PA to MD alternative

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

lecom is as short as is allowed to maintain accreditation as a u.s. med school. I talked to their director about this.

a DO and a DHSc are fundamentally different in that the DO is clinical and full time and a DHSc is academic and part time. different degrees for different purposes. (and yes, I am in a DHSc program because I need to work and can't afford the million dollar opportunity cost to go to medschool at this point in my life. wish I could).

True, med school must be a minimum of three years according to WHO, but they could still let the MCAT thing go.

[Walkoffshot]

Besides, when you hear people telling Pre pas that they need to work for 6 months as a CNA to get hce to be a good candidate for PA school, then using experience as an argument against RN-NPs falls flat. They will win that argument every time. The best approach for PAs are their tough curriculum in PA school, not their previous hce.

 

Agree 100%.

 

Think about it. NPs tout their experience in nursing as a reason behind the lower levels of oversight by MDs. Why not PAs who have a) previous experience in healthcare either as nurses, paramedics, so forth or b) elected to do a residency have as little oversight as NPs, especially with the push toward DNP?

 

Thought about it.. no dice. How can you even bring up the idea of supervision being inversely proportional to HCE in the PA world... unless you of course are one of those EMTs, nurses or whichever you prefer to tag a cert. as being above the rest. It seems as though this is an idea of wanting to diverge from the PA profession.. a PA is a PA is a PA... regardless of what background you have. Sure you may be able to add a few initials on your name tag beside the PA-C but At the end of the day, the PA-C is what your using to practice medicine, right? I would also highly doubt that there could be any regulation on past hce and amount of supervision. If your extra credentials get you the job over someone else.. then I will shake your hand and give you congrats. But I do not think it will fly if you get less supervision because of your experience.

 

Think about it like this. The argument you proposed is that NP's get less supervision because of there nursing experience. So let's say PA's fight it, and get the same benefit. What happens to the PA's without that EMT cert? Well... they get more supervision than their fellow PA. Do you think this would be good for the profession? Or open a whole new can of worms and watch the profession implode from the inside out? Bottom line.. I do not think that is how the NP profession gains their regulations on supervision... but I have been wrong before.

[Walkoffshot]

Besides, when you hear people telling Pre pas that they need to work for 6 months as a CNA to get hce to be a good candidate for PA school, then using experience as an argument against RN-NPs falls flat. They will win that argument every time. The best approach for PAs are their tough curriculum in PA school, not their previous hce.

 

Agree 100%.

 

Think about it. NPs tout their experience in nursing as a reason behind the lower levels of oversight by MDs. Why not PAs who have a) previous experience in healthcare either as nurses, paramedics, so forth or b) elected to do a residency have as little oversight as NPs, especially with the push toward DNP?

 

Thought about it.. no dice. How can you even bring up the idea of supervision being inversely proportional to HCE in the PA world... unless you of course are one of those EMTs, nurses or whichever you prefer to tag a cert. as being above the rest. It seems as though this is an idea of wanting to diverge from the PA profession.. a PA is a PA is a PA... regardless of what background you have. Sure you may be able to add a few initials on your name tag beside the PA-C but At the end of the day, the PA-C is what your using to practice medicine, right? I would also highly doubt that there could be any regulation on past hce and amount of supervision. If your extra credentials get you the job over someone else.. then I will shake your hand and give you congrats. But I do not think it will fly if you get less supervision because of your experience.

 

Think about it like this. The argument you proposed is that NP's get less supervision because of there nursing experience. So let's say PA's fight it, and get the same benefit. What happens to the PA's without that EMT cert? Well... they get more supervision than their fellow PA. Do you think this would be good for the profession? Or open a whole new can of worms and watch the profession implode from the inside out? Bottom line.. I do not think that is how the NP profession gains their regulations on supervision... but I have been wrong before.

[Veritas86]

Good point, honestly.

 

I guess my thought process is why not allow PAs the same level of limited autonomy that NPs have? And how would it be achieved?

 

First thing off the top of my head is requiring a residency, but that gets in to taking a major strength of PAs away, their ability to adapt. Also gets into the why not just go to med school area. So no dice on that one.

 

I dunno. Just bench racing, really. The PA system, as I've said before, isn't broken. Just wondering how it could be better for everyone from doc to patient. And thinking about the large amount of PAs who come from EMS backgrounds and getting limited reward for it.

[Veritas86]

Good point, honestly.

 

I guess my thought process is why not allow PAs the same level of limited autonomy that NPs have? And how would it be achieved?

