Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My training was explicit that you had to see tens of thousands of normal to recognize abnormal reliably. Rashes don't often look textbook, and there is so much variation in presentation of the same diagnosis.
Without that large clinical database in your own mind, you can't reliably tell when to worry. Anemia that is not microcytic and hypochromic, or that doesn't respond as expected to treatment (as per PP)? Dig further. On the other hand, you don't order labs or antifungal treatment for pityriasis rosea when you can recognize it, even on the many varieties of skin type.
NPs can be fantastic. Old school NPs with many bedside years under the belt, or NPs who are well-trained in a narrow scope with good oversight (e.g., L&D) are more likely to be fantastic than others.
And you still need to see tens of thousands of normal before you can reliably pick out abnormal.
This is so important. You are going to have trouble hearing a murmur if you haven't heard a lot of hearts without one. Even something simple like distinguishing wheezing from rhonchi requires experience. I had a NP at a Minute Clinic listen to my lungs and tell me I had pneumonia and she gave me antibiotics. That seemed serious so I got in with my pcp the next day who sighed and said "You don't have pneumonia -- so those antibiotics aren't going to do anything and they shouldn't have been prescribed." The NP thought she heard rhonchi and panicked.
Medicine isn’t as simple as normal vs abnormal. Good practioners have to have an advanced understanding of pathology, pathophysiology, and pharmacology. This cannot be done in a 2 yr PA crash course. NPs are slightly better because they get some of this in nursing school, then again in NP school, but still no where near as in depth and complete as the education a MD receives in 4 yrs medical school, plus residency, plus fellowship. Their depth of knowledge is not even comparable and goes way way beyond normal vs abnormal. They are dealing with people with complex issues involving multiple organ systems, on multiple meds, and each situation is slightly unique and individual. There needs to be critical thinking happening and that cannot happen if you don’t have the solid foundation of knowledge
Well, yes, but did you really expect a full medical school training in a single post? That's silly.
Normal vs abnormal is the heart of it. I'd challenge you to propose a medical problem that doesn't rest on that distinction at the core -- and medical school training plus residency plus (hopefully) working in a supportive learning environment for the first few years is what gets you there, minimally.
But it’s not helpful or cost effective to have an NP decide something is abnormal and then turf it to the MD because they aren’t really sure how to manage it. And this is what happens A LOT. They just make more work for the physician instead of less
I think you missed the point of the post. NPs coming through diploma mills are NOT the old school NPs with tones of experience, and they cannot reliably distinguish normal from abnormal. That's why the stories of poor care are mounting.
Furthermore, you cannot just declare medical schools must now have a 10% increase in admissions, or whatever. Those slots need to come with clinical placements with skilled practitioners. Many, many current NP students are not in a structured clinical training, if they even are getting any clinical time -- they are having to go out and find people to "supervise" them, with little to no oversight. If you start expecting medical students to do that, you'll see their trainign tank, too.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6773.13246
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00014
A list of studies... https://www.nice.healthcare/the-nicessities/nurse-practitioners-physician-assistants-safety
Most studies to date show better health outcomes / better health management for NP seen patients in primary care vs MD.
No, you need to look at the up to date research.
Second comment on this post. Why don’t you add the links?
Anonymous wrote:Why would somebody choose a low paying profession like nursing?
You will always be a low income earner and it will take years to pay back your student loans. Unless you have family money and get a free ride from your parents, that is the worst choice
There are other options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My training was explicit that you had to see tens of thousands of normal to recognize abnormal reliably. Rashes don't often look textbook, and there is so much variation in presentation of the same diagnosis.
Without that large clinical database in your own mind, you can't reliably tell when to worry. Anemia that is not microcytic and hypochromic, or that doesn't respond as expected to treatment (as per PP)? Dig further. On the other hand, you don't order labs or antifungal treatment for pityriasis rosea when you can recognize it, even on the many varieties of skin type.
NPs can be fantastic. Old school NPs with many bedside years under the belt, or NPs who are well-trained in a narrow scope with good oversight (e.g., L&D) are more likely to be fantastic than others.
And you still need to see tens of thousands of normal before you can reliably pick out abnormal.
This is so important. You are going to have trouble hearing a murmur if you haven't heard a lot of hearts without one. Even something simple like distinguishing wheezing from rhonchi requires experience. I had a NP at a Minute Clinic listen to my lungs and tell me I had pneumonia and she gave me antibiotics. That seemed serious so I got in with my pcp the next day who sighed and said "You don't have pneumonia -- so those antibiotics aren't going to do anything and they shouldn't have been prescribed." The NP thought she heard rhonchi and panicked.
Medicine isn’t as simple as normal vs abnormal. Good practioners have to have an advanced understanding of pathology, pathophysiology, and pharmacology. This cannot be done in a 2 yr PA crash course. NPs are slightly better because they get some of this in nursing school, then again in NP school, but still no where near as in depth and complete as the education a MD receives in 4 yrs medical school, plus residency, plus fellowship. Their depth of knowledge is not even comparable and goes way way beyond normal vs abnormal. They are dealing with people with complex issues involving multiple organ systems, on multiple meds, and each situation is slightly unique and individual. There needs to be critical thinking happening and that cannot happen if you don’t have the solid foundation of knowledge
Well, yes, but did you really expect a full medical school training in a single post? That's silly.
Normal vs abnormal is the heart of it. I'd challenge you to propose a medical problem that doesn't rest on that distinction at the core -- and medical school training plus residency plus (hopefully) working in a supportive learning environment for the first few years is what gets you there, minimally.
But it’s not helpful or cost effective to have an NP decide something is abnormal and then turf it to the MD because they aren’t really sure how to manage it. And this is what happens A LOT. They just make more work for the physician instead of less
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6773.13246
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00014
A list of studies... https://www.nice.healthcare/the-nicessities/nurse-practitioners-physician-assistants-safety
Most studies to date show better health outcomes / better health management for NP seen patients in primary care vs MD.
