How do we stop nurse practitioners?

[FNP_Blix]

Oh stop it you cannot honestly believe the bad NPs are anywhere close to as competent as the worst physician. Purely on schooling and boards alone the knowledge base isn't there and that nonsense about being better to the patient is boloney too


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Sure. You can have plenty of knowledge, but if your anything like the physicians I'm thinking of (e.g., doesn't come to see their patient for 3 days while in IMCU, doesn't ever see the patient but just copies and pasts their notes, has terrible bedside manner rendering trusting compliant relationships useless, etc.), then what good is the knowledge you possess if you dont wield it properly and simply suck at your job and providing care?

And "being good to the patient is boloney"? Lol wow. You are so clueless. Patient satisfaction means compliance and trust which translates to better outcomes.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[FNP_Blix]

I mean that's cool and all, but I'd like to hear it from a physician. I think they do a pretty good job in FM clinic, but I have noticed their training is much more piecemeal than physicians, and I can see them missing diagnoses or making poor clinical decisions because they don't have certain experiences.

Well at least we can agree that they do a pretty good job in FM...and no NP practices independently right out of school (unless they're dilusional). They acquire much of their knowledge while in practice with whomever and wherever they gain their experience.

 

[Chibucks15]

Sure. You can have plenty of knowledge, but if your anything like the physicians I'm thinking of (e.g., doesn't come to see their patient for 3 days while in IMCU, doesn't ever see the patient but just copies and pasts their notes, has terrible bedside manner rendering trusting compliant relationships useless, etc.), then what good is the knowledge you possess if you dont wield it properly and simply suck at your job and providing care?

And "being good to the patient is boloney"? Lol wow. You are so clueless. Patient satisfaction means compliance and trust which translates to better outcomes.

I'm actually a non-trad who spent plenty of time in hospital settings so no I'm not clueless thanks. Also what gives you the right to come after my quality of care when all I've done is be contradictory to your narrative? What I meant by the quote you sent back to me is that some of the NPs that came around literally did the exact same thing with what you're saying these terrible physicians do. It's all about the patient load you have that day with all the charting and other things you have to do. There's a bunch of red tape physicians have to maneuver around that they didn't have to before. I've seen just as many NPs with a bad bedside manner as physicians whether you choose to believe your sainthood is capable of that or not. In terms of trust I can gurantee you a patient would rather have a doctor in 99% of the situations, not an NP who introduces themselves as one. I have never seen a patient say "oh I'd rather listen to what the NP says" over the doctor, because they know the education difference too.

 

[FNP_Blix]

I'm actually a non-trad who spent plenty of time in hospital settings so no I'm not clueless thanks. Also what gives you the right to come after my quality of care when all I've done is be contradictory to your narrative? What I meant by the quote you sent back to me is that some of the NPs that came around literally did the exact same thing with what you're saying these terrible physicians do. It's all about the patient load you have that day with all the charting and other things you have to do. There's a bunch of red tape physicians have to maneuver around that they didn't have to before. I've seen just as many NPs with a bad bedside manner as physicians whether you choose to believe your sainthood is capable of that or not. In terms of trust I can gurantee you a patient would rather have a doctor in 99% of the situations, not an NP who introduces themselves as one. I have never seen a patient say "oh I'd rather listen to what the NP says" over the doctor, because they know the education difference too.

Oh really, so you haven't heard of that happening? I certainly have. I know patients that actually leave the hospital all together because their physician was so horrible. Plenty of knowledge, just sucked at the delivery. Also, I didnt mean any offense to you personally, however, if you dont think that "being good to the patient" matters and that it translates to better outcomes, then I'm sorry, you're clueless in that respect. There are good and bad clinicians in both professions. There are also really brilliant clinicians in both professions too. Physicians have their training and their nich as do NPs. Just tired of hearing you guys disparage nurses. Finally, you dont have to tell me about red tape and patient loads. I know about that too.

 

[Chibucks15]

Oh really, so you haven't heard of that happening? I certainly have. I know patients that actually leave the hospital all together because their physician was so horrible. Plenty of knowledge, just sucked at the delivery. Also, I didnt mean any offense to you personally, however, if you dont think that "being good to the patient" matters and that it translates to better outcomes, then I'm sorry, you're clueless in that respect. There are good and bad clinicians in both professions. There are also really brilliant clinicians in both professions too. Physicians have their training and their nich as do NPs. Just tired of hearing you guys disparage nurses. Finally, you dont have to tell me about red tape and patient loads. I know about that too.

