- 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 5/21/16 at 1:18 pm to Pavoloco83
Posted on 5/21/16 at 1:18 pm to Pavoloco83
quote:
Yeah, but for a lot of things, a doctor isnt necessary. Your average ear infection at the doc in the box, an infected cut, etc. Nurse practitioner would be fine for that.
You are looking at the issue from a very narrow perspective. While you personally may be able to tell the difference of when and when not you should see a NP
(and that is questionable. since diagnosing yourself, even for physicians, is a terrible idea)
A significant portion of the population is clueless when it comes to medical symptoms, diagnosis, etc. Those are the people that would get hurt.
Posted on 5/21/16 at 1:23 pm to Pavoloco83
While some here are advocating for 100% oversight of MDs over NPS, I am not. I think it's not practical in most settings (some exceptions... Smack)
I think the role of some oversight (20%) is enough because I believe it acts as a safety net. It won't catch every single mistake, but hopefully the MD will pick up on practice patterns of the NP and be able to identify areas of weakness over time then change that behavior.
The alternative is no oversight from a MD, no standard of educational training, and questionable motivation/resources from a board meant to supervise nurses. That sounds like a huge risk with very minimal upside.
Whoever is down voting every one of my posts, why don't you present a counter argument
I think the role of some oversight (20%) is enough because I believe it acts as a safety net. It won't catch every single mistake, but hopefully the MD will pick up on practice patterns of the NP and be able to identify areas of weakness over time then change that behavior.
The alternative is no oversight from a MD, no standard of educational training, and questionable motivation/resources from a board meant to supervise nurses. That sounds like a huge risk with very minimal upside.
Whoever is down voting every one of my posts, why don't you present a counter argument
This post was edited on 5/21/16 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 5/21/16 at 3:24 pm to WaWaWeeWa
I'm not totally sure what the language of the bill is. But I'm not concerned about the physician trained NP with 10+ years of experience practicing with little or no oversight. I'm concerned about a NP coming out of NURSING school practicing medicine and guided by a board of NURSES. That is scary as hell. I'm surprised they are pushing this as hard as they are. The much more superior training of a physician with (at least) 3 years of residency, after 1000s hours of clinical training, and basic sciences is difficult making the transition into practice. Nurses simply don't know what they don't know. The best NPs I know have gotten to the level of a clinic physician by the training of that physician. Eta: and they will admit that.
This post was edited on 5/21/16 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 5/21/16 at 3:28 pm to PJ250R
Damn I thought this thread was gonna take the weekend off.
Posted on 5/21/16 at 3:31 pm to L S Usetheforce
Sorry to ruin your weekend.
Posted on 5/21/16 at 3:34 pm to PJ250R
Advocacy never sleeps. No sleeping on the weekends. They awakened the tiger. Gotta defend our patients. This bill is a mess and needs to fail
Posted on 5/21/16 at 4:27 pm to LATigerdoc
I've been following this thread from the beginning and been silent. My 2 cents:
I was perfectly fine with seeing a nurse practitioner until one missed something that's easy to catch on an ECG. She wrote my symptoms off as "just dehydration" and told me to drink more water and to come back if I don't feel better in x number of days.
Fortunately the MD reviewed the chart the following morning. The phone call from the doc was a rude awakening. I ended up seeing a cardiologist later that day, and was not a happy camper. Apparently her "miss" was pretty egregious.
I refuse to see an NP again, and insist that my appointments be with the physician. Im certain that not all NPs would have missed it, but I'm not going down that road again.
I have contacted my congressman with my feelings on the bill.
I was perfectly fine with seeing a nurse practitioner until one missed something that's easy to catch on an ECG. She wrote my symptoms off as "just dehydration" and told me to drink more water and to come back if I don't feel better in x number of days.
Fortunately the MD reviewed the chart the following morning. The phone call from the doc was a rude awakening. I ended up seeing a cardiologist later that day, and was not a happy camper. Apparently her "miss" was pretty egregious.
I refuse to see an NP again, and insist that my appointments be with the physician. Im certain that not all NPs would have missed it, but I'm not going down that road again.
I have contacted my congressman with my feelings on the bill.
This post was edited on 5/21/16 at 4:29 pm
Posted on 5/21/16 at 4:44 pm to LATigerdoc
quote:
Gotta defend our patients
Popular
Back to top


0




