This has been a heated discussion between some of my friends and I, so I thought I would bring it to the forum.
Should people who are going through a dnp programs and taking the SAME test we all took for our MSN - NP for national certification think their education 'doctorate" is a clinical doctorate?
Until there is a national standard and an elevation of the test (think along the USMLE) then I think anyone who thinks their DNP is a clinical doctorate is a joke.
Specializes in Anesthesia, Pain, Emergency Medicine.
AND, the bottom line. Nurses should stick together for the good of the nursing profession. I tend to back what the major credentialing organizations are striving for as it improves our profession as a whole.
Instead of in-fighting, go to aanp.org or aacn.org and read up on where the NP profession is heading and what they are trying to do.
Specializes in telemetry, cardiopulmonary stepdown, LTC. Hospice.
AND, the bottom line. Nurses should stick together for the good of the nursing profession. I tend to back what the major credentialing organizations are striving for as it improves our profession as a whole.
Instead of in-fighting, go to aanp.org or aacn.org and read up on where the NP profession is heading and what they are trying to do.
I agree, but I am worried about one aspect: the cost of getting a DNP. I agree that striving for top-level education and clinical experience will only improve the field of nursing, but I worry how in the world I will afford paying for a Doctorate when I have children who are entering college. They need to get the costs of these programs in line!
As for me, when I get there, I will introduce myself to my patients as, "Hello, I'm an advanced care nurse practitioner working with the team of Dr. so and so. My name is DOCTOR Cara Randall. Considering that many of my patients think housekeepers are nurses, the CNA's are nurses, etc. etc...there is already plenty of confusion, I hear it all the time. It just takes a little communication to explain, and some writing on their wipe board so they remember who everyone is. NO biggie, but if I have to pay and work for that sucker, I AM going to be called Dr.
Amen Cara. Good point. An you are NOT calling yourself a physician, but a doctor (teacher) of nursing practice. I can respect that and I see why you would introduce yourself that way. And you know what, eventually the patients will understand the difference.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
AND, the bottom line. Nurses should stick together for the good of the nursing profession. I tend to back what the major credentialing organizations are striving for as it improves our profession as a whole.
Instead of in-fighting, go to aanp.org or aacn.org and read up on where the NP profession is heading and what they are trying to do.
*** I very much agree with you about nursing sticking together. That is why I am dismayed and the attempts by the AACN, the ANA and the other nurse haters out there to drive wedges.
Talking with our dean (of a very large nursing school w/ 6 dnp programs), and she said that the DNP idea rose out of a retroactive need to give credit where credit was due. Mainly, NP programs were requiring a great deal of clinical hours without the respect of a higher degree. If you look at an typical executive MBA for example, it is one night a week or every other weekend for 18 months or so. NP's had the same amount of didactic hours, but were racking up anywhere from 2-3 times the hours in clinicals and not receiving real credit. So that is one of the reasons you are seeing traditional master's programs phasing out and DNPs on the rise and recommended by the ANA because it takes a great deal more work to become an advanced practice nurse.
On the other hand I see PMFB and other's points about the cost of a DNP program especially for CRNA and acute care DNPs. It used to be relatively inexpensive to start or maintain CRNA and other NP programs, but now it is getting very expensive, especially with all of the new guidelines. A new CRNA program that was going to start here has been scrapped because of cost.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
talking with our dean (of a very large nursing school w/ 6 dnp programs), and she said that the dnp idea rose out of a retroactive need to give credit where credit was due. mainly, np programs were requiring a great deal of clinical hours without the respect of a higher degree. if you look at an typical executive mba for example, it is one night a week or every other weekend for 18 months or so. np's had the same amount of didactic hours, but were racking up anywhere from 2-3 times the hours in clinicals and not receiving real credit. so that is one of the reasons you are seeing traditional master's programs phasing out and dnps on the rise and recommended by the ana because it takes a great deal more work to become an advanced practice nurse.
