FP Journal Editor in chief wants to fully embrace NPs

[deleted87716]

Wow. Half price.

You dodged the question.

No, I answered it.

Stupid questions deserve stupid answers.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[sarjasy]

No, I answered it.

Stupid questions deserve stupid answers.

You're right, it was a stupid answer.

 

[sarjasy]

Doesn't bother me a bit. The OD has been around for close to 100 years as a doctoral degree. Its hardly a new thing (cough cough DNP cough).

So the title "doctor" then is a matter of the time of existence of the corresponding degree, not the content of the degree, legal scope of practice or functional role of the person holding the degree?

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

So the title "doctor" then is a matter of the time of existence of the corresponding degree, not the content of the degree, legal scope of practice or functional role of the person holding the degree?

No, I just didn't want to go into that. But since you insist...

In addition to always having been a doctoral profession, ODs have always been independent practitioners and have only required temporary oversight in some situations when expanding their scope. The functional role is that of the traditional meaning of doctor - they take a history, examine the patient, come up with a diagnosis, and formulate a treatment plan. Said treatment plans follow the same evidenced-based practice that their MD counterparts use. The only difference between the OD of the 50s and the one of today is the larger toolbox of treatment options present these days.

So tell me, my health student friend, what is your agenda in asking this question?

 

[fab4fan]

Doesn't bother me a bit. The OD has been around for close to 100 years as a doctoral degree. Its hardly a new thing (cough cough DNP cough).

At one point it was a new doctoral degree. (cough, cough)

 

[sarjasy]

No, I just didn't want to go into that. But since you insist...

In addition to always having been a doctoral profession, ODs have always been independent practitioners and have only required temporary oversight in some situations when expanding their scope. The functional role is that of the traditional meaning of doctor - they take a history, examine the patient, come up with a diagnosis, and formulate a treatment plan. Said treatment plans follow the same evidenced-based practice that their MD counterparts use. The only difference between the OD of the 50s and the one of today is the larger toolbox of treatment options present these days.

So tell me, my health student friend, what is your agenda in asking this question?

My agenda? Just a student trying to understand to whom the title "doctor" belongs, prompted by Blue Dog's response to the audiologist earlier in the thread.

See, probably because I am merely a student, I just can't wrap my brain around it. From what I've been able to gather, DPT's, OTD's, DNP's, Pharm.D's and Au.D's aren't to be called "doctor." Depending on the specific degree under discussion, the reasons given are usually something like these...

1) They didn't go to med school
2) They don't diagnose and treat
3) It confuses the patients
4) They have a limited scope of practice
5) They don't practice independently
6) The degree didn't used to be a doctorate

My confusion lies in the fact that OD's, psychologists, podiatrists and dentists meet one or more of the 6 disqualifiers above, yet (correct me if I'm wrong) few have any problems with with them being referred to as "doctor." So why is it OK to call these folks "doctor" but not the DPT, OTD, DNP, Pharm.D and Au.D?

 

[deleted87716]

My agenda? Just a student trying to understand to whom the title "doctor" belongs, prompted by Blue Dog's response to the audiologist earlier in the thread.

I didn't say they shouldn't be called "doctor." I suggested that anyone can be called "doctor," even plumbers.

As far as the medical field goes, it's not about the title. It's about the potential for patients to be misled.

 

[sarjasy]

I didn't say they shouldn't be called "doctor." I suggested that anyone can be called "doctor," even plumbers.

No, you didn't say that. You don't have to.

As far as the medical field goes, it's not about the title. It's about the potential for patients to be mislead.

Mislead or confused (or both)?

Take the average patient off the street, and ask them to explain the difference between an OD and an opthamologist. Or a psychologist and psychiatrist. I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) you don't oppose all four of these being referred to as "doctor." You don't think patient's are confused/mislead here?

What about the doc that refers to an MA or a receptionist as "nurse" in front of a patient as discussed elsewhere. Is that misleading?

 

[deleted87716]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[sarjasy]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Brilliant.

 

[deleted87716]

Brilliant.

Not taking the bait.

Go troll somewhere else.

 

[Paseo Del Norte]

I didn't say they shouldn't be called "doctor." I suggested that anyone can be called "doctor," even plumbers.

As far as the medical field goes, it's not about the title. It's about the potential for patients to be misled.

