Skip to main content

Nurse Practitioner Scope of Practice and the AMA

I have been working at CHAS Health, a community clinic serving Eastern Washington and Northern Idaho for a little over 3 years now. This is a different experience for me than my prior 35 years of practice for many reasons. CHAS originally started as a small clinic associated with a homeless shelter and provided mainly care of people without health insurance. It has expanded, but it still serves primarily people with various kinds of barriers to getting health care. CHAS provides support for people who are at risk of losing their homes and who have trouble paying copays. We are happy to take care of people with drug and alcohol problems, people who have just gotten out of prison, people who have trouble following recommendations from health care providers and may have been "fired" from other practices. We also see people who don't have any of these challenges, but just happen to like us. We are set up to make it possible for all sorts of people to navigate the very fragmented and expensive system that is American Healthcare.

When I first started to work at CHAS I was surprised to find out that I wouldn't actually have an office and I would probably be moving from one desk to another depending on what space was available. In my previous offices I always had my own desk with drawers that I put things in that I would use to take care of patients, a bookshelf to hold my favorite texts, wall space to put up pictures of family and copies of diplomas and medical licenses. I worked with RN's who would assist with procedures and could give intravenous treatments. I shared on-call responsibilities with a number of other doctors with nearly the same experience I had. At CHAS we use medical assistants instead of RN's, who can do many but definitely not all of the things RN's can do and have less independence than my previous nurses. (We did get a nurse finally but we share her and she has very different responsibilities.)

The biggest difference is that CHAS is primarily served by Nurse Practitioners and Physician's Assistants as the providers rather than MD's. There are a few MD's, but it is really difficult to recruit MD's for our practice. There are more Nurse Practitioners and PA's in the job market and they are apparently less picky about certain things. They also have fewer years of training than doctors and took on less responsibility in the process of getting their degrees. Some have many years of experience, having been nurses before but none had the baptism by fire that is common for MD's. (I recall as an intern taking care of a whole medical floor of acutely ill patients in the hospital, getting 4+ new admissions from the emergency department and making decisions completely unsupervised countless nights, presenting the cases in the morning to the attending physician and working until sign-off at 6 PM the next day.) I don't recommend the baptism by fire thing, but it does teach you medicine. That scenario was repeated, with gradually increasing levels of experience, for 3 years before I was released to practice independently. 

So right out of training I had some skills. Not to say that a person needs to be able to juggle the needs of sick and dying hospital patients in order to take good care of clinic patients. Nevertheless there is a difference in the backgrounds of NP/PA's and MD's, related to level of responsibility and sheer hours of patient contact as the main decision maker. That said, the backgrounds of mid-level practitioners can be more helpful to outpatients than that of certain MD's. Studies do not show that MD's do a better job of taking care of patients in community clinics that NP's or PA's. 

More NP's and PA's are licensed each year than MD's. Looking through various internet sources, it appears that over 36,000 new NP's and 20,000 PA's are licensed each year and new physician graduates add up to fewer than that, around 20,000. MD's and DO's (Doctor of Osteopathy, a pathway very similar to MD) actively practicing medicine number a bit over 1 million in the US. NP's and PA's add up to just under 500,000, since those two certifications have not existed for as long. 

An MD or DO degree takes 8 years to complete after finishing high school (a college degree then 4 years of medical school), and is followed by a required residency program that takes 3-7 years depending on the specialty. When I did it, there were no restrictions on the number of hours we spent at work during our clinical years and residency, which meant that we spent vast amounts of time in the hospital. Weekends had virtually no meaning after the first 2 years. It is incredibly competitive to get in to medical school, so students need to have stellar grades and scores and have done a few extra things that show how super special they are just to be admitted. Residency is also competitive: some people complete their MD only to fail to get a residency. This is a huge hurdle to starting practice as a doctor and a colossal waste of time, money and talent.

Becoming a doctor in the US is an unnecessarily difficult process. 

The British system, followed by many other countries in the world, involves getting a Bachelors degree in medicine. This degree requires around 6 years after high school and leads to a degree as a physician and surgeon. It is possible to practice medicine after that, though I believe most people do a residency. After being qualified to be a physician they are called "doctor" though they do not have a doctorate degree. It is possible to do further academic or scientific work and gain a doctorate in medicine or science, but that is not common or required. 

A nurse practitioner in the US usually gets a four year Bachelors degree in nursing (occasionally 2 years if it is an accelerated program), spends a few years being a nurse (sometimes many years) and then does the 2-4+ year program to be an Advanced Practice RN. This can lead to a practice as a midwife, nurse anesthetist (like an anesthesiologist) or a family practice NP. Physicians assistants finish a regular undergraduate degree (Bachelor of arts or sciences), usually does some kind of medical or science related job for a few years, then applies to a program that takes 2 years to complete. Both NP's and PA's can do residency programs before going to work.

