LVN Vs. RN? - page 4
Can anyone tell me the difference between LVN and RN? Is LVN in demand just like RNs? How much do they usually make and what exactly do they do? Thanks!!!... Read More
Mar 8, '05Quote from the veridicanafter having been a member here since feb '2002....i thought i'd never see the day where someone actually *admit* to having their position swayed where heated debates such as lpn vs rn...etc are involved. i really must commend you veridican for standing up in order to make your new view known. you don't have to be in complete agreement with the majority here...but to admit that your original perception maybe slanted from having a limited raw data/experience to draw on as evidenced by your admission to only having worked on a rn only unit. and i agree with you as far as people can learn from these types of threads as long as they are kept civil.karen, i do respect your opinion here, and the others as well, but yours comes from experience. you've seen both sides. i think i can understand that it's not about "assistant" as much as it is about scope of practice. i see that they are two different types of nurses.
my view has been slanted because i work on a floor (cardiology/icu stepdown) and only rns are used along with msts (multi-skilled techs). and it's the only place i've worked as a nurse. the scope of practice required necessitates rns, but this is not the case on other floors, nor is it the case in many settings, i.e. home health, hospice, ltc, etc.
and to others, i don't think this string is beating a dead horse. i have changed how i view things as a result, so that is why it has been going on. and it will go on again, because it's a subject people like to talk about--just like bsn vs adn. i haven't seen any examples of insults, or any examples of flaming, etc. i think this is a good topic that has been well handled.
i believe your first breakdown of the lpn/rn latter wasn't that far off the mark in that lpns are supervised by rns...therefore...it would stand to reason that you'd would come to the conclusion that they (lpns) work for rns. however....as others stated...lpns have various education today (much like rns have various education within that level of nsg). one poster here has given you their background education having a degree as an lpn. many colleges/universities are exploring that aspect (lpn, as/aas) as a minimum entry level for the *technical* nsg & are pushing for rn, bsn for the minimum entry level for the *professional nsg*. i think what's confusing is the various educational ways of entering nsg....& for some....the very definition of nsg varies.
for example...i've been a lpn for 9.5 yrs when i'd finished by rn program. i applied to various hospitals in my area. most told me that my prior lpn experience *doesn't count* as nsg experience (despite having worked in the u.s. army 7.5 of those years...three of which as the ncoic of an icu) & that i would start out at the level i clinical nsg. now some other facilities (too far for me to travel) do accept two lpn years of med/surg for one rn years of experience. in orderwords....my 9.5 yrs of lpn experience would equal 4.75 yrs of rn experience. i've asked the recruiters how can they have lpns working on med/surg floors, have a lpn school on premises, & have a lpn-rn/bsn track in the work when they don't consider lpn experience as being *nursing* experience. they just chalked it up to what *other* institutions are doing & follow their lead. they've said the problem stem from there being too much of a stratus for lpn programs & they aren't teaching the same quality of information. that puzzles me because the same could be said about the various ways one can become a rn (diploma, associate, bachelor, & in some cases, bsn/msn fast track for second bachelor's candidates with no prior nsg education/experience).
with respects to other professions working under the direction (not license) of a md/do...that's not that far off the track either. it's true....rns, apns, pas, rts, rds, msws, pharmd are all professionals with certifications/licenses of their own who physicians collaborate with before making their final decisions on how to treat (most are at least master's level educated). but ultimately....it's the md/dos who write the orders...otherwise...hospitals will not get paid. some states do allow apns to bill separately from physicians & others won't...but that's slowly changing. in fact...i understand that now there's a push for apns to have their clinical doctorate (dnp/dsnc/dns) degree as the minimum entry level. for now though...lots of insurance companies won't *pay* unless the bill is submitted with a physician's signature on it. it would be interesting to see their take once apns are mandated to be dsns....would that be enough?...i wonder. for now though....hospitals recognize physicians as being the main money makers in their establishments...& insurance companies go along with that. until the time in which other professional healthcare workers can bill separate from a physician ordering their services...they (other healthcare professionals) certainly do come under md/dos supervision where the patients are concerned....even if said md/dos are physically *over-seeing* the other healthcare professionals at the time of service. they (md/dos) take recommendations from said specialty & make the decisions to treat...then evaluate said treatment by those other professional healthcare workers (as long as they perform their practice within their scope)...& go on from there. the same collaborative relationship do exist between lpns & rns. rns make the assignments & delegate what's required with the lpns. lpns gather data which is then added to the rns' assessments which helps the rns in making care-plans & ultimately execute the interventions of the care-plan per their scope of practice. lpns then report the effectiveness of the care-plans to the rns who ultimately is legally the ones who make the evaluations. then they collaborate with lpns to see if further assessment is warranted. lpns legally have to work under the supervision of rns....that doesn't mean that said rns have to have constant *visual over-seeing* of lpns. it only means that they must be present or readily available (as such is the case in assistant living) for emergent events that's not within the lpn scope of practice. both are licensed nurses....however...rns are considered the *professional* while lpns are the *technical* nurse. there are status with other professional healthcare workers as well: pt/ot/rt/pharm (master prepared) pharmd (doctorate) supervises their techs (associate/bachelor's prepared). likewise...there's differences within the physician latter as well. for example... ophthalmologist (md/do who can dx & operate on the eyes)...optometrist (who is trained to dx & treat eye diseases...but because they're not medical doctors or have not train in medical school...they can't operate on the eyes)...& optician (tech who prepares lenses). my point is everyone has a specific scope of practice they must adhere to...otherwise...they're at risk of losing their certification/license to practice. everyone has to collaborate with members within their own field as well as collaborate with members of another indiscipline. that doesn't make one any less competent in their area of expertise/practice...they just have certain guidelines they must follow.
again...i think the problem here is the scope of practice & how each state determines such. the problem for many lpns is that...yes...they too take a national examination board that each state agrees to recognized as being competently safe to practice at the entry level. however...each state aren't on the same footing in terms of how they allow lpns to practice...despite them all taking the same national exam. i've been told it's do to the various ways one is educated as a lpn...but again...the same could be said about the rns & how there's even more various ways of entering nursing. yet...each sbon seem to be o.k. with rns sitting for a national examination which says one is competent to practice at the entry level. i don't know...but it seems to be a double standard to me. we don't see this with the various ways one can become a physician (md/do/dc/dpm/ddm/vmd/etc).....true...there's different scopes of practices among the various physicians...but for some reason...they all belong to the ama & are all recognized as physicians. go figure...
moeLast edit by SKM-NURSIEPOOH on Mar 8, '05
Mar 8, '05Quote from elleonNeither one of them make what they ought to salary wise. One is no better than the other, the title doesn't make the nurse. One requires more schooling than the other, but does not a better nurse make.Can anyone tell me the difference between LVN and RN? Is LVN in demand just like RNs? How much do they usually make and what exactly do they do? Thanks!!!