Ill take a potential hit and say what I think. In the hospital, the term doctor should be reserved for physicians. It's not about being fair, ego, education, and so on. For me, it's simply about making sure patients can clearly identify the physician. I think we agree on this point?

 

[sarjasy]

Not taking the bait.

Go troll somewhere else.

Wasn't bait, bro. You just took it that way.

 

[deleted87716]

Ill take a potential hit and say what I think. In the hospital, the term doctor should be reserved for physicians. It's not about being fair, ego, education, and so on. For me, it's simply about making sure patients can clearly identify the physician. I think we agree on this point?

Patients should always know who is taking care of them.

 

[sarjasy]

Patients should always know who is taking care of them.

Classic. Love the irony of your statement. You mean, unless they have a doctorate in audiology, physical therapy, occupational therapy or nursing. Then the qualifications of the caregiver must be carefully concealed from the patient so as to avoid confusion. Or, if you are a real doctor, you may refer to the MA, CNA, phleb, janitor, receptionist or anyone else capable of grabbing the doctor a band-aid as "nurse."

 

[Paseo Del Norte]

Patients should always know who is taking care of them.

Agreed.

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

Classic. Love the irony of your statement. You mean, unless they have a doctorate in audiology, physical therapy, occupational therapy or nursing. Then the qualifications of the caregiver must be carefully concealed from the patient so as to avoid confusion. Or, if you are a real doctor, you may refer to the MA, CNA, phleb, janitor, receptionist or anyone else capable of grabbing the doctor a band-aid as "nurse."

Good point.

 

[deleted87716]

What about the doc that refers to an MA or a receptionist as "nurse" in front of a patient as discussed elsewhere. Is that misleading?

Good point.

I never refer to my MAs as nurses, and they all wear photo IDs that say "Medical Assistant."

 

[sarjasy]

I never refer to my MAs as nurses, and they all wear photo IDs that say "Medical Assistant."

Never said you did.

What I did say is that you are all for patients being informed of the qualifications of the person providing them care except if it is a doctorally prepared OT, PT, nurse or audiologist - a point you completely ignored.

I also said that it is not unusual for docs to refer to non-nurses as nurses, a pratice I am sure that you are not as bothered by as you are an Au.D. being called "doctor." Ironically, the Au.D is a doctor but the phleb is not a nurse, yet no doubt you are more bothered by the former.

 

[pianoman511]

Never said you did.

What I did say is that you are all for patients being informed of the qualifications of the person providing them care except if it is a doctorally prepared OT, PT, nurse or audiologist - a point you completely ignored.

I also said that it is not unusual for docs to refer to non-nurses as nurses, a pratice I am sure that you are not as bothered by as you are an Au.D. being called "doctor." Ironically, the Au.D is a doctor but the phleb is not a nurse, yet no doubt you are more bothered by the former.

The difference is that regardless of the doctoral preparedness of a Au.D or DPT they are still an audiologist or physical therapist just as a PharmD is a pharmacist. Out of respect they can be addressed as doctor, but in a clinical setting they have their respective titles. None of them have the ability to practice medicine in an unrestricted manner, they all have limitations on their licenses. Therefore, the only true "doctor" of medicine would be an MD/DO in the hospital setting.

I agree it is not unusual for doctors to refer to non-nurses as nurses because many of the older physicians are used to the time when all patient care givers were nurses. There were not techs, CNAs, phlebotomists, etc running around. Most newer physicians realize that there are different levels of caregivers and make attempts at reading their name tags to find out who they are.

 

[sarjasy]

The difference is that regardless of the doctoral preparedness of a Au.D or DPT they are still an audiologist or physical therapist just as a PharmD is a pharmacist.

You are confusing a profession with a degree. Doctor is a degree, physician is a profession. Your biochem, calculus, and english prof's are all "Dr. so and so," not by virtue of their profession, but by virtue of their degree.

None of them have the ability to practice medicine in an unrestricted manner.

Neither does a dentist, optometrist, psychologist or even a podiatrist, yet they are all called "doctor."

 

[deleted87716]

you are all for patients being informed of the qualifications of the person providing them care except if it is a doctorally prepared OT, PT, nurse or audiologist.

I said nothing of the sort.

 

[sarjasy]

I said nothing of the sort.

Your cat and mouse game was kinda' entertaining at first.

No, technically you haven't said that, but that is the gist of what you have "said" from your posting pictures of plumbing vans and signing your posts with quotes inspired by a TV commercial (which are curiously gone now). At any rate, you really haven't directly addressed the point, which itself says all that needs to be said.

 

[deleted87716]

Your cat and mouse game was kinda' entertaining at first.

Is that what you call it when you have arguments with people about things they haven't said? I don't find it as entertaining as you do.

No, technically you haven't said that, but that is the gist of what you have "said" from your posting pictures of plumbing vans and signing your posts with quotes inspired by a TV commercial (which are curiously gone now).

Still there. Signatures on SDN don't appear in every post in a thread.

 

[pianoman511]

You are confusing a profession with a degree. Doctor is a degree, physician is a profession. Your biochem, calculus, and english prof's are all "Dr. so and so," not by virtue of their profession, but by virtue of their degree."

That would be correct, except that in a medical setting it is implied that when one is addressed as "doctor" it would refer to a "medical doctor" just as "doctor" in the academic setting refers one who has obtained a doctoral degree in a given discipline. This is no different than the current DNP debate, where I would gladly refer to a DNP as "doctor" in academia, but not in the hospital setting as it is an academic degree and not a clinical degree (this is per the descriptions which I have heard utilized by champions of said degree).

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

You are confusing a profession with a degree. Doctor is a degree, physician is a profession. Your biochem, calculus, and english prof's are all "Dr. so and so," not by virtue of their profession, but by virtue of their degree.



Neither does a dentist, optometrist, psychologist or even a podiatrist, yet they are all called "doctor."

When I walk into the English department, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an English professor. When I walk into the math department and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a math professor. When I walk into the biochemistry department and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a biochem (or another bio field) professor. Not a medical doctor.

When I walk into a dentist's office and one of the staff introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a dentist. Not a medical doctor. When I walk into a veterinarian's office and one of the staff introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a veterinarian. Not a medical doctor. When I go to my optometrist's clinic to get my eyes checked, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an optometrist.

Similarly, when I walk into a hospital and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I (and most others, according to a recent AMA patient survey, IIRC...I could be wrong about that) assume that they're a medical doctor (ie. MD/DO). Not an English professor, not a math professor, not a biochemistry professor, not a dentist, not a veterinarian, not an optometrist.

Don't see why you have to get so insulted if someone doesn't address you as a doctor in a context outside of the one you have your doctorate in.

 

[Paseo Del Norte]

When I walk into the English department, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an English professor. When I walk into the math department and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a math professor. When I walk into the biochemistry department and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a biochem (or another bio field) professor. Not a medical doctor.

When I walk into a dentist's office and one of the staff introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a dentist. Not a medical doctor. When I walk into a veterinarian's office and one of the staff introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a veterinarian. Not a medical doctor. When I go to my optometrist's clinic to get my eyes checked, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an optometrist.

Similarly, when I walk into a hospital and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I (and most others, according to a recent AMA patient survey, IIRC...I could be wrong about that) assume that they're a medical doctor (ie. MD/DO). Not an English professor, not a math professor, not a biochemistry professor, not a dentist, not a veterinarian, not an optometrist.

Don't see why you have to get so insulted if someone doesn't address you as a doctor in a context outside of the one you have your doctorate in.

It's a bit early, but I think we have a post of the year candidate...

 

[sarjasy]

When I walk into the English department, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an English professor.... Not a medical doctor..

Why? Because doctor is degree, not a profession. At any rate, what you assume to see is not relevant. When someone at the family practice clinic comes in to draw your blood, you might "assume" that the person is a nurse, but it could easily be an MA, phleb or someone off the street that the physician has trained (per the laws of the state in which I live).

When I go to my optometrist's clinic to get my eyes checked, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an optometrist.

Can of worms, here. Many eye clinics employ both MDO's and optometrists, both of which call themselves "doctor" and both of which you may very well see depending on your condition. Are you willing to say that the average eye health patient knows the difference or cares about the difference?

Similarly, when I walk into a hospital and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I (and most others, according to a recent AMA patient survey, IIRC...I could be wrong about that) assume that they're a medical doctor (ie. MD/DO). .