No, you need to look at the up to date research.
Anonymous wrote:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6773.13246
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00014
A list of studies... https://www.nice.healthcare/the-nicessities/nurse-practitioners-physician-assistants-safety
Most studies to date show better health outcomes / better health management for NP seen patients in primary care vs MD.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My training was explicit that you had to see tens of thousands of normal to recognize abnormal reliably. Rashes don't often look textbook, and there is so much variation in presentation of the same diagnosis.
Without that large clinical database in your own mind, you can't reliably tell when to worry. Anemia that is not microcytic and hypochromic, or that doesn't respond as expected to treatment (as per PP)? Dig further. On the other hand, you don't order labs or antifungal treatment for pityriasis rosea when you can recognize it, even on the many varieties of skin type.
NPs can be fantastic. Old school NPs with many bedside years under the belt, or NPs who are well-trained in a narrow scope with good oversight (e.g., L&D) are more likely to be fantastic than others.
And you still need to see tens of thousands of normal before you can reliably pick out abnormal.
This is so important. You are going to have trouble hearing a murmur if you haven't heard a lot of hearts without one. Even something simple like distinguishing wheezing from rhonchi requires experience. I had a NP at a Minute Clinic listen to my lungs and tell me I had pneumonia and she gave me antibiotics. That seemed serious so I got in with my pcp the next day who sighed and said "You don't have pneumonia -- so those antibiotics aren't going to do anything and they shouldn't have been prescribed." The NP thought she heard rhonchi and panicked.
Medicine isn’t as simple as normal vs abnormal. Good practioners have to have an advanced understanding of pathology, pathophysiology, and pharmacology. This cannot be done in a 2 yr PA crash course. NPs are slightly better because they get some of this in nursing school, then again in NP school, but still no where near as in depth and complete as the education a MD receives in 4 yrs medical school, plus residency, plus fellowship. Their depth of knowledge is not even comparable and goes way way beyond normal vs abnormal. They are dealing with people with complex issues involving multiple organ systems, on multiple meds, and each situation is slightly unique and individual. There needs to be critical thinking happening and that cannot happen if you don’t have the solid foundation of knowledge
Well, yes, but did you really expect a full medical school training in a single post? That's silly.
Normal vs abnormal is the heart of it. I'd challenge you to propose a medical problem that doesn't rest on that distinction at the core -- and medical school training plus residency plus (hopefully) working in a supportive learning environment for the first few years is what gets you there, minimally.
Anonymous wrote:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6773.13246
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00014
A list of studies... https://www.nice.healthcare/the-nicessities/nurse-practitioners-physician-assistants-safety
Most studies to date show better health outcomes / better health management for NP seen patients in primary care vs MD.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6773.13246
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00014
A list of studies... https://www.nice.healthcare/the-nicessities/nurse-practitioners-physician-assistants-safety
Most studies to date show better health outcomes / better health management for NP seen patients in primary care vs MD.
This is important info, but two issues here:
1) The individual articles you posted are from 2019 and 2020, and the proliferation of essentially untrained NPs is more recent.
2) The NPs that people are worried about the most are ones practicing in specialties and not primary care.
I am fine with an NP, even in a specialty, but the training needs to be waaaaay better than it is.
Anonymous wrote:Why would somebody choose a low paying profession like nursing?
You will always be a low income earner and it will take years to pay back your student loans. Unless you have family money and get a free ride from your parents, that is the worst choice
There are other options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My training was explicit that you had to see tens of thousands of normal to recognize abnormal reliably. Rashes don't often look textbook, and there is so much variation in presentation of the same diagnosis.
Without that large clinical database in your own mind, you can't reliably tell when to worry. Anemia that is not microcytic and hypochromic, or that doesn't respond as expected to treatment (as per PP)? Dig further. On the other hand, you don't order labs or antifungal treatment for pityriasis rosea when you can recognize it, even on the many varieties of skin type.
NPs can be fantastic. Old school NPs with many bedside years under the belt, or NPs who are well-trained in a narrow scope with good oversight (e.g., L&D) are more likely to be fantastic than others.
And you still need to see tens of thousands of normal before you can reliably pick out abnormal.
This is so important. You are going to have trouble hearing a murmur if you haven't heard a lot of hearts without one. Even something simple like distinguishing wheezing from rhonchi requires experience. I had a NP at a Minute Clinic listen to my lungs and tell me I had pneumonia and she gave me antibiotics. That seemed serious so I got in with my pcp the next day who sighed and said "You don't have pneumonia -- so those antibiotics aren't going to do anything and they shouldn't have been prescribed." The NP thought she heard rhonchi and panicked.
Medicine isn’t as simple as normal vs abnormal. Good practioners have to have an advanced understanding of pathology, pathophysiology, and pharmacology. This cannot be done in a 2 yr PA crash course. NPs are slightly better because they get some of this in nursing school, then again in NP school, but still no where near as in depth and complete as the education a MD receives in 4 yrs medical school, plus residency, plus fellowship. Their depth of knowledge is not even comparable and goes way way beyond normal vs abnormal. They are dealing with people with complex issues involving multiple organ systems, on multiple meds, and each situation is slightly unique and individual. There needs to be critical thinking happening and that cannot happen if you don’t have the solid foundation of knowledge
Anonymous wrote:I really don’t understand physicians assistants and nurse practitioners. Why do they keep coming up with terms? I think most patients don’t know what they mean. Patients know what an RN is and a doctor.
My parent is an OB and midwives have a similar issue. Most patients don’t know what the education of a midwife is an assume it’s more like a doula.