course. However, I only mentioned about the specific group of nurses (APRNs, NPs). Sorry.. my false, I didn't make it clear:)

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ICU, ER, RESEARCH, REHAB, HOME HEALTH, QUALITY.

seems like we as a profession couldn't decide if BSN should be entry level so instead concentrating on that issue we add something on the other end..its crazy.. and the BSN argument has still not been answered..

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion