MD, DO, NP, DC, OD -- Who deserves the title Physician?

Specialties NP

Published

our professional scope of practice asserts that our role is to assess, diagnose, and treat in health and illness.

from assessing, diagnosing, treating - diabetes, thrombosis, heart disease, infection, emphysema, hep c, hiv, etc, to rendering prenatal care, and preventative care - we are primary care providers. we make life and death decisions each day with our patients in managing disease - thrombosis management and prevention; hep c management; hiv management, heart disease and cva management; women's health - yet we are given less legitimacy in the social security act and cms section 410.20 than a chiropractor or optometrist.

i have nothing against chiropractic physicians mind you, but take a look at chiropractic.

cannot prescribe - not even an aspirin

procedures? - scant more than "moist heat";

assessment - can't even look into your ear according to their scope of practice

educational requirements? - a bachelors degree?, nope - about a year and a half of college study (90 credits), a 2.5 gpa, and 3 yrs of study at a chiropractic school.

how do chiropractors see themselves? go to http://schools.naturalhealers.com/lifewest/

chiropractic is a total-body healthcare system, and not a method of pain management. as a gatekeeper for direct access to the health delivery system, the responsibilities of the doctor of chiropractic as a primary care clinician include wellness promotion, health assessment, diagnosis, and the chiropractic management of the patient's health care needs. when indicated, the doctor of chiropractic may also co-manage, consult with, or refer to other health care providers

optometry - about the same. 65 college credit hours (a year and change), 2.5 gpa, a 4 yr program. -- then - slit lamp, snellen, better or worse, eyeglasses or contacts? see you in two years.

that's all fine. but, here's the rub. the chiropractor and optometrist - according to section 1861®(1) of the ssa,and cms sec. 410.20 -- are designated a physician with all of the privileges and honors of that professional designation.

the apn? nope. even though our scope of practice is much, much broader; our responsibility and liability - far greater. yet we are still treated as hand-maids, and put in our place as second class providers - the extenders, the mid-levels. none of us treat mid-way; perform half of a procedure; help the patient heal only half the way through a disease.

does any other primary care provider treat heart disease more or differently than you as a provider treat heart disease? does the physician carry more responsibility or liability? no. a pcp is a pcp. and god bless all of us, md, do, apn.

there is no comparison.the nurse practitioner's contribution to the health of our nation is every bit as important as the md, or do, and far above that of the dc or od. in the clinic we shoulder the responsibilities and liabilities - every one of our actions or inactions as a provider -- every moment we spend with a patient is legally ours to bear alone....

yet how many times have you been told - sorry, we need a physicians signature on that... you can't order that - it has to be ordered by a physician. we can't send that to you - we have to send it to the physician. sorry, we only credential physicians.

am i the only apn that feels a little bewildered and disgusted by this?

i have no innate yearning or desire to be called a physician mind you, its not an ego thing. but what i do have is a desire for, is to be respected for my role as a primary care provider by hospitals, insurers, labs, etc, so that i can do my job.

why i'm writing this.

as health care and our roles evolve, i believe that it is our responsibility to lobby for the advancement of our professional role, and with that updates to the ssa and cms sec. 410.20, two of the main documents that define the apn to other professionals. this is critical so that other professionals will not be confused about our role, our education, our abilities, and our responsibilities to our patients.

we regularly talk about fighting battles in my home state of tennessee, but are we only treating the symptoms of our professional legislative, political, and administrative woes? - shouldn't we also be addressing the root problems from which most of these arise - such as our absence from ssa 1861®(1)and cms sec. 410.20.

it may be time for each individual apn to write, call, or otherwise encourage other apn's as well as our advocates at ana, and our legislators to argue in favor of apn pcp's inclusion in cms sec. 410.20 and ssa 1861®(1).

because as the role of the nurse practitioner continues to evolve in response to changing societal and health care needs, so should the ssa and other government acts that define us to the nation.