I never said being good doesn't matter at all you are grasping at straws. That's just the stuff you hear as to "why NPs are better". The physician doesn't have a niche in care the NPs do. If they want to accept full liability for their care and watch the whole thing blow up go for it in my opinion. There's many stories docs have told me of NPs getting too big for their britches and then not having to face the consequences because it's the docs ass on the line not theirs. Idk you're just on a mostly medical student website complaining about being disparaged when there's online NP schools churning out terrible practitioners (psst those are the ones we're hating on) whatever lets you sleep at night though


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[FNP_Blix]

I never said being good doesn't matter at all you are grasping at straws. That's just the stuff you hear as to "why NPs are better". The physician doesn't have a niche in care the NPs do. If they want to accept full liability for their care and watch the whole thing blow up go for it in my opinion. There's many stories docs have told me of NPs getting too big for their britches and then not having to face the consequences because it's the docs ass on the line not theirs. Idk you're just on a mostly medical student website complaining about being disparaged when there's online NP schools churning out terrible practitioners (psst those are the ones we're hating on) whatever lets you sleep at night though


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Yea actually you did say that. You stated, "..and that nonsense about being better to the patient is boloney too." Maybe I miss understood, but that's what I got out of that statement. Also, you are wrong about physicians taking all the liability. NPs that practice independent take full responsibility legally for their practice. Typically in med mal suits where NPs are the primary defendants, they get sued for practicing beyond scope, as it can be pretty vague in some instances. It's actually physicians that get sued for "getting too big for their britches" as they end up taking care of patient's that should have been referred. Note that only 2% of NPs have ever been the primary defendant in med mal suits...Even for NPs in team based environments still end up getting sued if they mess up. If the physicians is supervising, then this dynamic may be different. However, they should realize they are taking that risk before hand. Nevertheless, NPs actually prove to decrease the risk overall of getting sued. Bottom line, NPs decrease risk of malpractice suits and its just not accurate that physicians take all the responsibility. So don't just throw crap out there when you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[deleted480308]

Yea actually you did say that. You stated, "..and that nonsense about being better to the patient is boloney too." Maybe I miss understood but that's what I got out of that statement. Also, you are wrong about physicians taking all the liability. NPs that practice independent take full responsibility legally for their practice. Typically in med mal suits where NPs are the primary defendants, they get sued for practicing beyond scope, as it can be pretty vague in some instances. It's actually physicians that get sued for "getting too big for their britches" as they end up taking care of patient's that should have been referred. Note that only 2% of NPs have ever been the primary defendant in med mal suit...Even for NPs in team based environments still end up getting sued if they mess up. Its just not accurate that physicians take all the responsibility, so don't just through crap out there when you don't know what you're talking about.

those numbers get a bit fuzzy....what percentage of NPs are practicing independently? and what percentage of those have been a primary defendant in a med mal suit?

 

[aformerstudent]

I have mixed feelings on NP's. I had a procedure that required sedation and unbeknownst to me it was a nurse anesthetist who administered it. I was livid because I should have been told about that. They also charge you the anesthesiologist rate.

That's the negative experience. The positive experience is that one of my loved ones sees an NP for a certain issue and that specific NP is smarter than the surgeon. She is very well educated and very committed to that specific field; smart enough to be the doctor. She eventually referred us to someone who addressed the issue surgically but the level of care was outstanding and the referral was spot-on. I'm still not a fan of NP's because I believe the patient should have a choice as to who they want to see. If they want to see an MD/DO, they should be allowed to see the MD/DO. If a PA or an NP is going to see the patient, that should be made known well in advance before they commit to any type of treatment.

If you've ever been to a salon, you get to select tiers of service. I don't get why you can't do that in healthcare. I work in healthcare and when my colleagues have family that have specific ailments, they send them to the city to be seen by an MD; not at our hospital where they will be seen by a PA. They must know something.

