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 Consultation Liaison Psychiatry.
That is still a proposal, not a requirement. The only advanced practice group that has actually embraced the mandatory-DNP idea is the CRNAs, and I believe their target date is 2025 (and it remains to be seen whether that will actually happen).

You're correct, it's a proposed requirement at this point, but discussion has focused on 2015 rather than 2010 as someone else posted.

I suspect that the date will be moved back; too many questions still remain, in my opinion. Many of us would be more supportive of a clinical degree rather than a 'practice' degree. In any case, I don't believe that we are physicians.

Specializes in Adult primary care, college health.
The DNP needs to develop it's own version of the COMLEX, i.e. Steps 1-3, tweaked to reflect "nursing theory/roles" type stuff (which will make many groan, but putting in this stuff is the only way to get academia to support it).

But how could one go about preparing a single DNP licensing exam, when advanced practice training is already so specialized? Further, the DNP isn't limited to only APN students - nurses whose area of practice is, say, management/ hospital administration are enrolling in these programs as well. What single exam could possibly test for competence adequately in each area of specialization, without requiring each DNP student to have knowledge in areas completely unrelated to their specialty?

We already have certification exams to test for competency in our respective areas of specialization. If the goal of creating a "DNP Exam" for all DNP graduates that resembles the COMLEX or USMLE is only to make the DNP look more like a medical degree (which, of course, it's not)...well, I'm just not convinced that's enough of a reason. Just my $0.02. :)

Specializes in Cardiac, Pulmonary, Anesthesia.

Why doesn't nursing come up with a generalist NP is what I want to know? Why can't we have an NP that can do acute care, primary care, first assist for both children and adults? I'm not suggesting that we get rid of the specialty degrees, but why not have one that is a combination of them all? Then the doctorate could be in a 12-24 month (depending on specialty) residency experience in a specialty. So you have generalist MSN NP, and a DNP specialty. It's more school time/money but I sure as heck would've done it. Everyone is happy this way. You have your MSN specialist, your MSN generalist, and a real clinical doctorate in a specialty. if you have the MSN specialist degree you could complete the generalist degree (after a period of practicing in your specialty) and have your doctorate. All problems solved.

I know it will never come about (not in my lifetime), but a boy can dream.

Specializes in Consultation Liaison Psychiatry.

The FNP is about the closest to a generalist for NP's. I'm not certain that we should move toward a combination acute care/primary care/1st assist model at a time that other professionas are moving away from that model. Acute care has become so specialized that we have hospitalist services to manage inpatient care. In my academic medical center, only a few patients are managed by their PCP's while care for the majority is by the hospitalist service. Our hospitalist service includes, MD/DO's, PharmD, NP's, PA's and a rapid response team(critical care RN and Resp therapist).

Specializes in ACNP-BC, Adult Critical Care, Cardiology.
Why doesn't nursing come up with a generalist NP is what I want to know? Why can't we have an NP that can do acute care, primary care, first assist for both children and adults? I'm not suggesting that we get rid of the specialty degrees, but why not have one that is a combination of them all? Then the doctorate could be in a 12-24 month (depending on specialty) residency experience in a specialty. So you have generalist MSN NP, and a DNP specialty. It's more school time/money but I sure as heck would've done it. Everyone is happy this way. You have your MSN specialist, your MSN generalist, and a real clinical doctorate in a specialty. if you have the MSN specialist degree you could complete the generalist degree (after a period of practicing in your specialty) and have your doctorate. All problems solved.

I know it will never come about (not in my lifetime), but a boy can dream.

During the early stage of the DNP discussions, I thought this was the actual direction nursing was going to take in introducing the practice doctorate. One of the weaknesses identified in the current Master's programs was the inconsistent hours and breadth of clinical rotations across the various programs. Initially, I thought the first two years of the BSN to DNP programs was going to be a generalist NP track and then the final or third year was going to be the specialization track. However, through years of opposing ideas from many groups of people who have a stake at the DNP, the current model have now emerged which essentially is no different than what we already have in the current Master's degree offerings in terms of clinical content.