social security act 1861

http://www.ssa.gov/op_home/ssact/title18/1861.htm

so. if you agree, take a moment and write someone. don't sit back and do nothing. :rotfl:change happens because of you. :) write a short note to your local chapter of ana, the national ana, george bush, your senators and your representatives and voice your desire for an updated cms sec. 410.20 and ssa 1861®(1) to help apn's across the nation do their job. thanks gang. http://www.firstgov.gov/contact/elected.shtml

respectfully,

r. martin

family nurse practitioner, chief manager and primary care provider

campbell station primary care associates

11541 kingston pike, ste 101

knoxville, tn 37922

user_online.gif

Specializes in ICU, Telemetry, Cardiac/Renal, Ortho,FNP.

Old thread but here's my .02

First of all the thread opens with a negative bash on chiropractic education. I know of very few, if any, students who can manage to rack up 90 credit hours in 1 1/2 years as you suggest. If they did, they are a lot smarter than most medical school applicants and very determined so what's your point?:angryfire

Overall, chiro school is for those who can't/don't want to/shouldn't go into medical school. It may be because of grades/money/age etc. and criticizing them is for pursuing higher ed. is silly. If you haven't done a professional doctoral program yourself you have NO IDEA what any of these programs entail. Just labeling them as inferior to a medical program is not enough explanation of the demands of any doctoral level program of study regardless if you agree with what's being studied or not.

True enough that chiro school is 3 years...that's 3 years (calendar years!). Not academic years...first you criticize a hypothetical student for completing 90 hours in 1 1/2 years (incredible academic achievement) and then you criticize a chiro student for (not hypothetical) completing a 4 year graduate professional academic program in 3! That is full time school no summers off. The programs are about 4200+ class hours, 250 or so credit hours. Not small stuff. Even medical/osteopathic programs are offering 3 year programs now. It has nothing to do with competence. It has everything to do with economics and student turnover. :nono:

NO OTHER PROFESSION besides a medical doctor/osteopathic doctor has a right to the term 'physician' without a 'qualifier' in the United States. I don't believe ANY of the other fields ever try to pass themselves off (as a profession) as such, either. Now, yes one can refer to themselves as a chiropractic physician and it's perfectly fine, same with the other professions. However, it is not worth the effort or the arguement. Keeping it open and simple for the public interest is probably the safest bet.

Now, taking it a step further. Who deserves the title Doctor? M.D.'s/D.O.'s? Why? Because they say so? So what? What about Phd's, DNSc, DNP's, D.C., D.D.S., D.P.M., O.D., N.D., D.PT, PharmD.?

If they want "physician"...o.k. no problem. If they want "Doctor" (like they are pushing legislatively now) then I would argue we ALL have to have qualifiers (which is defeating the purpose of simplicity for public interest) with the term "Doctor". In fact, most academics would argue the term "Doctor" originates with them first so medical doctors would not be able to use the term generically.

Consider in a hospital how inappropriate it would be to use "Doctor" when referring to english teacher. Just as inappropriate on a university campus when referring to your "physician" as Doctor while discussing literature in english class. That term can be just as controversial b/c anyone who earns a doctorate level degree, either a professional or academic, has the right to use it. Even your attorney.

All the professional degree programs require the same pre-med curriculum. Yes, some differ if you really care to take the rest of a B.S. program, too. However, if you research more you will see that a great many schools now transfer back your first year of professional school credit to award a B.S. degree anyway. The incentive is to get you in their program faster since most first year didactic medical education is upper level undergraduate courses, not 5000-6000 level, but 4000.

You have to keep this in perspective. Yes, MD/DO programs have the 'best' students on average and very determined applicants but they also are required to be the final word in healthcare with an unrestricted scope of practice. Is that necessary for someone who practices only joint manipulation, physical therapy/physiotherapy and counseling...no a lesser academically qualified student is an appropriate candidate on average for this field. Remember, too, there are Physicians who are chiropractors, Chiropractors who become physicians, dentists who are M.D.'s, M.D.'s who are nurses. The degree doesn't tell enough about the practioner, it merely qualifies them to sit for licensure. Each practitioner must be judged on their own merit. In other words I don't want a chiropractor doing injections any more than I want a physician filling my teeth!

