Jump to content

What Makes A State "PA Friendly"?


Recommended Posts

We often hear this on the forum- which states are more PA friendly than others, progressive vs restrictive.

 

What are the factors that make a state PA friendly?

 

 

Ease of licensure/renewal requirements

Prescriptive authority/limitations

Supervisory ratio and restrictions

Scope of practice

cosignature requirements

Practice ownership

Admitting privileges (is this a state issue?)

 

 

I have no idea the current state of things like home care, workers comp, hospice, etc.

 

 

What else are you dealing with in your practices?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this counts, but I have been in California and Arizona. Arizona is much more "PA Friendly" to me because doctors AND pts know what PAs are and how they can be utilized. In California I was sick and tired of explaining what a PA was and how they differed from Medical Assistants (or how we are not "like a nurse").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

WA allows pa's to sign ANYTHING delegated them by their sponsoring physicians, no chart reiew requirement, pa's an run er's solo, sch 2-5 dea. easy to get license quickly

CA: medical board farly pa friendly. pa's encouraged to work rural/underserved, etc. reasonable scope of practrice laws, etc

OR massive bureacracy takes > 6 mo to get license, background check wants to know what your grandparents liked on their cereal, etc

 

in WA it's all about what a pa can do and is entitled to do.

in OR it's about you can't do anything unless we bless it. the OR board took > 1 yr to enact rules for pa's to prescribe sch 2 even after the law was passed allowing it. you need every little thing spelled out in your practice desciption(may use slit lamp, may suture lacs, may do I+D's, etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I agree with Vulgatus - I'd love to see a list of PA vs NP friendly states (or those that accept both about equally) but have a difficult time finding this data.

 

On a side note that is slightly related: I did read in http://nurse-practitioners-and-physician-assistants.advanceweb.com/News/Front-Center/Despite-Rallies-and-FTC-Support-Florida-NP-Legislation-Stalls.aspx

 

that all states except FL/AL allow NPs to prescribe controlled substances,

and all states except FL/KY allow PAs to prescribe controlled substances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WA allows pa's to sign ANYTHING delegated them by their sponsoring physicians, no chart reiew requirement, pa's an run er's solo, sch 2-5 dea. easy to get license quickly

CA: medical board farly pa friendly. pa's encouraged to work rural/underserved, etc. reasonable scope of practrice laws, etc

OR massive bureacracy takes > 6 mo to get license, background check wants to know what your grandparents liked on their cereal, etc

 

in WA it's all about what a pa can do and is entitled to do.

in OR it's about you can't do anything unless we bless it. the OR board took > 1 yr to enact rules for pa's to prescribe sch 2 even after the law was passed allowing it. you need every little thing spelled out in your practice desciption(may use slit lamp, may suture lacs, may do I+D's, etc)

 

Question about Washington. So you can write sched 2 meds without a M.D. Cosigning a chart? I thought California was liberal especially in rural areas but from the description that you gave about Wa it seems a lot more PA friendly.

What is the PA to M.D. Ratio is WA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Vulgatus - I'd love to see a list of PA vs NP friendly states (or those that accept both about equally) but have a difficult time finding this data.

 

On a side note that is slightly related: I did read in http://nurse-practitioners-and-physician-assistants.advanceweb.com/News/Front-Center/Despite-Rallies-and-FTC-Support-Florida-NP-Legislation-Stalls.aspx

 

that all states except FL/AL allow NPs to prescribe controlled substances,

and all states except FL/KY allow PAs to prescribe controlled substances.

 

When I worked in Florida, there were many docs who were from other countries or came there to retire and work, mostly in Family Practice. There also seemed to be a higher ratio of those who graduated from foreign medical schools. As a group, these docs were protective of their turf. I often felt some resistance from docs who did not have a busy practice. I suspect at least a part of the reason is to limit competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yup. no prob with sch 2 as long as you have your own dea.

I think it's 4:1 unless a rural setting then more. don't know for sure.

I hadn't lookeds at the AAPA regs page in a while so I just checked it to remind myself.

Current supervisory ratio is 3:1.

No physician shall serve as primary supervisor or sponsor for more than 3 licensees without authorization by the

commission.

It does have this interesting stuff to say about remote sites:

Licensee may be utilized in remote site (defined as a setting physically separate from the supervising physician’s primary

place for meeting patients or a setting where a supervisor is present less than 25 % of the PA’s practice time). Commission

or its designee may grant approval if there is demonstrated need; adequate provision exists for immediate communication;

physician spends at least 10 % of PA practice time at the site. Commission may consider modifications to on-site

requirements on an individual basis providing sponsoring physician demonstrates that adequate supervision is being

maintained by alternate method.

And of course:

PA and supervising physician shall ensure that adequate supervision and review of the work of the PA are provided. PA

and supervising physician shall ensure that all patient care measures are documented in written form by PA. Every written

entry shall be reviewed and countersigned by supervising physician within 2 working days unless a different time period is

authorized by commission. (No chart co-signature requirement for certified PAs.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the reason I started this thread is that I think we can come up with some sort of "scoring system" for PA friendliness. e.g.

 

Prescriptive authority

Full to sched II, no state formulary 3 pts

Sched III, no state formulary 2 pts

No narcs 1 pt

 

etc.....

 

using the parameters listed in the AAPAs regulations

 

Scope

Prescriptive Authority

Supervisory Requirements/Ratio

Co Signature

Initial Application for license

Additional licensure requirements/maintenance/renewal, fees

New grad temp permit

Board notification

CME

Add'tl education requirements- eg infectious, pharm

Title/practice protection

Identification

SP Liability

BOM representation

PA Discipline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadn't lookeds at the AAPA regs page in a while so I just checked it to remind myself.

Current supervisory ratio is 3:1.

No physician shall serve as primary supervisor or sponsor for more than 3 licensees without authorization by the

commission.

It does have this interesting stuff to say about remote sites:

Licensee may be utilized in remote site (defined as a setting physically separate from the supervising physician’s primary

place for meeting patients or a setting where a supervisor is present less than 25 % of the PA’s practice time). Commission

or its designee may grant approval if there is demonstrated need; adequate provision exists for immediate communication;

physician spends at least 10 % of PA practice time at the site. Commission may consider modifications to on-site

requirements on an individual basis providing sponsoring physician demonstrates that adequate supervision is being

maintained by alternate method.

And of course:

PA and supervising physician shall ensure that adequate supervision and review of the work of the PA are provided. PA

and supervising physician shall ensure that all patient care measures are documented in written form by PA. Every written

entry shall be reviewed and countersigned by supervising physician within 2 working days unless a different time period is

authorized by commission. (No chart co-signature requirement for certified PAs.)

 

Anderson,

That sounds really dated. Is that in the AAPA policy manual? If so then it needs to be updated with more broad terms to direct the states looking to expand PA laws and regulations. I know in california it's 4:1 and charts must be signed in 30 days unless a sched 2 med was written during the visit then it's 7 working days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anderson,

That sounds really dated. Is that in the AAPA policy manual? If so then it needs to be updated with more broad terms to direct the states looking to expand PA laws and regulations. I know in california it's 4:1 and charts must be signed in 30 days unless a sched 2 med was written during the visit then it's 7 working days.

 

This is current.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Physician Assistant Forum! This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More