- 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
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Copacetic
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 8 |
| Registered on: | 5/11/2016 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
Then I hope you are not an MD.
Touchet. What I meant was, if you are going to pick a diagnosis that only a Dr. can treat, diabetes wouldn't be it.
Polymyositis Rheumatica would have been better. :geauxtigers:
Polymyositis Rheumatica would have been better. :geauxtigers:
Spock, I misquoted myself. It was the AMA, not AAFP.
My apologies
"Jama 2000 Jan5; 283(1)59-68"
Also check out:
American College of physicians, 2009. "NPs in primary care."
Quality of patient care by NPs and PAs, Annals of internal medicine
NEJM:(very candid article that most on both sides would agree on) "Expanding the role of the APN-risks and rewards".
And lastly, the most comprehensive, methodologically sound, meta-analysis encompassing 37 (I believe)studies done from 1990-2008 is found on Medscape family medicine entitled "Quality and effectiveness of care provided by Nurse Practitioners"
My apologies
"Jama 2000 Jan5; 283(1)59-68"
Also check out:
American College of physicians, 2009. "NPs in primary care."
Quality of patient care by NPs and PAs, Annals of internal medicine
NEJM:(very candid article that most on both sides would agree on) "Expanding the role of the APN-risks and rewards".
And lastly, the most comprehensive, methodologically sound, meta-analysis encompassing 37 (I believe)studies done from 1990-2008 is found on Medscape family medicine entitled "Quality and effectiveness of care provided by Nurse Practitioners"
And tarnish their reputation? Nah. Ask yourself why DRG (diagnostic related groups) were created. Or stark laws. You'll find a lot about why healthcare is the way that it is now. NPs were created to fill a void. The void is getting greater, especially with the governor's plan to expand medicaid. We are all paying for it. Physicians won't fill it. Figure it out.
uggghh. Its objective evidence. and I know it
re: Defeat the Nurse Practitioner scope of practice expansion - Louisiana SB 187
Posted by Copacetic on 5/12/16 at 10:13 am to LATigerdoc
I have!!! And post-streptococcal arthritis, and post-streptococcal endocarditis too. Learned about them in NP school.
re: Defeat the Nurse Practitioner scope of practice expansion - Louisiana SB 187
Posted by Copacetic on 5/12/16 at 10:07 am to LATigerdoc
I agree LATigerdoc. The education and direct clinical care of patients in residency is clearly superior to that given to NPs. But what if, oh say an NP, with 10 years of prior ICU and ER experience as a registered nurse, goes through NP school, and then practices in a rural health clinic (where you are the NP, MD, Neurologist, Endocrinologist, Pediatrician, dermatologist.....out of necessity because there are no PCPs, let alone specialists that will see them) for another 10 years of practice, logging in upwards of 30,000 hours of direct clinical care. What then? Do you still think that your semester of gross human anatomy trumps that real world experience? Sir, NPs are not supervised by physicians, PAs are. NP's are forced by law to "collaborate" with a physician. Guess what? Collaboration with a healthcare team (hopefully) happens every day in every office, with or without a paper document that says it needs to occur. NPs practice independently in 22 states already. They still collaborate. Only in those states, the NPs are not having to pay a physician a portion of their income for the "oversight". Oh, and by the way, NPs practice in 22 states independently AND have better patient satisfaction, equal patient outcomes, and reduced overall healthcare costs (mainly because they see people who would have otherwise had to go to an ER, because physicians who are so concerned about their health that they will scream to the rooftops if someone else invades their turf, refuse to see them). Its been proven in greater than 40 studies, even one done by AAFP. At some point in the career of an NP, even if it is after 5 years of experience, the chord should be cut.
Diabetes? Dude, a monkey can treat diabetes. NPs have been here since the 1960's. The simple truth is, you are going to have some NPs that are as good or better than their physician counterparts, and you are going to have some that really shouldn't be practicing. The same is true for physicians. The question is not if, but when an NP should be allowed to practice independently. My point is that Once an NP has had umpteenth hours of real, clinical practice, the clinical research shows that they are as good in some areas, and better in others, than physicians. That, my friend is objective evidence. It is a fact. To argue it is to continue to insist that the world is flat. Who would you rather see, an greenhorn MD who has just completed his residency, or a seasoned NP who has practiced in the rural health arena (Front line)for 10 years. Yet the greenhorn is responsible for supervising the NP?
Popular
2












