ProgressiveThinking

As stated in the thread title, is 75k worth it for a DNP? I ALMOST started a DNP program at a top 10 school nearly 3 years ago as a new grad CRNA, but deferred because I wanted to work, pay down loans, and save money. As I shop through DNP programs I find myself interested in bigger named schools, e.g. UCLA, Johns Hopkins, Yale, etc. These programs all run ~70-85k, and it makes me wonder if paying $$ for the name is worth it. I'm a co-owner of an anesthesia group that contracts with both CRNAs and MDs for multiple facilities, so getting a DNP will not lead to me earning anymore money. If anything, it's a bad investment financially (unless I somehow used it to become a hospital system CEO). Ultimately, I'd be doing it for self-satisfaction which is why I'm drawn to doing it at a bigger named school. HOWEVER, I sometimes wonder if I should get over going to a a more expensive school for the name. We have a local private school that offers a post-master's DNP for 20k. There's also DNAP programs that are geared towards CRNAs that allow you to take 1 class per semester at a low cost, namely University of Missouri. Although, as somebody who lives in California, I would feel weird saying I graduated from a school in Missouri. I just wouldn't be proud to say that I graduated from any of these schools, but at the end of the day a DNP is a DNP. I guess my question is, how important is school prestige for the DNP? Is ~75k worth it for a name?

Minimum amount of questions here for LVN, RN, and CRNA. Case closed.

I became a CRNA and never looked back. I love it. WAY different from bedside nursing. Being a provider is much more satisfying. However, I will say that nursing as a career is pretty good IF and only IF you look at it like a career. If you plan on staying in med/surg, giving people baths and passing out narcotics and antiemetics for the rest of your career (or working in nursing homes for that matter), of course you're going to hate nursing. Those are burnout jobs that thankless. I did both. Once I got to the ICU I felt a little more respected, and my job satisfaction went up. I am VERY VERY thankful to those who make their careers out of working in med/surg and SNFs. It just wasn't for me though. With nursing you can go into IT, anesthesia, NP, dialysis, ER, ICU, management, admin, med/surg, tele, infection control, education, teaching, etc. The list goes on. If you don't like your job then find one you do like. There's A LOT of opportunity out there.

I hope it's the Medical Center's OR, but likely it'll be the Heart and Surgical Hospital.

Oh yeah, and when I was there the anesthesia group was considering no longer allowing SRNAs to rotate through the main medical center's OR. With CRNAs no longer being able to rotate there or one of the other outpatient surgical sites, SRNAs were essentially limited to 1 of the outpatient sites for ALL of LLU. I hope this is no longer the case though, because for what you pay at LLU you would hope that the education would be top notch without any limitations. This isn't to say that if you go to LLU you won't become a good CRNA. By all means you can and there are some very solid providers that have graduated from the program, and some even practice independently. Just don't go to the LLU expecting to get great experience at LLUMC. It just ain't happening. Work hard and learn everything you can in your outrotations:-ARMC, VA, Navy, NAPA, Ohio (optional, but great). If they do allow you to rotate to the main OR (I did), be prepared to deal with people whose intensions are to make you feel second class as a SRNA.

Well, I've rotated through LLU, and I have to say that it was the worst rotation I had. VERY INCREDIBLY anti-CRNA and extremely medically directed. The CRNAs aren't even allowed to push induction drugs, place CVLs or A-lines at the facility. I repeat, at their own facility. The anesthesia group is fairly anti-CRNA, and it was vocalized when I rotated through. The SRNAs I worked with varied in quality, with most being okay. The majority of the good experience they receive comes from their out-rotations, namely ARMC which is TWUs primary California clinical site (hence the suggestion for TWU). I would rank programs as followed: 1) Kaiser (only downside is they have too many rotations so as soon as they get their bearings at a place it's onto the next rotation), but they consistently produce solid graduates. 2)TWU (ARMC is hands down the greatest site for SRNAs in SoCal, but you get worked long hours like staff for free, but come out prepared. Their students were the strongest clinically-LLU, Kaiser and USC rotate here). 3) and 4) LLU and USC come in at a tie. USC rotates to sites where there are no CRNAs and are forced to follow MDAs all day who don't let them do anything (anesthesia can be political like that), and for some, it really showed. LLU's main downside is that it's affiliated with a medical center with an anesthesia residency that has anti-CRNA sentiments. Residents obviously get preference for big cases, and as a SRNA you won't even be pushing induction drugs. It was a fairly demeaning rotation honestly. One of the MDs told me that CRNAs are basically technicians who don't do any real thinking. CRNAs even got pulled out of one of their outpatient centers so that residents could get more experience that was more similar to private practice. ALSO, for the cost and the length of the program, you might as well go to medical school. FWIW though LLU does have a pretty solid heart rotation up in NAPA, or at least they used to. If I wanted to be a CRNA and ABSOLUTELY HAD TO stay in the IE, I would go to LLU, but I would strongly consider making other options work.