Again, irrelevant. Patient expectations and/or beliefs mean nothing. Male nurses get called "doctor" all the time, and CNA's, phlebs, and environmental techs get called "nurse" all the time by patients, based on patient "expectations." The ignorance of the patient of the training of the patient's care provider is not relevant.

Don't see why you have to get so insulted if someone doesn't address you as a doctor in a context outside of the one you have your doctorate in.

I don't - don't even have a doctorate, so I have no dog in the fight. But how can you possibly say that an Au.D or a DPT practicing, say, in a hospital is not in their context?

 

[sarjasy]

That would be correct, except that in a medical setting it is implied that when one is addressed as "doctor" it would refer to a "medical doctor" just as "doctor" in the academic setting refers one who has obtained a doctoral degree in a given discipline. .

Really? So is an eye clinic that employs both MDO's and optometrists is not a "medical setting?" Or a mental health clinic that employs both psychiatrists and psychologists? Why isn't there a debate among them? Why aren't the MDO's having panic attacks about optometrists calling themselves "doctor?" Why aren't the psychiatrists up in arms over psychologists calling themselves "doctor?" Please tell me.

You see, your post betrays the disingenuousness and intellectual dishonesty of this debate. As soon as you (or someone else) can explain to me how, for example, the relationship between the MDO and the optometrist, or the psychiatrist and the psychologist, is somehow fundamentally different than the relationship FP MD and the DNP, or the ENT MD and the audiologist, or the ortho and the DPT, and the use of the the word "doctor," I'll be more than willing to listen.

 

[PSYCHNP]

When I walk into the English department, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an English professor. When I walk into the math department and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a math professor. When I walk into the biochemistry department and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a biochem (or another bio field) professor. Not a medical doctor.

When I walk into a dentist's office and one of the staff introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a dentist. Not a medical doctor. When I walk into a veterinarian's office and one of the staff introduces themselves as a doctor, I assume they're a veterinarian. Not a medical doctor. When I go to my optometrist's clinic to get my eyes checked, I assume whoever introduces themselves as a doctor is an optometrist.

Similarly, when I walk into a hospital and someone introduces themselves as a doctor, I (and most others, according to a recent AMA patient survey, IIRC...I could be wrong about that) assume that they're a medical doctor (ie. MD/DO). Not an English professor, not a math professor, not a biochemistry professor, not a dentist, not a veterinarian, not an optometrist.

Don't see why you have to get so insulted if someone doesn't address you as a doctor in a context outside of the one you have your doctorate in.

Notice that it is always the so called medical students going back and forth about being called "doctor" not the NPs.

Give it a rest.

 

[sarjasy]

Is that what you call it when you have arguments with people about things they haven't said? I don't find it as entertaining as you do.

OK, man. You're opposed to the use of "doctor" in a clinical environment by anyone other than physicians, you just won't say it. Instead, you post pictures and quote television commercials to get your view across, while hiding behing phrases like, "I never said that."

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Why? Because doctor is degree, not a profession. At any rate, what you assume to see is not relevant. When someone at the family practice clinic comes in to draw your blood, you might "assume" that the person is a nurse, but it could easily be an MA, phleb or someone off the street that the physician has trained (per the laws of the state in which I live).

A doctorate is a degree. But it's a degree bound by context.

Again, irrelevant. Patient expectations and/or beliefs mean nothing. Male nurses get called "doctor" all the time, and CNA's, phlebs, and environmental techs get called "nurse" all the time by patients, based on patient "expectations." The ignorance of the patient of the training of the patient's care provider is not relevant.

The ignorance of the patient and the patient's beliefs do mean a lot. It's not irrelevant. If patients' beliefs don't mean anything, why do you care who gets called a doctor in the hospital or medical clinic anyways?

I don't - don't even have a doctorate, so I have no dog in the fight. But how can you possibly say that an Au.D or a DPT practicing, say, in a hospital is not in their context?

I never said a hospital wasn't an Au.D's or DPT's context. You're putting words in my mouth.

If I went to the hospital specifically to see an Au.D or a DPT, I would expect the person introducing themselves a doctor in that particular clinic to be an Au.D or DPT. Again, this all goes back to context. It's the same if I walk into the neurology department to see a neurologist. I'd expect the person introducing him/herself as a doctor to be a neurologist.