Specializes in Cardiac, Pulmonary, Anesthesia.
The FNP is about the closest to a generalist for NP's. I'm not certain that we should move toward a combination acute care/primary care/1st assist model at a time that other professionas are moving away from that model. Acute care has become so specialized that we have hospitalist services to manage inpatient care. In my academic medical center, only a few patients are managed by their PCP's while care for the majority is by the hospitalist service. Our hospitalist service includes, MD/DO's, PharmD, NP's, PA's and a rapid response team(critical care RN and Resp therapist).

I know fnp is the closest to the generalist model and itsnot close enough in my opinion.

Who is moving away from this model? This is the model used by everyone except nursing. All other practitioners first have a generalist model and then specialty training if they desire. I'm not saying toss out the MSN NP specialties we have now, but have a true generalist for those that want it (and alot of people would go for this).

I know acute care is specialized, that's why I included the idea of residency for the doctorate and have the MSN generalist have OTJ training in the specialty just like the MSN specialist except they would be able to switch specialties/treat all ages without having to go back for yet another certificate. RN is a generalist degree that can practice in all specialties, why don't we have an NP that could do the same?

Should the PhD prepared nursed take an exam to prove him or herself? I took a certification exam and passed it. I'm not a physician. I'm a nurse practitioner. When I complete my DNP, I can be addressed as "Doctor" because of academic credentials alone, but not physician. A physician is a MD or DO.

PS: A chiropractor can do pelvic exams?? I think NOT!

Specializes in Consultation Liaison Psychiatry.

I only said that acute care is more frequently being done by hospitalists rather than community physicians. At least in New England, Family practice docs are rarely doing OB these days. I'm sure that when you get away from major medical centers you'll still find the docs who do everything.

I'd think that education of an NP generalist who could do acute and primary care and first assist would take as long as med school. I'm not against the concept, just am unsure re the demand for the role. That said, our hospitalist service employs a large number of NP's, most of whom trained as FNP's. They are certainly doing acute care, could do primary care, too if they wanted to. They didn't go back to school for additional education, aren't certified ACNP's. All of them had acute/critical care experience as RN's before their FNP programs.

Specializes in Consultation Liaison Psychiatry.

By the way, I do like the idea of a CLINICAL doctorate which would be additional education in the specialty area...much more sensible than this practice doctorate.

There is absolutely ZERO reason for us, as NPs, to have people address us as "Dr" in the clinical setting. This has been talked about ad nauseum on this forum. No body owns a title but the use of it in certain situations is inappropriate. As many on here have said before, go to medical school if you want to be called Dr.

Who is moving away from this model? This is the model used by everyone except nursing. All other practitioners first have a generalist model and then specialty training if they desire. I'm not saying toss out the MSN NP specialties we have now, but have a true generalist for those that want it (and alot of people would go for this).

I know acute care is specialized, that's why I included the idea of residency for the doctorate and have the MSN generalist have OTJ training in the specialty just like the MSN specialist except they would be able to switch specialties/treat all ages without having to go back for yet another certificate. RN is a generalist degree that can practice in all specialties, why don't we have an NP that could do the same?

The way I look at it, the NP is a shortcut degree (I am not trying to be nasty). It was made so that nurses could treat the easier cases that did not require a physician and could extend the reach of physicians. So instead of a strong foundation in basic sciences, then years of rotations and then even more years of residency and then more years of fellowship, an NP gets a specialized education. Why not just go to med school then?

In a time when we need more providers, making it longer to be an NP (especially without adding more clinical competence) is obsurd.

Specializes in Consultation Liaison Psychiatry.

The NP is a license, the MSN is the degree and is no shortcut. Yes, the NP role was created to provide more clinicians to the public, particularly to meet primary care needs. Most NP's these days do have a good education in basic sciences in undergrad programs, supplemented in their graduate programs.

I agree that making NP programs longer will not help the public. Not everyone can afford the time and expense of a doctoral level NP program after BSN training. Not everyone wants to be an organizational leader on the forefront of health care reform. Some of us LIKE providing care to the public. I see no value added to the clinical role by the current DNP curricula.

I do think that some people will chose medical school over the combination of undergrad and graduate training for the proposed DNP track to the NP role. More physicians..good; fewer nurses...not good. Nursing education (both undergrad and grad)does, in my opinion, better prepare us as patient/family teachers than does current medical education.

We should value both the NP and physician roles rather than trying to compete. We provide different levels of care. We should be trying to provide the best quality care that we can given our different traing and roles.

+ Add a Comment