- 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
SB 435 would allow advanced practice nurses to not work under a physician
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:50 am
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:50 am
In a hospital or nursing home setting. Being heard right now at the Capitol. Last time this came up, there was some good discussion on here about this.
Present law requires an advanced practice registered nurse to have a formal written collaborative practice agreement with a licensed physician.
Proposed law exempts advanced practice registered nurses performing their duties in a hospital or nursing home from the requirement of the formal written collaborative practice agreement.
I’m curious how this affects NPs who go straight to grad school from under grad with no experience? Wouldn’t they need a physician to look over them?
ETA: Passed out of Committee to the Senate Floor.
Present law requires an advanced practice registered nurse to have a formal written collaborative practice agreement with a licensed physician.
Proposed law exempts advanced practice registered nurses performing their duties in a hospital or nursing home from the requirement of the formal written collaborative practice agreement.
I’m curious how this affects NPs who go straight to grad school from under grad with no experience? Wouldn’t they need a physician to look over them?
ETA: Passed out of Committee to the Senate Floor.
This post was edited on 4/4/18 at 12:49 pm
30
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:51 am to toosleaux
quote:
to not work under a physician
I bet they will still work on top of one though.
Get it?
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:53 am to toosleaux
This is the thread where all the Republicans come out to support government regulation
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:53 am to toosleaux
Good.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:54 am to Cold Drink
quote:
This is the thread where all the Republicans come out to support government regulation
Nice preemptive straw man
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:54 am to Cold Drink
Yes, I’m a Republican but also a medical professional and this is a terrible idea.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:57 am to toosleaux
I'm sure this scope would not be allowed without a certain amount of experience. A quick google search says that Connecticut allows independent practice for NPs who've completed 3 years of collaborative practice.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:58 am to toosleaux
RIP patients
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:02 am to toosleaux
I’m a republican and a pharmacist. They aren’t doctors so no they shouldn’t be working without being under a collaborative physician being responsible for their actions
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:02 am to Evil Little Thing
quote:
I'm sure this scope would not be allowed without a certain amount of experience.
This. With increased residency probably. Definitely not going to have NP's straight out of school going into practice.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:02 am to toosleaux
Is this bill proposed because there is a shortage of physicians in these areas or is it simply an attempt to lower qualifications?
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:05 am to toosleaux
As a black democrat I think this is a terrible idea.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:10 am to toosleaux
I don’t understand why an NP needs to work under a doc when they can prescribe Z-Paks and steroid shots autonomously.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:18 am to Cold Drink
quote:
This is the thread where all the Republicans come out to support government regulation
Are you saying that Republicans should say that who can provide healthcare to patients should be completely unregulated because small government? That's pretty ridiculous.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:26 am to High C
quote:
Is this bill proposed because there is a shortage of physicians in these areas
Yes
quote:
s it simply an attempt to lower qualifications?
Yes. Using the former as an excuse to do the latter
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:27 am to toosleaux
I would think it would depend on the scope of their practice. If they are working at an Urgent Care seeing routine sore throat/cold type things or a Minute Clinic for the same types of issues, probably not as a big a deal as say diagnosing and treating complex cardiovascular issues. Then again, I'm no physician. So, I would think it pretty important to have lots of physician input on this type of thing.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:30 am to bengalbait
I am a mid level provider and have been for the last 10 years and I think this is a bad idea. We are not medical doctors, we are doctor extenders. I have been doing virtually the same thing everyday for 10 years and I still refer to my supervising physician often. There are cases that we figure out together, and still even more that need to be referred out to someone else. It is a team approach, but, mid levels need supervision in my experience. Just my opinion.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:34 am to toosleaux
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:40 am to High C
quote:
an attempt to lower qualifications
This. The LA Board of Nursing tries it every year.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 11:42 am to toosleaux
I haven’t read the specific bill but in the two settings listed in the post: hospital and nursing home, wouldn’t these nurse practitioners still be under the guidance/authority of a department head or medical director?
Page 1 of 11
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News