 

[Chibucks15]

Yea actually you did say that. You stated, "..and that nonsense about being better to the patient is boloney too." Maybe I miss understood but that's what I got out of that statement. Also, you are wrong about physicians taking all the liability. NPs that practice independent take full responsibility legally for their practice. Typically in med mal suits where NPs are the primary defendants, they get sued for practicing beyond scope, as it can be pretty vague in some instances. It's actually physicians that get sued for "getting too big for their britches" as they end up taking care of patient's that should have been referred. Note that only 2% of NPs have ever been the primary defendant in med mal suit...Even for NPs in team based environments still end up getting sued if they mess up. Its just not accurate that physicians take all the responsibility, so don't just through crap out there when you don't know what you're talking about.

Whatever bud. It's my n=1 so I'm sorry if your experiences are different. I'm repeating what I was told by physicians. Good luck on convincing the entirety of SDN and the physician world that NPs are as incredible as you believe them to be. You're definitely the pioneer the profession needs. I don't see much gain for me arguing your logic best of luck


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[FNP_Blix]

...Good luck on convincing the entirety of SDN and the physician world that NPs are as incredible as you believe them to be. You're definitely the pioneer the profession needs...


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Don't think I'm going to convince all of you, but I come here to shake the bee hive a bit. I wan't to have an open dialogue with the future physicians and hash out the topics we have maybe been holding inside. And can't tell if you are being sarcastic, but thanks! You really think I'm the pioneer the profession needs? lol

 

[FNP_Blix]

I have mixed feelings on NP's. I had a procedure that required sedation and unbeknownst to me it was a nurse anesthetist who administered it. I was livid because I should have been told about that. They also charge you the anesthesiologist rate.

That's the negative experience. The positive experience is that one of my loved ones sees an NP for a certain issue and that specific NP is smarter than the surgeon. She is very well educated and very committed to that specific field; smart enough to be the doctor. She eventually referred us to someone who addressed the issue surgically but the level of care was outstanding and the referral was spot-on. I'm still not a fan of NP's because I believe the patient should have a choice as to who they want to see. If they want to see an MD/DO, they should be allowed to see the MD/DO. If a PA or an NP is going to see the patient, that should be made known well in advance before they commit to any type of treatment.

If you've ever been to a salon, you get to select tiers of service. I don't get why you can't do that in healthcare. I work in healthcare and when my colleagues have family that have specific ailments, they send them to the city to be seen by an MD; not at our hospital where they will be seen by a PA. They must know something.

Appreciate you're input. The reason people can't always choose to see the doctor is because it's not feasible. The current climate in healthcare right now is like, "all hands on deck, we need all the help we can get." There simply aren't enough physicians to care for all the population, so APNs (i.e., NPs, CRNAs, CNMs, CNSs) & PAs help mitigate this issue. It may be 2-4 decades before you see enough physicians to reduce the need for mid-level providers.

 

[FNP_Blix]

those numbers get a bit fuzzy....what percentage of NPs are practicing independently? and what percentage of those have been a primary defendant in a med mal suit?

look it up your self. This is industry data, not a sponsored NP study. You can find that on your own.

 

[deleted480308]

look it up your self. This is industry data, not a sponsored NP study. You can find that on your own.

you are the one trying to imply that as 2% (non linked claim) of NPs have been primary defendant that it's due to quality....what I'm pointing out is that the statistic means nothing if you aren't using independent NPs

If it's a claim you want to make, then cite it

 

[FNP_Blix]

you are the one trying to imply that as 2% (non linked claim) of NPs have been primary defendant that it's due to quality....what I'm pointing out is that the statistic means nothing if you aren't using independent NPs

If it's a claim you want to make, then cite it

Haha, you're telling me to cite something now!? I've cited so much stuff already, while you have cited jack squat the entire time we've been debating. Get real man.

 

[KGflyboy]

Haha, you're telling me to cite something now!? I've cited so much stuff already, while you have cited jack squat the entire time we've been debating. Get real man.

He merely pointed out you cited a misleading number. You are cherry picking statistics and studies and then misinterpreting their results to fit your narrative.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

 

[FNP_Blix]

He merely pointed out you cited a misleading number. You are cherry picking statistics and studies and then misinterpreting their results to fit your narrative.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

It's not misleading, it's what the data shows. In fact, NPs show to decrease med mal risk for practices and hospitals in general. Almost like a anecdote. God only knows, if you leave a physician to his/her own devices, he/she is more likely to get sued. Strange how that works...

