Future of FM

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
One of my attendings said this- at 4:30PM, midlevels will go home even if they screwed up a case and patient needs to be seen immediately in the ER. It is us, physicians who will end up holding the hand of the patient and having to fix the mess into the wee hours. Everyone wants to play doctor wihtout the real responsibility.

This is an unfair slur. I've been a PA for 13 yr with a very high sense of responsibility. I am reticent to hand off a a case in the ED even if I am way past my shift. When I work outpatient FM it's just me and I am the last one to leave.
Don't paint such broad strokes...just makes you sound like an idiot parroting whatever you heard your attending say.

Members don't see this ad.
 
This is an unfair slur. I've been a PA for 13 yr with a very high sense of responsibility. I am reticent to hand off a a case in the ED even if I am way past my shift. When I work outpatient FM it's just me and I am the last one to leave.
Don't paint such broad strokes...just makes you sound like an idiot parroting whatever you heard your attending say.

Well, we all should know right now that generalizations suck. If the person had specifics, he should have bracketted them, rather than generalizing.

From everything I continue to read, I think that FP and primary care, as their own specialties, however, are in trouble. So much will eventually be placed on the midlevels. Of course I really don't know how it will turn out, b/c I have no crystal ball. But I looked at numerous pieces of information that seem to indicate that it will go down in this direction. I can therefore guess that many med students may not pick primary care.

Personally, and no offense, there are people, like certain rhematology players or people with complex cardiac and endocrine issues and so forth that I believe should see an experienced, reputable physician over a NP or PA. My mother is a prime example of this. It's already too easy for some physicians to miss what's going on with her--and/or how one thing, done or not done, will affect her health. And the rhematologists and other specialists don't manage everything with her all the time. But the prmary care physician/s need to be cognizant of her overall health situation--all the nuances, as well. People with less experience and education can and have missed these things with her. I would not feel comfortable at all with her seeing a NP or PA over a good and experienced primary care physician--not even for a sinus infection. I have very sound reasons for this. She ha certain conditions that require special attention and insight when it comes to selecting various short-term medications and treatments--for anything--even antibiotics for, say, a sinus infection.

And let's face it. The patients that many primary care physicians see today are complex, which is why many of the primary care docs will say, "Hey we are not going to be pushed out." Even though they have a point and in many ways I agree with them, the thing is, financial constraints will play a big part in pushing them out. I believe that patients will be worse off for it.

It totally sucks, but to me it's a bit blind to say midlevel usage is not, at least to some degree, a threat to medicine, and ultimately to patients and patient care.

I guess we will have to watch and see what happens--especially in light of ACA.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
As a student all I hear are rumors. Which is one reason why I wanted some clarification. I agree that an NP/PA won't replace physicians, but what about ARNP/DNP? I constantly hear from nurses, " Don't do primary care, that's what we're going to be doing in the future! you should specialize!"....um seriously?

YES! I have heard this over and over and over ad nauseum. The chant never ends, which is why I have posted my concerns. It's like no one will shut the heck up about it.
 
K? Why is that?

To which also I will add. . .we shall see!

Probably the fact that primary care reimbursements have increased because of the ACA......so far......

we'll see how the 1,023,653 new regulatory agencies that are being put into place will impact the day to day life of PC

then again, I'm just an "idiot parroting whatever I heard my attending say" so disregard due to their lack of experience/knowledge :rolleyes:
 
Im sorry but the local mental health hospital affiliated with my hospital is ABSOLUTELY run by NPs

yep...becoming more common. Psychiatrists in the future are going to have to prove they are MUCH better than psych NP's based on outcomes, and I'm not sure we can do that for most things.
 
The same financial issues that impact physicians will impact mid-levels in primary care. If it's unattractive for physicians, it'll be equally unattractive for mid-levels.
 
You know you have a great job when everybody else wants to do it. :)

Hey Blue Dog, I'm interested in what you were talking about in the other forum re: the federal license problems. Maybe I missed it if you replied but curious about what could be the downfall of that?
 
yep...becoming more common. Psychiatrists in the future are going to have to prove they are MUCH better than psych NP's based on outcomes, and I'm not sure we can do that for most things.

