re: Defeat the Nurse Practitioner scope of practice expansion - Louisiana SB 187

quote:

---

We said they're not equipped for autonomous management

---

Like when I see the NP at my GP's office and they don't consult the GP before I'm off to get my meds and additional treatment?

Your coach is an Nurse politicioneer

quote:

---

Nurse politicioneer

---

Took you all night to think of that one, eh?

Roles with the optometric politicians

quote:

---

Why do docs hire these untrained, ill equipped people to manage patients and write scrips for them?

---

Not being a smart as, but do you understand the difference in what we are saying vs what you are asking?


They have a role to play. They're good at that role. There are a lot of things they are good at. But at present, they work under a physician's oversight. Ideally, that physician trains them until he trusts them in certain areas. Once that occurs, he gives them some freedom but still makes sure they are doing their job well. They're very capable of a limited scope. The problem is that "headache" that comes through the door can be a normal "tension" headache that the patient just needs to be reassured, migraines which vary in severity and do/don't need a medicine to stop them both acutely and chronically, or even as severe as a brain tumor. ANS maybe the NP has a special interest in headaches and knows when to order a CT vs not. But he hasn't taken a neurology class. He hasn't taken a pathology class. And he hasn't taken a pharmacology class that are as in depth as what the MD has. But even still, with a special interest in the regular old headache, the NP may be pretty good.

The point I make is that pretty much anything you can think of has a differential that ranges from nothing to life threatening. The thought process gained through medical school and residency makes an MD qualified to approach those problems in that way. Nurse practitioners aren't taught diagnostic skills to that extent, and they're never taught how to think through a diagnostic work up like a physician, so as good as they can be at differentiating headaches in that example, they'll be less likely to be good at the rest of what goes into primary care- say working up a "cough" or "abdominal pain."


None of it is intellectual superiority. It's the type of training the two groups get. So to answer your question- they hire them because over time, they can trust them in a limited role once trained to relieve some of the burden of the practice of medicine.

You docs should work on your perception of being stubborn, inaccessable know it alls and maybe your prestige wouldn't be on the chopping block. Ego much?

All that to say they hire them because they are cheaper than another MD.

For the record, I understand both sides of this. I just don't think the consumer needs to be protected in this case.

If u don't trust us, I'm sure the LA state Capitol will step in and manage your renal failure for u (without a medical degree). Your call