Notice that it is always the so called medical students going back and forth about being called "doctor" not the NPs.

Give it a rest.

Joke's on you. I'm not even a med student. If you want to see nursing midlevels fight until their last breath to being called a "doctor" and being considered equivalent to physicians, just log onto allnurses or the doctorofnursingpractice forums. They're far worse than what any premed, med student, resident, or attending has said on SDN.

Also, I'm not going to give it a rest. So, if what I'm posting is really bothering you, it might be in your best interest to either not look into the threads I post in or just add me to your ignore list. I won't be offended, I promise!

 

[Dwindlin]

Again, irrelevant. Patient expectations and/or beliefs mean nothing.

This is were you're wrong. As much as people don't like it health care is a business, and patient satisfaction does matter. So as much as it pisses all the Ph.Ds, AuD, DNPs, etc, the general public (our customers) will likely never walk into a hospital/physicians office and relate "doctor" with anything but an MD/DO.

This has been argued ad nauseum, everyone knows that "doctor" is a title granted by your degree...but guess what? Patients don't care...when they say doctor in most health care settings they mean physician.

Now please go troll somewhere else.

 

[sarjasy]

This is were you're wrong. ... Now please go troll somewhere else.

Have you noticed how the person you disagree with is always a troll? Funny, huh?

Have you even taken the time to read my posts? You wrote, "Patients don't care...when they say doctor in most health care settings they mean physician." So is an OD or a psychologist a physician? I look forward to your answer.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Have you noticed how the person you disagree with is always a troll? Funny, huh?

Have you even taken the time to read my posts? You wrote, "Patients don't care...when they say doctor in most health care settings they mean physician." So is an OD or a psychologist a physician? I look forward to your answer.

An OD and a Psy.D are not physicians. Physician is a title only for those who have an MD/DO. I'm not really sure why you even asked that question. What answer were you expecting?

 

[sarjasy]

But it's a degree bound by context.

It is? Based on what? Tradition? Your personal opinion? You do realize that in large portions of the world (if not most of it), physicians don't even have doctorate degrees, don't you?

The ignorance of the patient and the patient's beliefs do mean a lot. It's not irrelevant. If patients' beliefs don't mean anything, why do you care who gets called a doctor in the hospital or medical clinic anyways?.

Because someone that earns a doctorate deserves the professional courtesy. Why you do you care of someone other and MD's are called doctor?

I'll give you the opportunity to explain to me how the MDO vs. OD is different than, say, a DNP vs. FP MD in the use of the word "doctor" and patient confusion. [Edit, did say MDO vs. DO when I meant to write MDO vs OD]

If I went to the hospital specifically to see an Au.D or a DPT, I would expect the person introducing themselves a doctor in that particular clinic to be an Au.D or DPT.

So, let me see if I understand. The health care provider must check the chart prior to seeing the patient to see why the patient is there to determine which title they are allowed to use. If they are a diabetic admitted for amputation of say, the left leg, I must introduce myself only as "physical therapist." If they are admitted for 3rd degree burns that were a direct result of dexterity issues related to a prior car accident, then I can introduce myself as "Dr. so and so, physical therapist." Correct?

 

[sarjasy]

An OD and a Psy.D are not physicians. Physician is a title only for those who have an MD/DO. I'm not really sure why you even asked that question. What answer were you expecting?

Umm, because "physcian" and "doctor" are typically linked. If you've read much on the debate, you'd probably picked up on that.

So, apparently your opinion is yet another variation. I'll ask you too. How is the MDO vs OD and psychiatrist vs. psychologist relationship and the use of the word doctor fundamentally different than an FP DNP and FP MD?

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Umm, because "physcian" and "doctor" are typically linked. If you've read much on the debate, you'd probably picked up on that.

So, apparently your opinion is yet another variation. I'll ask you too. How is the MDO vs OD and psychiatrist vs. psychologist relationship and the use of the word doctor fundamentally different than an FP DNP and FP MD?

To answer your question, the DNP receives a fraction of the training that a board-certified FP has. That is the difference.

"Here's a sample curriculum from a BSN-DNP program (at Duke): http://nursing.duke.edu/wysiwyg/down...t_MAT_Plan.pdf

You need 73 credits to go from a college degree to a doctorate. That turns out to be less than 3 years.