Oh man! My psych attending grilled us on this everyday. He was sooooo pushy for us (at grass roots level) to speak to the senator etc. Problem was, even with alot carefully presented info on outcomes etc. There wasn't an "interest" from us med students because we lacked affinity for psych.

I sure hope they manage to solve this hurdle, because based on many of his published articles, Psychology pHD's (PsychD's?), want prescription rights (in some states they have limited, but everyone's asking for more).

Psych D's prescribing highly addictive/abusive/very dangerous medications. Now that's more scary then FM being replaced by an NPs/PAs. :scared:
 
Hey Blue Dog, I'm interested in what you were talking about in the other forum re: the federal license problems. Maybe I missed it if you replied but curious about what could be the downfall of that?

The less the Feds are involved, the better.
 
The less the Feds are involved, the better.

I wholeheartedly agree with this.

Now, tell me that mid-level practitioners will not, in time, get special incentives, which physicians may not necessarily receive. I am referring to say NPs in states where working under the supervision of a physician is not mandatory.

I can see scenarios wherein, NPs will work in said areas, but will be given certain tax incentives--since they will claim hardship ( and use their political pull), saying that they work for significantly less than physicians. Many nurses are not merely going into the field to make six figures. Many specialized, hardworking RNs can make six figures, if they are willing to put in the overtime, work the ugly shifts, holidays, etc. These nurses are doing it because they don't want to stay as, if you will, menial grunt-workers at the bedside. Sure, we all don't feel this way; but primary nursing care invariably accounts for a fair amount of a nurses' work. The nurse certainly does many other things beyond that, I should know having worked as a nurse for some time. But these nurses want a sense of autonomy, less grunt work, a "higher" title (whatever that means), and, in many cases, the opportunity to move into teaching. They may take positions that are less attractive, with certain "incentives," at least for a while.

Don't underestimate the power of their collective pull in this particular political environment. And once certain incentives become available in one area, eventually it could certainly act like a domino effect to other areas. When you hear many advanced practice nurses and educators speak, it's hard to miss their message. They truly do feel that it will become foolish for most physicians to go into family practice. Nurses are not just trying to become CRNAs. Many of them, even with only a year or less of basic undergraduate nursing education and those with < a year of clinical experience are moving directly to NP programs. I think it's unwise to ignore the political pull of many advanced practice nurses. You can say "Never," if you want; but is that really wise, when you look at the big picture?

As far as the effects all the way around from ACA, I say, definitely, we shall see.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Nurses may succeed in expanding their scope of practice but ultimately their training will be the limiting factor. They just are not equipped to move much beyond bread and butter primary care. And when a case starts to involve varying combinations of complex pathology they soon come to the end of their rope. 800 clinical hours just does not cut it and, over time, it will show in increased costs and bad outcomes.

Let them have their autonomy. But physicians should not cover their butts anymore. Let them take responsibilty for whatever mess they make. And from my perspective physicians should not be even be hiring NPs anymore. PA training is far superior and they come out of school knowing that they are an going to be an "assistant".
 
Nurses may succeed in expanding their scope of practice but ultimately their training will be the limiting factor. They just are not equipped to move much beyond bread and butter primary care. And when a case starts to involve varying combinations of complex pathology they soon come to the end of their rope. 800 clinical hours just does not cut it and, over time, it will show in increased costs and bad outcomes.

Let them have their autonomy. But physicians should not cover their butts anymore. Let them take responsibilty for whatever mess they make. And from my perspective physicians should not be even be hiring NPs anymore. PA training is far superior and they come out of school knowing that they are an going to be an "assistant".