 

[Chibucks15]

It's not misleading, it's what the data shows. In fact, NPs show to decrease med mal risk for practices and hospitals in general. Almost like a anecdote. God only knows, if you leave a physician to his/her own devices, he/she is more likely to get sued. Strange how that works...

So sweeping generalizations are okay on your end but not ours?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[FNP_Blix]

So sweeping generalizations are okay on your end but not ours?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

You're right, but what can I say, I'm learning from the best. You guys and gals are vicious on here. Looks like you can ditch it but can't take it though.

 

[deleted480308]

It's not misleading, it's what the data shows. In fact, NPs show to decrease med mal risk for practices and hospitals in general. Almost like a anecdote. God only knows, if you leave a physician to his/her own devices, he/she is more likely to get sued. Strange how that works...

Post the data and we'll discuss what it shows

 

[FNP_Blix]

Post the data and we'll discuss what it shows

I have the article, but I'm not going to post it. Just take my claim as anecdotal if you don't believe me. Otherwise, do your own darn research. Done doing you favors and posting articles. How about you post some articles, huh? Back up the claims you've made about my profession.

 

[Chibucks15]

I have the article, but I'm not going to post it. Just take my claim as anecdotal if you don't believe me. Otherwise, do your own darn research. Done doing you favors and posting articles. How about you post some articles, huh? Back up the claims you've made about my profession.

It takes 2 seconds so basically you're showing you got nothing. I'll call that bluff any day


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[FNP_Blix]

It takes 2 seconds so basically you're showing you got nothing. I'll call that bluff any day


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Uh I'm sorry, are you illiterate when it comes to research? No, not taking the bait. Just google search and you'll once again, find a wealth of data that shows NPs to lower med mal risk, and corroborate the number I stated.

 

[deleted480308]

I have the article, but I'm not going to post it. Just take my claim as anecdotal if you don't believe me. Otherwise, do your own darn research. Done doing you favors and posting articles. How about you post some articles, huh? Back up the claims you've made about my profession.

You want an article that shows NPs are less trained than doctors? Because I can totally post their respective training...I'm willing to do that if you are denying a disparity in training

 

[deleted480308]

Uh I'm sorry, are you illiterate when it comes to research? No, not taking the bait. Just google search and you'll once again, find a wealth of data that shows NPs to lower med mal risk, and corroborate the number I stated.

And now you lost the whole forum...that's not how this works. You make a claim, you backup the claim

 

[Chibucks15]

Uh I'm sorry, are you illiterate when it comes to research? No, not taking the bait. Just google search and you'll once again, find a wealth of data that shows NPs to lower med mal risk, and corroborate the number I stated.

Again with the personal insults cmon now let's have an adult discussion. I'm simply saying that most of the research is biased or missing key components. I honestly don't have time for this though I have a big exam block.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[FNP_Blix]

Okay here is the data:

1) Nurse Practitioners and Professional Negligence Lawsuits | CPH & Associates
2) Medscape: Medscape Access ---> see page 2 5th paragraph down
3) Primary care provider role exposes nurse practitioners to malpractice risks - Business Insurance

 

[FNP_Blix]

You want an article that shows NPs are less trained than doctors? Because I can totally post their respective training...I'm willing to do that if you are denying a disparity in training

I never denied a difference in training. Have you missed the basis of the argument? It's about access and having a solution right now. Today. NPs fill that role...but anyway, we are on the topic of malpractice now.