Now, let's look at the fluff courses that aren't really clinically useful: Research Methods (3 credits), Health Services Program Planning and Outcomes Analysis (3 credits), Applied Statistics (2 credits), Research Utilization in Advanced Nursing Practice (3 credits), Data Driven Health Care Improvement (4 credits), Evidence Based Practice and Applied Statistics I & II (7 credits, since you told me medicine is not evidence based), Effective Leadership (2 credits), Transforming the Nation's Health (3 credits), DNP Capstone (6 credits), Health Systems Transformation (3 credits), Financial Management & Budget Planning (3 credits).

Here are the clinically useful courses: Population-Based Approach to Healthcare (3 credits), Clinical Pharmacology and Interventions for Advanced Practice Nursing (3 credits), Managing Common Acute and Chronic Health Problems I (3 credits), Selected Topics in Advanced Pathophysiology (3 credits), Diagnostic Reasoning & Physical Assessment in Advanced Nursing Practice (4 credits), Common Acute and Chronic Health Problems II (3 credits), Sexual and Reproductive Health (2 credits), Nurse Practitioner Residency: Adult Primary Care (3 credits), Electives (12 credits).

So, out of the 73 credits needed to go from BSN to DNP, 37 credits are not clinically useful. In addition, the number of required clinical hours is 612 hours (unless I miscounted something)!! Wow! And the NP program is designed the same way, with a bunch of fluff courses (11 credits out of 43 required are fluff) and requires 612 hours as well: http://nursing.duke.edu/wysiwyg/down...rriculum_2.pdf

Here are the curricula to several other programs:

• University of Arizona: http://www.nursing.arizona.edu/OSA/P...ndout_2008.pdf 31/74 credits are fluff.
• Loyola's MSN to DNP: http://www.luc.edu/nursing/dnp/curriculum.shtml (where are the basic science classes? They're all public health classes!!)
• MGH BSN to DNP: http://www.mghihp.edu/nursing/postpr...ulum.html?cw=1 (35/72 credits for Adult DNP are fluff while 46/83 credits for DNP in FM are fluff)

It's kinda scary how inadequate that training is in order to practice medicine independently. You can't really count prior nursing experience as time practicing medicine because you weren't practicing medicine during that time nor were you thinking in a medical manner (ie. the way a physician would). Nursing clinical hours might help you transition into medicine but they are NOT a replacement for medical clinical hours.

Now, just for comparison, let's look at a med school curriculum. I'll point out all the fluff courses here too. Here's an example from Baylor School of Medicine for M1/M2 (http://www.bcm.edu/osa/handbook/?PMID=5608) and for M3/M4 (http://www.bcm.edu/osa/handbook/?PMID=7463):

Fluff courses at Baylor School of Medicine during M1/M2 years ONLY: Patient, Physician, and Society-1 (4.5 credits), Patient, Physician, and Society-2 (6 credits), Bioethics (2.5 credits), Integrated Problem Solving 1 & 2 (10 credits).

Useful courses at Baylor School of Medicine during M1/M2 years ONLY: Foundations Basic to Science of Medicine: Core Concepts (14.5 credits), Cardiovascular-Renal-Resp (11.5 credits), GI-Met-Nut-Endo-Reproduction (14 credits), General Pathology & General Pharmacology (6.5 credits), Head & Neck Anatomy (4.5 credits), Immunology (5 credits), Behavioral Sciences (6.5 credits), Infectious Disease (13 credits), Nervous System (14 credits), Cardiology (4.5 credits), Respiratory (3.5 credits), Renal (4 credits), Hematology/Oncology (5 credits), Hard & Soft Tissues (3 credits), Gastroenterology (4 credits), Endocrinology (3.5 credits), GU/Gyn (3 credits), Genetics (3 credits), Age Related Topics (2.5 credits).

For only the M1/M2 years at Baylor, there's 162.5 total credits. Out of these 162.5 credits, 23 credits are fluff.