 

First thing off the top of my head is requiring a residency, but that gets in to taking a major strength of PAs away, their ability to adapt. Also gets into the why not just go to med school area. So no dice on that one.

 

I dunno. Just bench racing, really. The PA system, as I've said before, isn't broken. Just wondering how it could be better for everyone from doc to patient. And thinking about the large amount of PAs who come from EMS backgrounds and getting limited reward for it.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

Agree 100%.

 

 

 

Thought about it.. no dice. How can you even bring up the idea of supervision being inversely proportional to HCE in the PA world... unless you of course are one of those EMTs, nurses or whichever you prefer to tag a cert. as being above the rest. It seems as though this is an idea of wanting to diverge from the PA profession.. a PA is a PA is a PA... regardless of what background you have. Sure you may be able to add a few initials on your name tag beside the PA-C but At the end of the day, the PA-C is what your using to practice medicine, right? I would also highly doubt that there could be any regulation on past hce and amount of supervision. If your extra credentials get you the job over someone else.. then I will shake your hand and give you congrats. But I do not think it will fly if you get less supervision because of your experience.

 

Think about it like this. The argument you proposed is that NP's get less supervision because of there nursing experience. So let's say PA's fight it, and get the same benefit. What happens to the PA's without that EMT cert? Well... they get more supervision than their fellow PA. Do you think this would be good for the profession? Or open a whole new can of worms and watch the profession implode from the inside out? Bottom line.. I do not think that is how the NP profession gains their regulations on supervision... but I have been wrong before.

 

NP don't get around the supervision because of experience (because many of then don't have it) they get around it by answering to the nursing board and not the medical board.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

Agree 100%.

 

 

 

Thought about it.. no dice. How can you even bring up the idea of supervision being inversely proportional to HCE in the PA world... unless you of course are one of those EMTs, nurses or whichever you prefer to tag a cert. as being above the rest. It seems as though this is an idea of wanting to diverge from the PA profession.. a PA is a PA is a PA... regardless of what background you have. Sure you may be able to add a few initials on your name tag beside the PA-C but At the end of the day, the PA-C is what your using to practice medicine, right? I would also highly doubt that there could be any regulation on past hce and amount of supervision. If your extra credentials get you the job over someone else.. then I will shake your hand and give you congrats. But I do not think it will fly if you get less supervision because of your experience.

 

Think about it like this. The argument you proposed is that NP's get less supervision because of there nursing experience. So let's say PA's fight it, and get the same benefit. What happens to the PA's without that EMT cert? Well... they get more supervision than their fellow PA. Do you think this would be good for the profession? Or open a whole new can of worms and watch the profession implode from the inside out? Bottom line.. I do not think that is how the NP profession gains their regulations on supervision... but I have been wrong before.

 

NP don't get around the supervision because of experience (because many of then don't have it) they get around it by answering to the nursing board and not the medical board.

[EMEDPA]

. IF PAs had a choice, would it be better to be supervised by the BON or BOM?

An independent pa medical board....

[EMEDPA]

. IF PAs had a choice, would it be better to be supervised by the BON or BOM?

An independent pa medical board....

[Guest hubbardtim48]

I think it is a valid fight because of my personal background as a registered respiratory therapist. I have done a lot in my past 5 years experience from advanced ventilation (APRV/VDR/Jet etc.) to education (asthma, COPD, pneumonia, smoking cessation, etc). I am not going into all the details, but I have worked in a level 1 trauma center, level III nicu and one of the biggest burn centers in the US. I have taken care of CABG/AAA to 24 weekers and everything in between. So my experience in the emergency department to every ICU you can name to even surgery (yes I sit through caths, IR, CABG etc if they are on unconventional ventilation that the MD or DO or CRNA or AA can't run). So, when I apply to a job (ICU, ED, trauma, etc) I will be able to run any type of vent (conventional/unconventional/invasive/non-invasive, intubate, read ABGS, run a code, etc because I have done it and seen it hundreds of times. So, yes past HCE matters in getting a job because I will not have to be trained in those areas (where most docs can't even run a vent anyways).