 

[FNP_Blix]

More data on med mal:

1) How Likely are Nurse Practitioners to Get Sued? | MidlevelU
2) AANP - NP Fact Sheet

Anecdotal article by a physician on removing barriers for NPs:

1) A 'collaborating doctor' explains why nurse practitioners shouldn't need one (Your letters)

 

[KGflyboy]

Okay here is the data:

1) Nurse Practitioners and Professional Negligence Lawsuits | CPH & Associates
2) Medscape: Medscape Access ---> see page 2 5th paragraph down
3) Primary care provider role exposes nurse practitioners to malpractice risks - Business Insurance

None of those sources looked at the data of independently practicing NPs. This is why it's hard to take you seriously. You keep misrepresenting data. You can't assert that NPs are less likely to get sued than physicians by using NPs working under physician supervision as your comparison for the data. I don't think you actually read any of the studies you quote. You are simply Googling and reading summaries, typically reported by or authored by nursing organizations with an agenda, and assuming the data supports whatever conclusion you've read. It only took a couple minutes to look at where that 2% number you referred to came from.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

 

[FNP_Blix]

None of those sources looked at the data of independently practicing NPs. This is why it's hard to take you seriously. You keep misrepresenting data. You can't assert that NPs are less likely to get sued than physicians if by using NPs working under physician supervision as your comparison for the data. I don't think you actually read any of the studies you quote. You are simply Googling and reading summaries, typically reported by or authored by nursing organizations with an agenda, and assuming the data supports whatever conclusion you've read. It only took a couple minutes to look at where that 2% number you referred to came from.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

I tried researching the number of NPs that get sued that are in independent practice and the exact number is not there. But what difference does it make? Its saying for all NPs, the number is 1.9-2%. It's still low however you turn it. You can assume it went up a little bit (0.6%) in the last decade because of increasing autonomy. However the number is still enormously low and still corroborates my claim that we actually lower the risk of malpractice suits for a practice or hospital, and have far less suits against us as NPs as a whole...And there is no conspiracy here either. The agenda is presenting the data that I have available to me. And it is in favor of what I have been saying the whole time.

 

[KGflyboy]

I tried researching the number of NPs that get sued that are in independent practice and the exact number is not there. But what difference does it make? Its saying for all NPs, the number is 1.9-2%. It's still low however you turn it. You can assume it went up a little bit (0.6%) in the last decade because of increasing autonomy. However the number is still enormously low and still corroborates my claim that we lower risk, and have far less suits against us.

No, no it doesn't support your claim. All it shows is that the liability in malpractice suits is placed on the supervising physicians. NPs don't get sued because the vast majority are working under physician supervision, and the liability goes to the person ultimately responsible for decisions. This data does not show that NPs lower risk.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

 

[FNP_Blix]

No, no it doesn't support your claim. All it shows is that the liability in malpractice suits is placed on the supervising physicians. NPs don't get sued because the vast majority are working under physician supervision, and the liability goes to the person ultimately responsible for decisions.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

If you actually read the articles I sent, all mid-levels (in general) decrease physician risk of being sued too (if they are collaborating). And physician's do not take sole responsibility for the mess ups of their extenders. That is not to say that they cant be held vicariously liable, but they do not take full responsibility. If the physician gets sued, so is the NP.

 

[deleted480308]

Okay here is the data:

1) Nurse Practitioners and Professional Negligence Lawsuits | CPH & Associates
2) Medscape: Medscape Access ---> see page 2 5th paragraph down
3) Primary care provider role exposes nurse practitioners to malpractice risks - Business Insurance

The 2% number comes from a survey that non aanp members have to buy to see and therefore can't differentiate how what percentage of independent nps got sued (assuming they were honest and the survey was complete)

So that number means nothing yet

I never denied a difference in training. Have you missed the basis of the argument? It's about access and having a solution right now. Today. NPs fill that role...but anyway, we are on the topic of malpractice now.

the crux of the argument is does increased access justify a lesser trained provider?

I'm proposing no. I'm also saying you can't use access as a justification because if doctors increase supply and meet demand it isn't like you nurses will surrender independent practice. You want Independance because you want Independance.....this increased access line is just marketing

 

[FNP_Blix]

The 2% number comes from a survey that non aanp members have to buy to see and therefore can't differentiate how what percentage of independent nps got sued (assuming they were honest and the survey was complete)

So that number means nothing yet
the crux of the argument is does increased access justify a lesser trained provider?

I'm proposing no. I'm also saying you can't use access as a justification because if doctors increase supply and meet demand it isn't like you nurses will surrender independent practice. You want Independance because you want Independance.....this increased access line is just marketing

The data comes from surveys and closed claims analysis. You can say that it doesn't mean anything, but for a majority of the physicians and hospitals doing the hiring of NPs, this number means a whole lot.