OK so all these nurses and nurse leaders that rant at all these schools-all these folks are delusional? I would be fed to the lions if another nurse or one of these "This-is-how-we-are-gonna-save-the-nation" types heard me say that I think all nurse practitioners should function under the supervision of an experienced, BC'd physician. No, I don't think they should have to have a physician's sign off for things like homecare orders-- as in, should nursing care in the home be ordered for the patient or not. But there's a heck of a lot of other things that should be reviewed by the physician. As I said, I have worked with some smart and excellent nurses; but my mother is going to be seen by the physician. She has too many issues, and they are a pain enough already.

I don't know. When you hear this fanatical stuff drummed into your ears all the time, it starts to get to you. And then you see all these new nurses bypassing a lot of the process of getting some real clinical experience in nursing, only to go through for NP/MSN or CRNA or now the beloved DNP. It's different from when I first became a nurse. People then went into advanced practice nursing after they had had hardcore clinical experience over many years. IMHO, the strong clincial experience in certain areas in particular, over time, well it helped them to develop sound judgment and critical thinking. No, it's not the same as medical school and residency; but it sure was A LOT better than a lot of what I'm seeing today.
 
Here's my opinion on this.

Nurse practitioners and Doctorate Nurse Practitioners can say what they wish and voice whatever arguments they have toward having the responsibility of an MD. Unless they have an MD, they are not as good as a good MD with adequate residency training.

I know there are PAs on here that are probably very good at what they do, and have a lot of experience, and I would argue that they could probably fill their medical knowledge to the point of being equivalent to an MD's with supplemental reading over the years. Having said that, they are still not MDs by degree or formal training, and I am not concerned that they will one day have as much authority as me despite how much "lobbying" or etc is going on.

I do not plan on being so inexperienced as a physician that I have to be concerned that I may be replaced by a mid-level. I plan on being a medically versatile pillar of my community, and if it's clear within the first month of residency that I'm not doing the best job I can do, then I will not sleep until that has been corrected.

Furthermore I'm Canadian, and I have lived in 5 different countries throughout my life. If it ever comes to the point where someone with a lot less training than myself is given as much authority as me in either Canada or the US, I won't lobby I won't protest and I won't argue. I will simple move. Probably to France, since I speak French. But there's no point in discussing the differences between living in France and living in the US, because the shift in authority that would necessitate that on my part is probably never going to happen.

Just thought there should be one future PGY-1 on here defending the FM specialty and MD degree. Too much uncertainty. Be confident, guys, don't flinch when people tell you they're going to take your jobs.
 
It's all going to come down to those outcome studies, and if everyone on this forum doesnt want a mid-level taking patients from them then the best thing they can do in the long term (and obviously in the short term as well) is to be the best doctor they can possibly be. Those 30 states are going to see reduced quality of care, and i hate to talk like this because really its peoples' lives that i want to improve, but in doing so i plan on being far far better, unquestonably better, than anyone who gets their degrees online and has ten times less training hours than i do.
 
It's all going to come down to those outcome studies, and if everyone on this forum doesnt want a mid-level taking patients from them then the best thing they can do in the long term (and obviously in the short term as well) is to be the best doctor they can possibly be.


You are assuming most people [patients] will care more about quality of care than saving money/time/etc by seeing a midlevel.
 
You are assuming most people [patients] will care more about quality of care than saving money/time/etc by seeing a midlevel.

But will it save patients money/time/etc when these midlevels are practicing independently, have increased overhead (as compared to their supervised colleagues), and need to start seeing more patients to cover it all and flip the bills? Speaking of which, what kind of malpractice insurance will these folks pay as compared to physicians? Same? Don't see why it would (or should) be any less (although it should probably be more!).

Sorry to slide down the fallacious slippery slope and all, but that fluffy rep they get from spending so much time with their patients and giving them that "extra" attention may go right down the drain when they're dealing with some of the aforementioned issues they'll be facing when they start kicking it solo. Who will the patient see then? Im thinking the one with the better reputation and outcomes, regardless of credentials.
 
But will it save patients money/time/etc when these midlevels are practicing independently, have increased overhead (as compared to their supervised colleagues), and need to start seeing more patients to cover it all and flip the bills?