And how weird would that be. :trout:

WOW!! What great threads! If the original question is who deserves the title, then Webster College dictionary defines Physician as " 1. a person who is legally qualified to practice medicine; doctor of medicine, 2. a person engaged in general medical practice, as distinguished from a surgeon."

Its all about the legality of issues here in the good old USA.. That thanks to the Esquires (defined "as a title of respect sometimes placed, esp. in its abbreviated form after a man's surname in formal written address: in the US, chiefly applied to lawyers, women as well as men. Abbr. Esp") of the world. Interesting that the lawyers don't demand a title of respect like the doctors do.:uhoh3:

I appreciate the 5/8 treads from WyomingRN and Nightngale regarding autonomy and independence. In the final analysis, it's all about who best serves the patient or client, if you prefer. When healthcare reform comes.. Ya'll keep the faith, it's coming.. nurses will be seen as the general public currently does.. As the most respected and reliable of all the healthcare providers. Kudos to all!!

Remember:

"There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." --Albert Einstein

interesting assessments on the professions; however interesting they might be, they are neither accurate nor inclusive.

i daresay that i hope that doctors of chiropractic received a bit more education and are a bit more intelligent than what this misleading mudslinging might indicate.

of course, some people are bitter because doctors of chiropractic have wonderful results and are “stealing” pieces of the medical pie; however, the simple fact is that patients are becoming smarter and realizing that the solutions don’t lie in the poisons and potions offered by the medical community – great for them, bad for you. please do not misinterpret my meaning; i’m not throwing the dirt and mud back your way, i’m simply stating what is very obvious. and furthermore, i have to note that the practice of medicine *as it was meant to be* is wonderful. it’s a shame that all too often, it is practiced shamefully. instead of proper exercise, maintenance, and elimination of toxins, we’re cutting out women’s uteruses (and when i say “we’re”, i mean “you’re”). medical doctors are now simply treating as the pharmaceutical companies wish for them to treat (imagine a most entertaining puppet show and you will get the picture). so excuse me when i retort that medical doctors and nurses have no room to say nay.

that being said, let’s go through the topic at hand in a logical manner. your reasoning behind doctors of chiropractic not earning the title doctor is that you think we are uneducated. however, if we look at the simplest facts, you’ll find the chiropractors win that field. let's skip to the fields of science, biology, anatomy, physical diagnosis, radiographic diagnosis, diagnostic imaging, orthopaedic (or orthopedic) diagnosis, biophysics, biomechanics, physiology – we either do as well or better in these categories. you can have your pharmacology. we’ll stick with the stuff that works for most situations. if i have someone who walks in my office with a blood pressure of 150/95, i’ll send them your way – but for conservative care on neuromusculoskeletal conditions, there is no comparison and it doesn’t matter how much you might retort.

i feel that little justice on the field of chiropractic has been given so i find it my duty to set things straight. if you feel flabbergasted by the aforesaid, it's because this is a reply that defies what you know and what you might have falsely learned. i would love to invite you to email and even call if you have questions so that statements like the aforementioned are not made in true ignorance.

i believe that my eight years of education were better spent learning how to become a doctor of chiropractic than becoming a medical doctor. i can pull open my files and look at people’s progress and do so with a smile on my face. what percent of the medical population is satisfied in comparison? let us see, shall we?

for acute and chronic pain

"patients with chronic low-back pain treated by chiropractors showed greater improvement and satisfaction at one month than patients treated by family physicians. satisfaction scores were higher for chiropractic patients. a higher proportion of chiropractic patients (56 percent vs. 13 percent) reported that their low-back pain was better or much better, whereas nearly one-third of medical patients reported their low-back pain was worse or much worse"

journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, nyiendo et al. (2000)

that’s just low back pain. and look at that? 1/3 of your patients are getting worse? isn’t the first rule to not hurt your patients?