And no its not just marketing, it is the reality of the situation. We mitigate the issue of access whether you want to believe it or not. You are not going to produce more doctors by tomorrow, so NPs are the solution right now. Sorry, but its true. This has been true since like the 30s for NPs.

 

[KGflyboy]

If you actually read the articles I sent, all mid-levels (in general) decrease physician risk of being sued too (if they are collaborating). And physician's do not take sole responsibility for the mess ups of their extenders. That is not to say that they cant be held vicariously liable, but they do not take full responsibility. If the physician gets sued, so is the NP.

I did read your articles. I'm starting to think you are trolling us. None of those links have any data to support your contention that midlevels decrease risk. All the data shows is that they don't get sued often. That's clearly because the physician supervising the mid-level is the person held accountable most often in lawsuits. You are flat out making stuff up at this point.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

 

[deleted480308]

The data comes from surveys and closed claims analysis. You can say that it doesn't mean anything, but for a majority of the physicians and hospitals doing the hiring of NPs, this number means a whole lot.

And no its not just marketing, it is the reality of the situation. We mitigate the issue of access whether you want to believe it or not. You are not going to produce more doctors by tomorrow, so NPs are the solution right now. Sorry, but its true. This has been true since like the 30s for NPs.

And if the number of docs reaches saturation in 1yr, or 10 yrs or 100.....will the nurses give up indenpendent practice then? Because then you wouldn't be able to hide behind access.

My point is you want Independance because you don't like answering to docs....the access thing is marketing.

 

[FNP_Blix]

I did read your articles. I'm starting to think you are trolling us. None of those links have any data to support your contention that midlevels decrease risk. All the data shows is that they don't get sued often. That's clearly because the physician supervising the mid-level is the person held accountable most often in lawsuits. You are flat out making stuff up at this point.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

No I'm not trolling. I'm presenting to you the data and you don't want to accept it because you are blinded by your own bias and wishful thinking:

"...While nurse practitioners are sometimes covered by their employers' medical professional liability coverage, most buy their own insurance for several reasons, foremost of which is that med mal polices often require that nurse practitioners be scheduled, so they are not covered unless they are named in their employer's policy.

Since most malpractice cover is written on a claims-made basis, covering only those claims filed during the policy period, that prompts many nurse practitioners to buy their own occurrence-based coverage..." --Business Insurance (non bias source)

 

[FNP_Blix]

And if the number of docs reaches saturation in 1yr, or 10 yrs or 100.....will the nurses give up indenpendent practice then? Because then you wouldn't be able to hide behind access.

My point is you want Independance because you don't like answering to docs....the access thing is marketing.

I would be okay with stepping down from my position. I would find another niche. The great thing about nursing is the ability for lateral movements and changing specialties...And no, the lack of access is reality.

 

[deleted480308]

I would be okay with stepping down from my position. I would find another niche. The great thing about nursing is the ability for lateral movements and changing specialties...And no, the lack of access is reality.

You are seriously saying you and the other nurses would surrender legal ability to independently practice and go back to being supervised by physicians?

 

[FNP_Blix]

You are seriously saying you and the other nurses would surrender legal ability to independently practice and go back to being supervised by physicians?

Yes, I would actually do that if it reached saturation and the climate of healthcare changed. Or I would go to medical school. I just have a few pre-reqs and then take the MCATs (which I'm sure I'd rock) and then do my 4 years. I've actually already talked to my wife about it because I realize this may be a possibility in at least a decade or two. I don't even practice independently right now. I collaborate with a medical group and I love it...I can't speak for other nurses though...Nevertheless, I advocate for independent practice right now because I truly believe in the services we are providing.

 

[FNP_Blix]

Whoah there, cowboy. I don't know if medical school is good enough for you with that attitude toward admissions. The rest of us here didn't just cakewalk in.

And you'll need to learn how to critically examine study designs before you can "rock" the MCAT

This thread has turned into a troll haven


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

So out of all the debating we've done so far, that was the most you could contribute? If anything, you're perpetuating this "troll haven." And I never said it would be a cakewalk. I'm just confident in my abilities, and if I decide to go to med school ,then that's it, I will go. But for right now, I enjoy my role...And I did learn how to critically examine study designs. Unfortunately, the studies out there (in medicine in general) are never perfect and are without limitations or bias. You should know that since you're so smart.