Core Clerkships during M3 (useful clinical training): Medicine (24 credits, 12 weeks), Surgery (16 credits, 8 weeks), Group A selective (8 credits, 4 weeks), Psychiatry (16 credits, 8 weeks), Neurology (8 credits, 4 weeks), Pediatrics (16 credits, 8 weeks), Ob/Gyn (16 credits, 8 weeks), Family & Community Medicine (8 credits, 4 weeks), Clinical Half-Day (includes Clincal Application of Radiology, Clinical Application of Pathology, Clinical Application of Nutrition, Clinical Evidence Based Medicine, Longitudinal Ambulatory Care Experience, and Apex -- 23 credits).

So, without even taking into consideration M4 electives and required subinternships (which are usually in Medicine and Surgery), medical students already have a far superior medical training than NPs or DNPs. Other examples of med school curricula:

• UMich M1/M2: http://www.med.umich.edu/lrc/medcurr...gram/m1m2.html
• UMich M3/M4: http://www.med.umich.edu/lrc/medcurr...gram/m3m4.html
• Duke: http://medschool.duke.edu/modules/so...index.php?id=2

You can get a BSN to DNP in about 3 years according to many programs I've looked at. Medicine involves 4 years of medical school and a minimum of 3 years of residency before allowing independent practice. Here's the math:

BSN to DNP: 2.5 - 3 years of training; longer if courses taken part-time; 600-1000 clinical hours!
BS/BA to MD/DO: 4 years med school + 3-5 years residency: 7-11 years of training; not possible part-time; clinical hours > 17000"

Clear enough for you?

 

[Dwindlin]

Have you noticed how the person you disagree with is always a troll? Funny, huh?

Have you even taken the time to read my posts? You wrote, "Patients don't care...when they say doctor in most health care settings they mean physician." So is an OD or a psychologist a physician? I look forward to your answer.

Yeah I did read your posts...and a lot of your post history. A vast majority of your posts are inflammatory and serve nothing but to stir up a fight, hence I called you a troll. This topic (as I said) has been discussed ad nauseum on this board, you could done a simple search and got everyones opinions on the matter but you decided to stir it up again.

No. An OD/psychologist isn't a physician. It's as most everyone has said, context is what matters. If you go to a hospital/clinic, and start throwing around doctor the patient will assume MD/DO. Again if you don't think it matters...try it some time. Some patients get pretty upset when they believe they are seeing a physician ("the doctor") when they aren't. Then if you really don't think it matters ask the hospital CEO who they will side with when they get an angry letter from the patient?

 

[Dwindlin]

Umm, because "physcian" and "doctor" are typically linked. If you've read much on the debate, you'd probably picked up on that.

So, apparently your opinion is yet another variation. I'll ask you too. How is the MDO vs OD and psychiatrist vs. psychologist relationship and the use of the word doctor fundamentally different than an FP DNP and FP MD?

You've answered your own question...

You can't simply remove context. Most psychologists/DPTs/ODs/etc don't refer to themselves as "doctor" in the hospital (at least the places I've worked).

 

[deleted87716]

OK, man. You're opposed to the use of "doctor" in a clinical environment by anyone other than physicians, you just won't say it.

Sure, I will. You just don't ask the right questions.

As soon as [someone] can explain to me how...the relationship between the MDO [Huh...?] and the optometrist, or the psychiatrist and the psychologist, is somehow fundamentally different than the relationship FP MD and the DNP, or the ENT MD and the audiologist, or the ortho and the DPT, and the use of the the word "doctor," I'll be more than willing to listen.

In most clinical settings, these professionals perform distinctly different services from one another, lessening the potential for confusion.

That would not be the case in most primary care practices.

There's no such thing as an "MDO," by the way. I assume you meant "ophthalmologist."

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Umm, because "physcian" and "doctor" are typically linked. If you've read much on the debate, you'd probably picked up on that.

So, apparently your opinion is yet another variation. I'll ask you too. How is the MDO vs OD and psychiatrist vs. psychologist relationship and the use of the word doctor fundamentally different than an FP DNP and FP MD?

You know, I actually think those of us out of med school doesn't really care about the doctor thing so long as there is something on the ID badge/coat to say exactly what that is a doctor of. My badge as a big ole "Resident Physician" on it, you can be called doctor if you want, so long as your badge says something like "Psychologist" or "Nurse Practitioner.

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

You know, I actually think those of us out of med school doesn't really care about the doctor thing so long as there is something on the ID badge/coat to say exactly what that is a doctor of. My badge as a big ole "Resident Physician" on it, you can be called doctor if you want, so long as your badge says something like "Psychologist" or "Nurse Practitioner.