Bingo. :)
 
Wait until they start getting sued
 
I have no concerns about midlevels in psychiatry. Unlike many other specialties, psychiatry has such a shortage that midlevels won't be taking our spots any time soon. I'm not concerned and the evidence in my area (southern california) bears this out (and I'm in a very competitive area of the country and we are in high demand here). Lets take child psychiatrists for example, the number of child psychiatrists with offices in Long Beach and south Los Angeles can all fit into a single building, and this covers over a million people. The wait times for children to see them is abysmally long as in months, and the children suffer while waiting. Midlevels aren't rushing the scene to fix the problem either. There's a glut, and frankly midlevels are helping us cover much needed ground. If you do your research you will find cooperative efforts where midlevels work with psychiatrists in multidisciplinary group private practices, and the psychiatrists love them.

Don't take my word for it though (or the trolls on here), just ask around.
 
Last edited:

As a 4th yr med student, what I have noticed is the midlevels usually do not have a full schedule and get trivial cases. This is at the clinics where NPs, PAs work along side of the physicians. They also seek advice from the physician a lot. The midlevels do spend more time with each patient because they don't really have a full schedule, not because they are "nicer" than the physician. They never correct the patient when the patient calls them "doctor". Some of these patients don't even know who a is a doctor and who is not. But the midlevels were never hostile towards me, the med student. I got along very well with them except one older PA who was married to a FM doc. He was rude and yelled at me in front of the patient for no apparent reason. This guy probably has some issues with inferiority complex.
 
midlevels usually do not have a full schedule and get trivial cases. This is at the clinics where NPs, PAs work along side of the physicians. They also seek advice from the physician a lot.

I tend to not see this phenomenon. The army of mid levels I work alongside are sprinting nonstop.
 
Oddly, midlevels have a lower rate of malpractice than physicians.

If I'm a lawyer, I'm going to sue the person with the most money, which is usually the physician in a typical practice.

But if there is no physician in the practice, a physician can't be sued.
 
""Medicare should also provide higher payments to APRNs and PAs who serve in rural and underserved areas to incentivize their practice there, he said. "Instead of trying to recruit physicians, do we try to recruit advanced practitioners for some functions?" Samitt asked.""

So he wants 100% of MD billing rates for midlevels, except in rural and underserved areas where the midlevels could bill, say, 115% of MD rates.
 
Oddly, midlevels have a lower rate of malpractice than physicians.

is this working independently or under physician supervision? i think it goes without saying that once they're out on their own, the game changes. lawyers salivating, sharpening their forks and knifes, and stretching their hamstrings getting ready to pounce on this thing! cha-ching!!!

all in all, none of this "midlevel infiltration" fear sounds like as much of a worry as some would imply. like all services/products the market will speak for itself (even though a truly "free" market it is certainly not. government...smh). so, be good and become the better practitioner. at the very least, it's a good motivator to become the most kick-@$$ physician one can possibly be. at my stage in the game as a student, it means no slack and stay on the attack!
 
is this working independently or under physician supervision? i think it goes without saying that once they're out on their own, the game changes. lawyers salivating, sharpening their forks and knifes, and stretching their hamstrings getting ready to pounce on this thing! cha-ching!!!

all in all, none of this "midlevel infiltration" fear sounds like as much of a worry as some would imply. like all services/products the market will speak for itself (even though a truly "free" market it is certainly not. government...smh). so, be good and become the better practitioner. at the very least, it's a good motivator to become the most kick-@$$ physician one can possibly be. at my stage in the game as a student, it means no slack and stay on the attack!

As has been said before, many midlevels want nothing to do with primary care. An anecdote I know, but I recently spoke with a PA friend about to graduate and she is pumped about going into some crazy derm subspecialty because it's "so cool"

Like you said, just focus on being a great doctor and person and do what you enjoy and you will be fine.
 
Yeah, some of the nurse practitioners I know who've been doing primary care for a few years are looking to get out.

I'm sort of willing to go anywhere after I'm done with residency so hopefully I'll be fine.
 