 

[jdav_7]

.

 

[jdav_7]

Also, I'd like to point out that many states have offered the solution of decreasing medical school curriculum for family practice docs to reach rural communities. Texas tech comes to mind. Are docs who do 2.5 years of med and 1 year res equally competent?

 

[deleted480308]

Also, I'd like to point out that many states have offered the solution of decreasing medical school curriculum for family practice docs to reach rural communities. Texas tech comes to mind. Are docs who do 2.5 years of med and 1 year res equally competent?

I don't believe there is anywhere boarding fm docs with 2.5yrs of school and a 1yr residency......link?

 

[jdav_7]

I don't believe there is anywhere boarding fm docs with 2.5yrs of school and a 1yr residency......link?

FMAT Family Medicine Accelerated Track

Looks like it's actually a 3+3 year track, so I apologize. but point being, the standards are being lowered where we can't even really say anything concrete about training for physicians. Like I've previously mentioned, I think that we should promote access by improving education of mid-levels, not decrease medical education for physicians.

Note: looks like they're cutting clinical rotations to get them through the program quicker. Don't know how that would shape your opinion on it - I've found most docs say the clinical training is the most important part of Med school.

 

[deleted480308]

FMAT Family Medicine Accelerated Track

Looks like it's actually a 3+3 year track, so I apologize. but point being, the standards are being lowered where we can't even really say anything concrete about training for physicians. Like I've previously mentioned, I think that we should promote access by improving education of mid-levels, not decrease medical education for physicians.

Note: looks like they're cutting clinical rotations to get them through the program quicker. Don't know how that would shape your opinion on it - I've found most docs say the clinical training is the most important part of Med school.

It's 149 wks of school vs 160. You give up 3 summers and some electives to do it. So it's not shortening by 1 yr (4 months). But even that I'm not a fan of.

The only defensable part is they still take same board exams so they have objective proof of minimal standards to graduate.....I'd be interested in seeing their avg board scores and pass rate

And there is no reason to upgrade midlevel education in an attempt to make them something they aren't

 

[jdav_7]

It's 149 wks of school vs 160. You give up 3 summers and some electives to do it. So it's not shortening by 1 yr (4 months). But even that I'm not a fan of.

The only defensable part is they still take same board exams so they have objective proof of minimal standards to graduate.....I'd be interested in seeing their avg board scores and pass rate

And there is no reason to upgrade midlevel education in an attempt to make them something they aren't

Yeah, I hear you on that. As far as upgrading mid-level education, it's important to delineate that I'm not arguing for true independent practice. Just a little more respect for what they do and what their role is in eliminating access problems. If that takes extra training, then I'm all for it.

 

[deleted480308]

Yeah, I hear you on that. As far as upgrading mid-level education, it's important to delineate that I'm not arguing for true independent practice. Just a little more respect for what they do and what their role is in eliminating access problems. If that takes extra training, then I'm all for it.

I have great respect for their proper role

 

[jdav_7]

I have great respect for their proper role

Not saying you don't! But perhaps for high achieving NPs we might offer a chance to take the USMLE and complete a residency program after 5 years experience and a recommendation from a hospital executive? Completing that program would then allow them more autonomy - intentionally being vague here because I don't have this fully fleshed out - in rural areas?

 

[FNP_Blix]

FMAT Family Medicine Accelerated Track

Looks like it's actually a 3+3 year track, so I apologize. but point being, the standards are being lowered where we can't even really say anything concrete about training for physicians. Like I've previously mentioned, I think that we should promote access by improving education of mid-levels, not decrease medical education for physicians.

Note: looks like they're cutting clinical rotations to get them through the program quicker. Don't know how that would shape your opinion on it - I've found most docs say the clinical training is the most important part of Med school.

Experience may be the most important factor, and is why I'd be for more restricted entry into independent practice (i.e., minimum of 3-5 years of collaboration). Experience is the reason NPs become as good as their physician colleagues typically after years of collaboration. Majority of the NPs currently in independent practice have years of both RN experience and NP training and experience.