Ah, at last the voice of reason.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Ah, at last the voice of reason.

I would add that none of us are happy about everyone and their brother being called doctor, but I've better things to do than fight you folks about it.

 

[sarjasy]

To answer your question, the DNP receives a fraction of the training that a board-certified FP has. That is the difference. Clear enough for you?

In an earlier post I said MDO vs. DO as compared to a FP MD vs. DNP - I meant to write MDO vs. OD - just clarifying in case it caused confusion.

I am well aware of the training of all the specialties we have discussed. The point that I was attempting to make is that the relationship between an MDO and am optometrist is very similar to the relationship between an FP MD and an FP DNP. Yet no one seems to have a problem with the OD calling him/herself "doctor."

You comparison of an MD and DNP has nothing to do with it. You should compare the DNP to the OD within the context of their respective relationships to their MD counterparts.

 

[sarjasy]

No. An OD/psychologist isn't a physician. It's as most everyone has said, context is what matters. If you go to a hospital/clinic, and start throwing around doctor the patient will assume MD/DO. Again if you don't think it matters...try it some time. Some patients get pretty upset when they believe they are seeing a physician ("the doctor") when they aren't. Then if you really don't think it matters ask the hospital CEO who they will side with when they get an angry letter from the patient?

So from this (see bolded) I presume you are opposed to OD's and psychologists being referred to as "doctor" when they see patients in the same context as their MDO and psychiatric counterparts. After all, the patient that goes in to an eye clinic with conjunctivitis and sees an OD, he/she may very well think they are seeing a real physician (someone who has gone to medical school), especially if said clinic employs both MDO's and OD's.

 

[sarjasy]

You've answered your own question...

You can't simply remove context. Most psychologists/DPTs/ODs/etc don't refer to themselves as "doctor" in the hospital (at least the places I've worked).

No, my point is that "physician" and "doctor" are inappropriately linked as one and the same. A physician is a doctor, but a doctor may not be a physician.

And, BTW, you've seen OD's in the hospital? Really? I haven't, though I too am just a student.

 

[sarjasy]

Sure, I will. You just don't ask the right questions.

Perhaps you can educate me on the appropriate way to ask you questions.

In most clinical settings, these professionals perform distinctly different services from one another, lessening the potential for confusion.

In the public's eye (no pun intended), the OD and MDO, in an eye clinic, do not offer services that are radically distinct. That is even more true in the case of psychiatrists and psychologists. Only "insiders" have an idea of the distinctions, and in the end, there there is a tremendous amount of overlap.

There's no such thing as an "MDO," by the way. I assume you meant "ophthalmologist."

Well aware of that. MDO is just easier to type - no disrespect intended at all.

 

[sarjasy]

You know, I actually think those of us out of med school doesn't really care about the doctor thing so long as there is something on the ID badge/coat to say exactly what that is a doctor of.

I hope that's true, but I'm not sure it is.

My badge as a big ole "Resident Physician" on it, you can be called doctor if you want, so long as your badge says something like "Psychologist" or "Nurse Practitioner.

And that's the answer to the problem.

 

[Dwindlin]

So from this (see bolded) I presume you are opposed to OD's and psychologists being referred to as "doctor" when they see patients in the same context as their MDO and psychiatric counterparts. After all, the patient that goes in to an eye clinic with conjunctivitis and sees an OD, he/she may very well think they are seeing a real physician (someone who has gone to medical school), especially if said clinic employs both MDO's and OD's.

Frankly I don't care, I won't change the way I introduce myself to patients when I'm done. I currently give my name and that I'm an MS-II. When I'm a resident it will be name and resident, and after that name and physician. I was never arguing my opinion...simply what is. And yes what you describe can and does happen.

No, my point is that "physician" and "doctor" are inappropriately linked as one and the same. A physician is a doctor, but a doctor may not be a physician.

And, BTW, you've seen OD's in the hospital? Really? I haven't, though I too am just a student.

As I said above, whether you think it's right or not is irrelevant because that's how it is. Yes, we have several ODs in one of our hospital clinics doing free vision screenings couple times a month. For the record they all introduce themselves as optometrist, not doctor.