?

Do yourselves a favor and go to Kaiser, Texas Wesleyan, or USC if you're looking at California schools.

I did this exact thing because I thought my stats weren't competitive, and surprisingly, every single director replied to my email. Most said different things, but the recurring response was "Just apply. A lot of it depends on how competitive the cohort is from the application cycle you apply for, and more important than anything else is how you interview."

I was just accepted to a DNP program at a public research university that's ranked top 10 for public schools, and is nationally ranked as well. I currently work as a staff CRNA at this particular university's hospital, so I'm getting a pretty nice discount. These are the only 2 reasons I'm pursuing the DNP: 1) Large discount in a program that created a cohort to cater to CRNAs who work for the university, and 2) Doing it at a school that is locally respected with a name I'd be proud to say that I graduated from. I can't help but think about how I'm going to be wasting time and money pursuing this, and I've done A LOT of thinking about whether or not the DNP is really what I want. I'm still not sure, but I'm doing it for the aforementioned reasons. I'm happy to have the opportunity to pursue a doctorate, particularly because of my negative past with academics when I was younger. I also know that I will never be content if I don't obtain a terminal degree, especially as more new grad CRNAs come out graduating with a DNP. It's just my personality. However, I can't help but think that my doctorate won't be respected in the medical community. The curriculum is very lackluster, and I guess my point is that if you pursue a post-master's DNP you can't go into it expecting to become a better clinician, or expecting more respect from our physician colleagues. They'll never respect it. It's a turf war thing. I DO believe that the DNP curriculum will better prepare me function in the board room later on in my career, and it will help provide me with the tools to convince those in the C-suites to expand CRNA services......or at least I keep telling myself that to justify spending more money on another degree LOL

I mostly agree with this, but I'm a little on the fence about USC. I currently work with a lot their grads and a lot of their SRNAs rotated to my main clinical site when I was a SRNA. What some of their SRNAs told me is they're forced to start a different rotation every month and most of the sites are heavily supervised where CRNAs are either limited or they don't even have CRNAs. Just when they get comfortable and people start trusting them and allowing them to do things they have to go to a different site. I definitely agree with every other school listed, mainly Kaiser. Their students were pretty good. I was fortunate enough to rotate to a military hospital for a month, and they had some very very strong CRNAs. Only downside was at this particular place the military anesthesia residents got all of the bigger cases, but the CRNAs were very very independent.

I graduated from the largest program in the country. I was fortunate enough to be placed at a site with one of the busiest trauma centers in the state that didn’t have anesthesia residents. I specifically chose the site because I worked there in the ICU. We took overnight call and the CRNAs supervised 2 SRNAs at the same time. We were on the schedule and basically used as staff. The place was apolitical. CRNAs, SRNAs, and MDs all worked together and I learned so much. I was there for 12 months, and did 4 months worth out specialty outrotations, which I actually preferred. We had a ton of autonomy. When I graduated, I felt ready for independent practice and felt very prepared for neuraxial, and moderately prepared for peripheral nerve blocks. Granted, some of the newer blocks I never got to learn. It was a grind, but now that I’m practicing, the transition to practicing as a CRNA has been fairly easy for me, So I wouldn’t have done any other program. We had students rotate from both big name programs, and another program that’s known for producing independent practitioners. It was evident when they rotated to our site that they weren’t used to the autonomy that we were allowed, and weren’t clinically the strongest. I can’t speak to other big name programs, but mine was the best experience I could have had. I think it’s unfair to group all big programs together. I was fortunate because I knew people in the program, so I did research and knew what I was getting myself into. my advice would be to do your research and talk to alumni or current SRNAs on their clinical and didactic experience and then go from there. Don’t pay attention to the US News rankings.