i’ll end with a succinct analogy. if you’re driving down the road and your “service engine” light comes on – do you:

a. ignore it and hope it gets better?

b. put masking tape over the light?

c. cut the cord that feeds the light?

d. take it to a mechanic, find the problem, and fix it?

common sense points you to answer d. skip the “when in doubt chose c.” bologna, this just makes sense people!

and on that note, i hope you all have a happy, healthy, and enjoyable life!

yours truly,

dr. r.

proud chiropractic physician

rbrice1981

Wow, what a defensive posture you have on your eduational preparation for the practice of chiropractic. Sorry to have stepped on your last nerve. While defending your education and treatment options, you might want to check into your state's board of statues for practice. Here's Colorado's just in case you think you can legally use the title physician

CRS Title 12 Article 33

12-33-118 Use of Title

A license to practice chiropractic entitles the holder to use the title "Doctor" or "Dr" when accompanied by the word "Chiropractor" or the letters "D.C.", and use the title of "Doctor of Chiropractic". Such license shall not confer upon the licensee the right to practice surgery or obstetrics or to prescribe, compound, or administer drugs, or to administer anesthetics.

My thread was about who can legally use the title. I checked Webster's again for the definition. Yep, it's still the same.

Webster College dictionary defines Physician as " 1. a person who is legally qualified to practice medicine; doctor of medicine, 2. a person engaged in general medical practice, as distinguished from a surgeon."

Enjoy your practice of Chiropractic as your state allows!

mttopmama

Remember:

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

- Albert Einstein

Well, what an extemporaneous thing it would be to open up a chiropractic office without first checking your state's scope of chiropractic practice. Fortunately, neither Webster nor you hold the final on who is termed a doctor or physician. I believe the title "physician" and "doctor" are interchangeable to a limited degree as you would experience if you were to search at onelook.com (which searches many different dictionaries). When I applied to become a chiropractor in Illinois, the application process was to become a licensed chiropractic physician. Each state is different. It would appear that CO is similar; our scope simply prohibits invasive surgery, obstetrics, and prescriptive medicine. In Illinois, doctors of Chiropractic are titled both as Doctors and Physicians depending on who writes up the form. To me it makes no difference. We're portal-of-entry doctors and the trend is spreading as chiropractic research thrives.

It appears the thread was not started to determine as who can leagally use the term physician. If that had been the case, chiropractors would fit that. We just can't (and wouldn't want to) use the term medical physician. Instead it was titled, "...Who deserves the title Physician?". I don't have to point you to the title I'm sure. And it was my argument to stomp the theories that Chiropractors are not title-worthy.

Please don't think you stomped on my last nerve. I've reserved that nerve to third party payers. You haven't upset me nearly as much as they do on the daily.

Best wishes.

Doc

It appears the thread was not started to determine as who can leagally use the term physician. If that had been the case, chiropractors would fit that. We just can't (and wouldn't want to) use the term medical physician. Instead it was titled, "...Who deserves the title Physician?".

I think that you said it best earlier in the post: it varies by state. Here in Texas, chiropractors face disciplinary action from their licensing board for using the term 'physician' in advertising.

yes, you're right. In Illinois, we're very liberal and chiropractic has a lot of freedom. In Utah, chiropractors can practice minor surgery and obstetrics. In Washington State and Michigan, they can't tell a patient to drink water, take vitamin A or even adjust bones in the extremities. Vast vast differences I think. Most states are like Illinois (or slightly more restricting). You also have your polar opposites (UT vs WA and MI).

I would say that a very succinct summary would include:

1. YES, doctors of chiropractic deserve the title "doctor" and/or "physician" (either is a wonderful title to have and in my own mind COMPLETELY interchangeable; not so much in TX)

2. Drs. of Chiropractic go to more than a 3 year school (shakes his head at some of the rumors)

3. Chiropractic is multifaceted and should be respected as an equal among the healing arts professions

4. Research in Chiropractic has been demanded by the medical community; yet once submitted, there has been very little improvement on how certain people view us.

