Will352nd

As a PA, best advise I can think of is never order IM Toradol when the patient can take a PO Motrin. :) Remember, the work-up is the work-up based on what the patient requires, not what is easiest for the staff. Work as a team, take the input from the RN's, but at the end day...you are the provider.

A few things. The AS programs are ending. All are moving to Masters. The AS programs are some of the longest standing programs and have great reputations. These were born out of the old Certification Programs that started the profession.....remember, NP started the same, a few years after the first PA programs started. The requirements to get into the AS programs are similar to all PA programs. You have to have the core sciences (about 2 years worth) before you can apply. Also, these programs usually have the highest amount of required health care experience. There was mention in another post about lack of standardization in PA programs? The standard curriculum and single governing body (ARC-PA) is the reason I became a PA and not an NP. The ARC-PA is no joke. If a program is not holding up to standards, they are shut down. Schools with good reps end up on probation every year. Experience requirements have gone down in the last decade, this is true. That said, it is very difficult to get in any program without experience. One in five qualified applicants will get into PA. Having experience gives folks the edge. I have noticed that nurses like to reduce PA training to only 2 years. The actual length of most PA programs is 27 months. Average credit hours crammed in those 27 months is approx 100 credit hours (think about that for a sec). Then you have to consider the approx 2 years of upper level sciences just to apply. Be careful when you are generalizing the folks who most of you work with side by side. Remember, for the most part, we do the exact same job.

These threads always digress into who is better. The same thing happens on the PA forums. If you take a new grad PA and NP and put them in the same practice, there will some differences, but minor. Fast forward a couple of years you will see no real difference in the way they practice. Sure, you will see slight differences based on personality and motivation, but at the end of the day...medicine is medicine. My group hires NP's and PA's. Just about 50/50, no preference, it's in a busy ER. When we are put side by side as colleagues nobody cares about titles or superiority. We do the same thing.

There were 3 nurses in my cohort (PA). One failed out in the second semester, one graduated but had difficulty the whole way through, and one was a rock star; one of the smartest people I know. For the two the passed, their background helped and hurt them...it is hard to break bad habits/assumptions. Just know the with a BSN, you will still need do a lot of extra courses to be eligible to apply. Good luck.

In a nutshell, you just described PA school.

PAs have DEA numbers.

I am comparing and contrasting the AANP and the AAPA....this isn't a pi@#ing contest.

It's interesting to the hear that you don't think the AANP and the ANA as a whole, don't have clout. You described that change is difficult...yes, it is. You won't get it all and there will always be push-back from other organizations. But change happens....eventually. The AAPA is subset of the AMA that has little interest in pushing the needs of the AAPA. The AANP has the backing and clout of the ANA, which is a beast. Power and numbers = money. The AANP has an organization within that is dedicated to State and Federal legislation...the AAPA can't even get their foot in the door. Again, it's power in numbers....money talks. AANP - Legislation/ Regulation Have a look, I cruised this for about 5 mins and saw more legislative initiatives being pushed now than the AAPA has been able to accomplish in ten years. Really, you guys should be proud of your organization. I'm sure it's not perfect, but there are tangibles that you can see.

Not quite right. PA's were one of the answers to primary care shortage in 60's. It had nothing to do with "the MD's answer to NP's". The PA model was never to indended to just be an "assistent" to the physician. The role was, and is, to extend healthcare while working with the supervision of a physician. Supervision is defined as "available for consult/advise"....not "under the thumb" as frequently suggested/implied on this site. Most States have done away with the archaic chart co-signature rules and the Physician doesn't have to be in the same building...just available. Sounds a lot like collaboration doesn't it? The "assistant" title has been the bane of the PA since it's onset...it is what it is. The first NP Program (what we recognize as an NP today) was developed in 1965 at the University of Colorado. Dr. Eugene Stead tried to implement his PA model using nurses in 1964, but he was disillusioned by the by the push-back he was getting from the organized nursing organizations at the time. He went with military medics with his first PA class in 1965 instead. The value of nursing was recognized, but it was the decision of the NURSING organizations not to go with Steads model as opposed to Stead answering to the NP model tit for tat. Sources: Physician Assistant History Society and AANP - Historical Timeline NP's have it pretty good in regards to practice laws...and good on them. But it has little to do with being "better" or being more "competent", and everything to do with having a better lobby that is independent of the BOM. I know you didn't imply this and it is not an accusation, but it is "implied" quite a bit throughout the NP community. IMO, there will never be a merging of PA and NP. Most PA's were not nurses so it would make it difficult for them to practice "advanced nursing". NP's were not trained in the medical model and would have to build a stronger base in the core sciences to meet the curriculum of a PA program. Different approaches for the same goal...treat the patient. Just some thoughts from a guy who considered NP and PA and went with the PA model.

Thanks for your reply. 5 points for every year would equal 85 points (19 years). Are you sure that is right? Good with me if it is, but that seems pretty high. *Edit: I found the answer. It is 5 points for up to 4 years of experience. I will happily take 20 points.

Hi, I have read the entire thread, but I haven't seen anything on how the school comes up with the scores. I know it is a variation of GPA and NAT, but how are the variables weighed against each other and are there other factors that are considered?Please know that I have tried to contact the school via email and I haven't had much success with answers. I am a military medic currently overseas and I will be applying next year.Thanks,Will