[Guest hubbardtim48]

I think it is a valid fight because of my personal background as a registered respiratory therapist. I have done a lot in my past 5 years experience from advanced ventilation (APRV/VDR/Jet etc.) to education (asthma, COPD, pneumonia, smoking cessation, etc). I am not going into all the details, but I have worked in a level 1 trauma center, level III nicu and one of the biggest burn centers in the US. I have taken care of CABG/AAA to 24 weekers and everything in between. So my experience in the emergency department to every ICU you can name to even surgery (yes I sit through caths, IR, CABG etc if they are on unconventional ventilation that the MD or DO or CRNA or AA can't run). So, when I apply to a job (ICU, ED, trauma, etc) I will be able to run any type of vent (conventional/unconventional/invasive/non-invasive, intubate, read ABGS, run a code, etc because I have done it and seen it hundreds of times. So, yes past HCE matters in getting a job because I will not have to be trained in those areas (where most docs can't even run a vent anyways).

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

Sure seems like you went into the details there Hubbard. You should add humility to your special skills when you write your resume.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

Sure seems like you went into the details there Hubbard. You should add humility to your special skills when you write your resume.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

^which makes way more sense than answering to either. obviously, being under BON isnt the answer, and sounds absurd... but having your own board doesnt sound absurd when you look at it after considering trying to merge into BON. thats why the name change issue seems strange to me. why change the name if it does nothing for your status... it seems to be window dressing, and nothing more. however, develop your own boards and youll have to experience a name change as a natural course of events. changing the name to phsyician associate doesnt excite me to become one. gaining status on par with NP's does. thats just me.

 

It's a nice thought, but I don't think an independent pa board would ever happen. I mean, we can't have a board for medicine and then, what, a board for physician assisting. Def can't have two medical boards.

 

It does present a good idea though. Why not have a board that has equal number of members from each profession that practices under it? So that way you could have so many DOs, MDs, and PAs running the show. And they have to be none business owners to prevent conflict of interest. It's actually something you could do in reality, I think, and not just have a dream.

 

The name change is because the cart is before the horse already. We arent assistants and a name change is long over due. Also, it may not change our status, but it's a mind game. I know many doctors who know little about physician assistant (including my own dad) and I know they would not enter a collaborative agreement with one or allow them much in the way of autonomy. Why would they let an "assistant" have such? Ah, but if it was an associate, someone who they could tell just by the name, had the same basic training as them just not quite as much, they would be more inclined to do all the above. This is doubly true for legislation when Congressmen know little about you other than your name.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

^which makes way more sense than answering to either. obviously, being under BON isnt the answer, and sounds absurd... but having your own board doesnt sound absurd when you look at it after considering trying to merge into BON. thats why the name change issue seems strange to me. why change the name if it does nothing for your status... it seems to be window dressing, and nothing more. however, develop your own boards and youll have to experience a name change as a natural course of events. changing the name to phsyician associate doesnt excite me to become one. gaining status on par with NP's does. thats just me.

 

It's a nice thought, but I don't think an independent pa board would ever happen. I mean, we can't have a board for medicine and then, what, a board for physician assisting. Def can't have two medical boards.

 

It does present a good idea though. Why not have a board that has equal number of members from each profession that practices under it? So that way you could have so many DOs, MDs, and PAs running the show. And they have to be none business owners to prevent conflict of interest. It's actually something you could do in reality, I think, and not just have a dream.

 

The name change is because the cart is before the horse already. We arent assistants and a name change is long over due. Also, it may not change our status, but it's a mind game. I know many doctors who know little about physician assistant (including my own dad) and I know they would not enter a collaborative agreement with one or allow them much in the way of autonomy. Why would they let an "assistant" have such? Ah, but if it was an associate, someone who they could tell just by the name, had the same basic training as them just not quite as much, they would be more inclined to do all the above. This is doubly true for legislation when Congressmen know little about you other than your name.

[jdtpac]

^I have been reading all of these posts and find them to be quite interesting, especially the comments by the pre-PA and students. It's nice to see you are getting involved so early in your career. Good for you! I would like to make other comments but I don't have the time right now, it is Saturday and time to address my" Honey do list". I do want to leave you with this website to review, there is a state where physician assistants have their own licensing board and have for some time. Also, with the current changes in the statutes of Ohio there is very little difference between a PA and NP scope of practice.

 

http://www.idph.state.ia.us/licensure/board_home.asp?board=pa

 

I would like to make some other comments about PA versus NP practice and supervision later on today if I can done with my chores. Have great day.

[jdtpac]

^I have been reading all of these posts and find them to be quite interesting, especially the comments by the pre-PA and students. It's nice to see you are getting involved so early in your career. Good for you! I would like to make other comments but I don't have the time right now, it is Saturday and time to address my" Honey do list". I do want to leave you with this website to review, there is a state where physician assistants have their own licensing board and have for some time. Also, with the current changes in the statutes of Ohio there is very little difference between a PA and NP scope of practice.