I sure hope that I've done my part to educate just a few people about chiropractic and I thank you for giving me the opportunity to squash a few of the misleading rumors and erroneous falsehoods. I thank those of you who emailed/messaged me.

If anyone ever has questions regarding chiropractic, please feel free to view the American Chiropractic Association's web (www.acatoday.com). Previously I had my email and www but the moderators deleted them, so if anyone eer wants to have a valid discussion, just private message me and we can go from there.

Remember that it is through this education process that we learn, and it is through learning that we see progress. One thing we ALL have in common, we want to see a HEALTHIER AMERICA. So let's "git 'er dun".

Dr. R.

PS - don't mind the spelling; spellcheck's down!

In Utah, chiropractors can practice minor surgery and obstetrics.

I hate to make it seem like I'm picking on you, but in the spirit of eliminating falsehoods related to your profession, I have to point out the following link to the Utah Chiropractic Physician Practice Act, issued in May 2006:

http://www.dopl.utah.gov/licensing/statutes_and_rules/58-73.pdf

Look under Part 6 - Scope of Practice - Division Regulation. Obstetrics and incisive surgery (essentially defined as any surgery where a cut is made) by chiropractors are explicitly prohibited in Utah.

don't feel that you're picking on me because my point is quite clear. I said minor surgery; that includes suturing and a few other things.

The point is ... scope, and other things (like titles) varies state by state.

To everyone:

Did my part and wrote to everyone on the list. I am also a great adovocate of writing to reps. How else will they know? They are so busy with so many issues that if enough nurses write, then the topic may just register on their radar.

I am so sick of being treated at the level of housekeeping at our hospital. Ridiculous!

Do I think that teaching and nursing are still in the dark ages because of chauvanism? Absolutely, but rather, I think that the current reality is because women have held women in these fields back for so long, it has become ingrained within the professions (oh by golly, we better not speak up or we may get in trouble).

What "docs" do the Rn's at our hospital go to for family practice? The NP's in town.

With the reality of a doctor shortage, there will likely be more opportunity for NP's to branch out to medical specialties other than family practice. This is our time in history to make it happen and to perform the big push.

Nurses are too diffused as a group. We need to be unified and strong just as the AMA is.

Time to get real folks ! :)

I just have to respond about the Chiropractor issue.

When I was a little girl, my mother said the field of chiropracting was still considered in its infancy and had NO respect. They were considered "quacks." They kept pushing and now today, the "young folks" have no idea of their history but simply know it as a dignified profession.

For that reason, it is necessary for nurses to stay unified and keep pushing too in order to further their field(s).

i am a dc and also considered a physician. i own several medical offices and prefer to have nps as i believe they are absolutely competent, hard working, and deserve way more credit than they are given. i also disagree with any assertion that a chiro should not be considered a physician only because of a limited scope which has been chosen by our profession. it must be understood (and i do disagree with most of my colleagues on this) that chiropractors have chosen to be drugless doctors but this does not dimish our ability for diagnosis, only treatment.

i've personally caught hundreds of misdiagnosed conditions by mds only to have my correct diagnosis confirmed by specialists. i'm not tooting horns or sticking out my chest, i'm just stating the fact that dcs do have the education; we draw blood, interpret labs, perform physical exams and urinalysis and our boards include mostly non-chiropractic medical based diagnosis questions. i believe personally that although the thought of taking a different approach was well-intended, the outcome has been disastrous for our profession and that after 8 years of college and all the science, we should just have the pharmacology in our program and if one chooses not to prescribe, that's their prerogative.

now to the issue of title. although i completely agree that people and insurance companies get to hung up on this issue. we chose our professions and we need to stick it out or go back to school. i personally am considering going back to get my np so that i can practice the way i believe i should. let them have their titles, we are helping people and that's really what matters.

+ Add a Comment