- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Defeat the Nurse Practitioner scope of practice expansion - Louisiana SB 187
Posted on 5/20/16 at 10:41 am to Blind Eye
Posted on 5/20/16 at 10:41 am to Blind Eye
quote:
I just saw a patient with a large central dendritic ulcer. She was being treated for assumed allergic conjunctivitis by her "Doctor" with prednisilone drops. As you can imagine, her condition was getting significantly worse. Thank God she came in to see me. Call me whatever you choose, but it's quite possible I will save this woman's sight. If she needs a corneal transplant, I promise you that I will not try to legislate the privelage of doing this surgery. I am now going "surgically" remove a trichiatic lash.
Is anyone going to call this guy a self absorbed douche? Or does that only apply to physicians
Are you really resorting to citing cases where you have done something positive? You wouldn't know about the stuff you miss. That's called confirmation bias. I'm not even going to get into how ridiculous your story sounds.
0
Posted on 5/20/16 at 10:53 am to Blind Eye
quote:
I just saw a patient with a large central dendritic ulcer. She was being treated for assumed allergic conjunctivitis by her "Doctor" with prednisilone drops. As you can imagine, her condition was getting significantly worse. Thank God she came in to see me. Call me whatever you choose, but it's quite possible I will save this woman's sight. If she needs a corneal transplant, I promise you that I will not try to legislate the privelage of doing this surgery. I am now going "surgically" remove a trichiatic lash.
Is there such thing as residency for optometry?
Posted on 5/20/16 at 10:55 am to LATigerdoc
quote:
ss you're trying to get rid of the practice of medicine your argument is a straw man argument
I'm not the one making sweeping claims of being a full body Doctor.
Besides, how often do ENTs frick shite up to the point where surgical specialists or Alleregy/Immunology MDs have to right the ship? There were posts earlier proclaiming doctors to be experts on drug interactions (at least over other specialists), but pharmacists catch mistakes all the time.
You can't be an expert on everything, and we all forget much of what we have been exposed to in school. It's the stuff you see and do everyday that you become an expert on.
Posted on 5/20/16 at 11:58 am to Bmath
quote:
Besides, how often do ENTs frick shite up to the point where surgical specialists or Alleregy/Immunology MDs have to right the ship?
So your argument is, "even super highly trained individuals make mistakes on a daily basis, so we should let folks with less training practice without any supervision?"
I'm not sure that sits well with me.
This post was edited on 5/20/16 at 12:08 pm
Posted on 5/20/16 at 12:25 pm to Restomod
Gotta resort to basic common English terminology with ordinary words so the audience sees contrast when there's camouflage making two images externally seemingly indistinguishable
Posted on 5/20/16 at 12:29 pm to Bmath
Read the posts. How would I know any of this stuff if I were not a physician
Posted on 5/20/16 at 12:31 pm to LATigerdoc
I do not treat the entire body but I went to school to learn that. In our society we call that a doctor
Posted on 5/20/16 at 12:33 pm to LATigerdoc
We got way off topic. The thread is about whether it's safe for NPs to fully care for patients on their own without anybody watching behind them
Posted on 5/20/16 at 12:50 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
argument is, "even super highly trained individuals make mistakes on a daily basis, so we should let folks with less training practice without any supervision?"
No, it's an example of how even medical doctors can be overconfident about there skills, and often try to treat things beyond the scope of their practice.
Posted on 5/20/16 at 1:00 pm to LATigerdoc
A question for the supervising physicians currently, you have to monitor 20% of the charts, how often do you find these huge potential mistakes by the NP's, and if it is that many don't you think you should be looking at every chart?
Posted on 5/20/16 at 1:32 pm to LATigerdoc
quote:
Say I'm a patient. One "doctor" of the eye says he is a doctor, wears a white coat, and lobbied to give meds and do surgery and now talks about optometric residency .
The other doctor of the eye went to medical school, and his field of training entails meds and surgery for the eye.
How in the world am I as a patient to realized that one is a full body medical doctor with twice the training and the other has been pushing his scope of practice forward through the legislature for several decades?
Tell me how this is not confusing to the patient. It appears as if there is an ongoing attempt to camouflage the two as one in the same which they are not
And if both are competent in what they do, operate within their scope of practice, and governed by a board that oversees that they are complying with all policies and laws, where exactly is the problem?
Posted on 5/20/16 at 1:36 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
So your argument is, "even super highly trained individuals make mistakes on a daily basis, so we should let folks with less training practice without any supervision?"
So just curious, what is your understanding of the level of "supervision" required as part of the current collaborative practice agreements?
Posted on 5/20/16 at 1:38 pm to LATigerdoc
quote:
We got way off topic. The thread is about whether it's safe for NPs to fully care for patients on their own without anybody watching behind them
That is a great statement... So with the current collaborative practice agreements that are in place now, how much "watching behind" is currently done?
This post was edited on 5/20/16 at 2:56 pm
Posted on 5/20/16 at 1:46 pm to chadg
The bigger question is whether this thread has enough steam to reach 100 pages? I believe delaying the vote by a week only help this thread.
Posted on 5/20/16 at 2:01 pm to guttata
200
Posted on 5/20/16 at 2:41 pm to chadg
quote:
So just curious, what is your understanding of the level of "supervision" required as part of the current collaborative practice agreements?
The physician is required to sign off on at least 20% of the charts. He does not have to be present at the time of the patient encounter, but most of the time in reality, they are on site or close by.
Posted on 5/20/16 at 2:43 pm to Bmath
quote:
No, it's an example of how even medical doctors can be overconfident about there skills, and often try to treat things beyond the scope of their practice.
Again, I'm not understanding the relevance. It's so difficult that no one is capable of being right all the time. How does lowering the standard help?
Posted on 5/20/16 at 2:48 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
The physician is required to sign off on at least 20% of the charts. He does not have to be present at the time of the patient encounter, but most of the time in reality, they are on site or close by.
Wrong...Can you show me that, because that is false... The collaborative practice agreement doesn't require any charts to be reviewed...
Posted on 5/20/16 at 2:50 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
The physician is required to sign off on at least 20% of the charts. He does not have to be present at the time of the patient encounter, but most of the time in reality, they are on site or close by
so currently 80% of the patients that are seen by a NP nothing would change if the new law passed?
Posted on 5/20/16 at 2:50 pm to chadg
It should
Page 75 of 127
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News