 

http://www.idph.state.ia.us/licensure/board_home.asp?board=pa

 

I would like to make some other comments about PA versus NP practice and supervision later on today if I can done with my chores. Have great day.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

Well I'll be a monkey's uncle. A pa board does exist. Thanks. This will be an interesting read this afternoon.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

Well I'll be a monkey's uncle. A pa board does exist. Thanks. This will be an interesting read this afternoon.

[Walkoffshot]

So, yes past HCE matters in getting a job because I will not have to be trained in those areas (where most docs can't even run a vent anyways).

 

Exactly. Your prior experience will land you the job assuming there isn't anyone more qualified, but regarding the topic of the post, it will not/should not decrease the amount of supervision you get from your SP. Hiring is not regulated in the same degree that practicing medicine is. They are two different beasts.

[Walkoffshot]

So, yes past HCE matters in getting a job because I will not have to be trained in those areas (where most docs can't even run a vent anyways).

 

Exactly. Your prior experience will land you the job assuming there isn't anyone more qualified, but regarding the topic of the post, it will not/should not decrease the amount of supervision you get from your SP. Hiring is not regulated in the same degree that practicing medicine is. They are two different beasts.

[EMEDPA]

I believe a few states already have pa medical boards.

[EMEDPA]

I believe a few states already have pa medical boards.

[acozadd]

I think it is a valid fight because of my personal background as a registered respiratory therapist. I have done a lot in my past 5 years experience from advanced ventilation (APRV/VDR/Jet etc.) to education (asthma, COPD, pneumonia, smoking cessation, etc). I am not going into all the details, but I have worked in a level 1 trauma center, level III nicu and one of the biggest burn centers in the US. I have taken care of CABG/AAA to 24 weekers and everything in between. So my experience in the emergency department to every ICU you can name to even surgery (yes I sit through caths, IR, CABG etc if they are on unconventional ventilation that the MD or DO or CRNA or AA can't run). So, when I apply to a job (ICU, ED, trauma, etc) I will be able to run any type of vent (conventional/unconventional/invasive/non-invasive, intubate, read ABGS, run a code, etc because I have done it and seen it hundreds of times. So, yes past HCE matters in getting a job because I will not have to be trained in those areas (where most docs can't even run a vent anyways).

 

Or you may run into instances where you will not be allowed to use these skills you have as the doctors, who supervise you, are not comfortable performing these same skills. I know EMED has mentioned this as an issue he has run into in the ED before. Get back to us when you actually graduate/get a job and let us know if your past experience mattered or not.

 

The basis of the argument in the OP implies that those with certain HCE will be allow one to be better prepared for ALL specialties regardless of whether or not they had ANY exposure to it and therefore require less supervision... my response to that is LOL. Even being a PA in some fields will have little to no translation of skill into another, but we are to make the argument that these non-clinician positions will be adequate to allow for less supevision?

[acozadd]

I think it is a valid fight because of my personal background as a registered respiratory therapist. I have done a lot in my past 5 years experience from advanced ventilation (APRV/VDR/Jet etc.) to education (asthma, COPD, pneumonia, smoking cessation, etc). I am not going into all the details, but I have worked in a level 1 trauma center, level III nicu and one of the biggest burn centers in the US. I have taken care of CABG/AAA to 24 weekers and everything in between. So my experience in the emergency department to every ICU you can name to even surgery (yes I sit through caths, IR, CABG etc if they are on unconventional ventilation that the MD or DO or CRNA or AA can't run). So, when I apply to a job (ICU, ED, trauma, etc) I will be able to run any type of vent (conventional/unconventional/invasive/non-invasive, intubate, read ABGS, run a code, etc because I have done it and seen it hundreds of times. So, yes past HCE matters in getting a job because I will not have to be trained in those areas (where most docs can't even run a vent anyways).

 

Or you may run into instances where you will not be allowed to use these skills you have as the doctors, who supervise you, are not comfortable performing these same skills. I know EMED has mentioned this as an issue he has run into in the ED before. Get back to us when you actually graduate/get a job and let us know if your past experience mattered or not.

 

The basis of the argument in the OP implies that those with certain HCE will be allow one to be better prepared for ALL specialties regardless of whether or not they had ANY exposure to it and therefore require less supervision... my response to that is LOL. Even being a PA in some fields will have little to no translation of skill into another, but we are to make the argument that these non-clinician positions will be adequate to allow for less supevision?