The AMA (American Medical Association) is involved in advocacy for physicians to various agencies, including federal and state governments. I just recently saw that their focus this year involves pushing back against "scope creep." By this they mean trying to make sure that nurse practitioners can't practice independently of doctors. There are 26 states (including Idaho, where I practice) that are considered "full practice" states for nurse practitioners. They can open their own clinics and can practice and prescribe independently. There are still some restrictions, including hospital work and (strangely) prescribing certain durable medical goods. The AMA continues to lobby enthusiastically against more states joining the "full practice" majority. 

I recently read an opinion piece by Robert Doherty in the Annals of Internal Medicine. Mr. Doherty worked for decades at the American College of Physicians in health policy and knows his stuff. His essay "In the These Uncaring Times, Will Physicians Lead Us Back to our Better Angels?" holds nothing back in encouraging doctors to be involved in the fight against discrimination against vulnerable and disadvantaged people, to work harder, even to be involved in civil disobedience. He feels the US is regressing, with corporate profits made more important than "the dignity, health and lives" of Americans. He mentions that we need do more to reduce harm to patients, rather than focus on issues such as "scope of practice." Working on scope of practice means pushing back against the power of nurse practitioners and is what the AMA is doing. 

The clinics where I work rely heavily on NP's and PA's to provide primary care to our patients. Without them, CHAS would simply be unable to function. In my position as an internal medicine consultant, I review many charts and observe many practice styles. There is huge variability in the  level of competence and completeness and also in the complexity of patients. I am in awe of some providers' care and other times things are clearly missed or done wrong. Sometimes I notice that I have missed something that another provider would have noticed. Care is obviously better when providers are able to ask each other questions, and when they have diverse backgrounds. It is good when MD's are part of a mix of providers. But it has been extremely difficult to recruit MD's for our clinics. Specialty care, such as gastroenterology, rheumatology, neurology, oncology and surgical subspecialties is almost always provided by MD's outside of our clinic. Our patients often wait in excess of 6 months to see these specialists, which is both dangerous and embarrassing. The cardiologists in our area use nurse practitioners to manage patients with heart disease and we are generally able to get these patients in much more quickly because at these offices there is adequate staffing. In our community there are simply not enough MD's.

So what should we do about the increasing numbers of NP's and PA's providing care for patients? I think we should welcome them, support them, mentor them and learn from them. We MD's should have a more humble perspective, realizing that the US system is different than most of the rest of the world and that our very arduous educational path for producing doctors has not created a system that is more effective and equitable than places that do it differently. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to make your own ultrasound gel (which is also sterile and edible and environmentally friendly) **UPDATED--NEW RECIPE**

I have been doing lots of bedside ultrasound lately and realized how useful it would be in areas far off the beaten track like Haiti, for instance. With a bedside ultrasound (mine fits in my pocket) I could diagnose heart disease, kidney and gallbladder problems, various cancers as well as lung and intestinal diseases. Then I realized that I would have to take a whole bunch of ultrasound gel with me which would mean that I would have to check luggage, which is a real pain when traveling light to a place where luggage disappears. I heard that you can use water, or spit, in a pinch, or even lotion, though oil based coupling media apparently break down the surface of the transducer. Or, of course, you can just use ultrasound gel. Ultrasound requires an aqueous interface between the transducer and the skin or else all you see is black. Ultrasound gel is a clear goo, looks like hair gel or aloe vera, and is made by several companies out of various combinations of propylene glycol, glyce...

Ivermectin for Covid--Does it work? We don't know.

  Lately there has been quite a heated controversy about whether to use ivermectin for Covid-19.  The FDA , a US federal agency responsible for providing unbiased information to protect people from harmful drugs, foods, even tobacco products, has said that there is not good evidence of ivermectin's safety and effectiveness in treating Covid 19, and that just about sums up what we truly know about ivermectin in the context of Covid. The CDC, Centers for Disease Control, a branch of the department of Health and Human Services, tasked with preventing and treating disease and injury, also recently warned  people not to use ivermectin to treat Covid outside of actual clinical trials. Certain highly qualified physicians, including ones who practice critical care medicine and manage many patients with severe Covid infections in the intensive care unit vocally support the use of ivermectin to treat Covid and have published dosing schedules and reviews of the literature supporting...

Actinic Keratoses and Carac (fluorouracil) cream: why is this so expensive?

First, a disclaimer: I don't know why Carac (0.5% flourouracil cream) is so expensive. I will speculate, though, at the very end of this blog. Sun and the skin: what happens If a person reaches a certain age, has very little pigment in her skin, and has spent lots of time in the sun, bad stuff happens. The ultraviolet radiation of the sun does all kinds of great things: it makes us happy, causes us to synthesize vitamin D which strengthens our bones and it gives us this healthy glow until we get old and wrinkled and leathery. And even that can be charming. The skin cells put up with this remarkably well for a long time, partly aided by melanin pigment which absorbs the radiation, which is why we tan and freckle, if we are fair skinned. Eventually, though, we absorb enough radiation that it injures the skin and produces cells which multiply oddly. It also damages the skin's elasticity which creates wrinkles. The cells which reproduce in odd ways peel, creating dry skin or...