*** while i understand the point that advanced practice nurses worked harder for their masters than some other fields, i don't buy that reason for a second. i think the dean you spoke with is the victim of propaganda.
on the other hand i see pmfb and other's points about the cost of a dnp program especially for crna and acute care dnps. it used to be relatively inexpensive to start or maintain crna and other np programs, but now it is getting very expensive, especially with all of the new guidelines. a new crna program that was going to start here has been scrapped because of cost.
*** many will ask themselves if the added time and expence of a dnp np program is worth it over the cost of a bachelors or masters pa program. more time, a lot more money, pretty ,much same pay and job.
*** while i understand the point that advanced practice nurses worked harder for their masters than some other fields, i don't buy that reason for a second. i think the dean you spoke with is the victim of propaganda.
i wouldn't agree that it is propaganda she is listening to since she is the one helping to create and then approve the program content, structure, and methodology and you have to do that on evidence, not hearsay or rumors. furthermore, she isn't the only one i have talked to about this matter. there are a good 15 phd's on my floor alone and they reluctantly saw the need as well.
the fact the np's, especially crna's, were doing far more work than other masters programs is well documented and the ncsbn, ana, and other regulatory bodies approved the dnp because of the plethora of evidence to support the advanced recognition. trust me, the phd's were not all too happy with the change because they are in school even longer than a dnp and there is still in-fighting over terminal degree and 'dr.' recognition and status. they worked hard for their titles as well and were not excited to share the spotlight.
i think we need to be very careful about how we assign the 'doctor' title, however. the title is loosing its meaning when every specialty decides that it too is a doctor.
You have a valid point, especially with CRNA's. They are in school for 24-28 months straight for 50-60 hrs a week in clinical and the rest dedicated to studying, they should earn a higher degree then another person who is getting there Masters from the comfort of their home doing weekly assignments. But if that's the case, why add an additional 2 years to get your DNP? Every other discipline gets their's with an additional 2 years of school as well.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
I wouldn't agree that it is propaganda she is listening to since she is the one helping to create and then approve the program content, structure, and methodology and you have to do that on evidence, not hearsay or rumors. Furthermore, she isn't the only one I have talked to about this matter. There are a good 15 PhD's on my floor alone and they reluctantly saw the need as well.
The fact the NP's, especially CRNA's, were doing far more work than other masters programs is well documented and the NCSBN, ANA, and other regulatory bodies approved the DNP because of the plethora of evidence to support the advanced recognition.
*** If that were REALLY the motivation behind the push for DNP and entry to advanced practice then why don't we simply award the DNP to those completeing the over long current programs? If the issue is that NPs & CRNAs are working too hard to only recive a masters (and I don't buy that) then why not simply award them a DNP for the programs as is? This would still allow the schools to charge the crazy high tution they got for doctorate credits but save the students a year or more?
I can't speak for NP programs as I am not really familiar with what the requirements are, however CRNA programs are already full of fluff. My roomate who graduated last August spent 3 months doing his thesis on the subject of medical errors. A worthy topic for sure but not directly related to becoming a competent CRNA. It's silly to take a program already too heavy on fluff and add yet more fluff while in the process dramaticaly increasing the cost and time burden on students.
Is there some evidence that graduates of MSN programs are not competent practioners?
FWIW the hospital where I work has a DNP CRNA program in association with a state university. One of the main clinical instructors tells me that the qualiety of applicants has dropped dramaticaly since they went to DNP. There are four other non DNP CRNA programs in the area that are attracting the highest qualiety students according to him.
Lots of fluff in the MSN programs too, but the fluff does not take place of the hard core stuff. I think they do that because it keeps it nursing. I had no idea that CRNA's had fluff too. Makes me feel a lil better. And I agree, why not make the programs DNP as is if that is truly the case. I looked at a program around me for the DNP (just in case they make me get it) and its essentially the same classes in the MSN program but just with higher numbers ie NUR 700 instead of NUR 500. IDK. I think it has a lot to do with politics and $$$. No offense to anyone :)
nomadcrna, DNP, CRNA, NP
730 Posts
AND, the bottom line. Nurses should stick together for the good of the nursing profession. I tend to back what the major credentialing organizations are striving for as it improves our profession as a whole.
Instead of in-fighting, go to aanp.org or aacn.org and read up on where the NP profession is heading and what they are trying to do.