Never have I ever met a physician who cared so much about the nursing admissions process to comment that one should pursue advanced practice after 3 years. Also, a lot of the basic mistakes that you mentioned that BSN-DNP nurse made is learned at the bedside with ICU being one of the prime areas to learn this stuff. I never experienced lateral violence or anti-intellectualism at the bedside. We were encouraged to take courses that would help us grow clinically, and our hospital would pay for it. If anything, there was an unspoken competition about who could get more "certifications," and who was capable of taking care of the sickest of the sick, e.g. crashing trauma, septic patient on multiple vasopressors about to code, etc. This bedside experience is something I still use today and fall back on when anesthetizing sick patients. Granted, I worked in unionized California hospitals where nurses had nurse-to-patient ratios and were paid 100k+, which may have attracted a different demographic to the field than a hospital in a state without ratios that pays 25/hour would. If anything, working in a nursing home as a LVN passing medications for 30+ patients taught me time management. Working in med-surg allowed to learn to quickly sift through information, analyze it and respond accordingly. Working in step-down prepared me to work in the ICU. My ICU experience nicely prepared me for anesthesia school and my current practice is a culmination of all of my experience and education. Sure, you might not need this type of experience as a FNP practicing in primary care, but would I rather have a FNP with 10+ years of cardiothoracic and ER experience be my PCP, or a brand new BSN-DNP without any prior experience be my PCP if they graduated from the same program? I would personally choose the former. I think the beauty of nursing is that people can advance their education and change their specialty rather easily. I don't think that creating more barriers for people to improve their situation and learn more is the answer. I do however think that the quality of programs and their curriculum should be examined and beefed up academically as long as its relevant to their specialty. Use the extra months and credits to give CRNAs more regional/cardiothoracic/US/TEE, FNPs more clinical hours and specialty rotations, nurse leaders more admin rotations that are relevant , etc. Better this than doing an irrelevant capstone project.

I think that's more of an example that DNP programs should require experience for admission, or that hospitals shouldn't hire people into a role where they're expected to establish clinical guidelines without any clinical experience. It sounds like her undergrad nursing program failed her as well. It also sounds like her DNP program's pharmacology course failed her as well. Perhaps the quality of the courses already given, since MSN and BSN-DNP programs are required to have pharm, patho, and physical assessment courses as part of their curriculum, should be evaluated. I don't know that one nurses mishap means we should add calculus and physics to a nursing leadership degree though. I definitely agree with you when you say that DNP curriculum is watered down needs revamping, though.

I'm a MS prepared CRNA as well, and I completely agree that the DNP lacks application to most advanced practice nurses. While I don't necessarily think that a non-APRN who wants to obtain a degree with a specialization in say, leadership should have to repeat any hard sciences, I do wish that an BSN-DNP FNP or BSN - DNAP (CRNA) would add additional clinical hours (mainly for NPs though since CRNAs have a minimum of 2000 clinical hours), or applicable courses that can actually be applied to clinical practice, e.g. extra regional anesthesia, cardiothoracic anesthesia, or transesophageal echocardiography, etc. instead of fluff courses that require bogus capstone projects. The post-master's DNP program that I'm pursuing will have zero application to anesthesia, but I'm doing it because it's a hybrid program (not completely online) at a big name institution and I'm hoping it will open more doors for me in the future through networking. The problem with making a post-master's DNP more difficult, especially for working professionals is less people will apply, and at the end of the day these programs exist to make the institution money, unfortunately. This is especially applicable to individuals like me who went to a CRNA program that was heavy in the chem/biochem/o-chem, patho, pharm and graduated with 3000+ clinical hours. I think a good idea would be to add more hard sciences to BSN-DNP programs, and have post-master's programs that will help an APRN improve clinically.