As has been said before, many midlevels want nothing to do with primary care. An anecdote I know, but I recently spoke with a PA friend about to graduate and she is pumped about going into some crazy derm subspecialty because it's "so cool"

Like you said, just focus on being a great doctor and person and do what you enjoy and you will be fine.

whats so cool about derm.....other than the precious metals
 
The procedures are fun. Many of my patients can't get in to derm, so I do some sebaceous cyst removals, punch biopsies, shave biopsies, etc. They're fun and a nice way to break up the day.

One of my supervising physicians (FM) had a keen interest in derm. He had a threadbare copy of Habif on his shelf that he had read through at least five times. The dermatologist in our county was an ***** and patients refused to see him so my doc became our group practice dermatologist for all but the most serious diseases that truly required derm (and they went to the big city for that). My SP was excellent at skin biopsy by all methods except for Mohs for which he hadn't been trained.
A good family practitioner can and should develop niches within his/her practice and make the most of those talents. I learned so much from him.
 
whats so cool about derm.....other than the precious metals

The ladies seem to like it, for obvious reasons I suppose...personally I appreciate its importance but wouldn't want it to be my entire practice. I would however like to learn some skills when I become a FM doc.
 
Derm is like many other things -- the easy **** is easy enough; where the problem comes in, many times, is in the failure to recognize what is not the easy, simple, or mundane. The biggest problem with derm is the perceived simplicity and ease of it all - let me be the first to tell you that is not the case, sadly enough. Some lessons are only learned in a painful manner... and the tendency to not know one's limits has to be one of the biggest shortcoming of docs in general. That goes for every specialty, btw.
 
...and the tendency to not know one's limits has to be one of the biggest shortcoming of docs in general.

I'm writing this one down on my whiteboard and in my mind. Me thinks it's a good one to remember down the road.
 

"Instead of seeing Walgreens as competition, primary care doctors should partner with them and use the drugstore clinic as another access point into the health system. Competition would then be averted, continuity of care would be preserved, and patients would have improved access and their medical records seamlessly reconciled among their various care venues."

Ignoring the ridiculous "medical records seamlessly reconciled" comment (one has to wonder what magical world Kevin must be living in), "accessing" somebody else's office...er, store...is not the same as "accessing" my office.

If a patient wants to use a nurse at Walgreen's as their primary care "provider," then by all means...go for it. Just don't expect me to come along for the ride.
 
Ignoring the ridiculous "medical records seamlessly reconciled" comment (one has to wonder what magical world Kevin must be living in), "accessing" somebody else's office...er, store...is not the same as "accessing" my office.

If a patient wants to use a nurse at Walgreen's as their primary care "provider," then by all means...go for it. Just don't expect me to come along for the ride.


blue dog saves the day once again! haha Im still FM all the way!
 
Erasing inequities between doc, advanced practitioner pay

Craig Samitt, M.D., president and chief executive of the Dean Health System in Madison, Wis., further suggested Medicare should reduce doctor's pay by 15 percent for services better left to APRNs or PAs, reported MedPage Today.



Yea. Hello wall? Meet writing.

I think this is allowed. I don't know why it wouldn't be. . .but go to this site and get just a wee bit of the sense of what's going on. I think someone in there quoted 17 states for independent practice.

http://allnurses.com/nursing-news/nurses-doctors-equally-827316-page2.html
 
If I'm a lawyer, I'm going to sue the person with the most money, which is usually the physician in a typical practice.

But if there is no physician in the practice, a physician can't be sued.

Don't be so sure. Midlevels can get a LOT more coverage a LOT cheaper than MDs. I represented a PA in an appellate matter once where the plaintiff let the doctor out--for no money--because the PA had a nice (cheap) million-dollar policy. Joke was on the plaintiff when we got the judgment reversed on appeal, though. :)
 
Don't be so sure. Midlevels can get a LOT more coverage a LOT cheaper than MDs.

Those who practice autonomously? If so, give it time, that will change. Too obvious for it not to, unless there are some heavy limitations of scope of practice in place.
 
Top