Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted September 4, 2020 Moderator Share Posted September 4, 2020 AAEM, ACEP, and every other organization has jumped on the bandwagon against having residencies. Hope AAPA and SEMPA come out with another good rebuttal. https://www.aaemrsa.org/UserFiles/file/AllEMorgjointstatementrepostgradtrainingofNPandPAs.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFatMan Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 (edited) The way I read it was that they are more opposed to the name 'residency' or 'fellowship' being used for non-physicians than the actual training - maybe I'm wrong. And don't SEMPA and ACEP work closely together? EDIT: Yep, I read it wrong. Sounds like they are okay with it, as long as they are in charge of it. Hmmm. Edited September 4, 2020 by TheFatMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted September 4, 2020 Author Moderator Share Posted September 4, 2020 2 hours ago, TheFatMan said: The way I read it was that they are more opposed to the name 'residency' or 'fellowship' being used for non-physicians than the actual training - maybe I'm wrong. And don't SEMPA and ACEP work closely together? EDIT: Yep, I read it wrong. Sounds like they are okay with it, as long as they are in charge of it. Hmmm. If you go back and look at AAEM statements, they believe that EVERY emergency patient should be presented to a BC-EM physician. No APPs seeing patient alone, no FM working in EDs, no moonlighting residents. They have gone so far as to say that certain ACEP presidents, who have been in EM for decades, isn’t true EM physician and therefore shouldn’t even be in ACEP. They repeatedly say there are enough EM physicians today, but only 30% of ED visits are attended by a EM physicians. Never do they offer any solutions to meet this gap. Yet also they are against opening any new residencies and want several closed. When solutions are proposed (expanded training and membership to non-EM BC/BE physicians, increase training and scope of APPs, etc) they scream that people will die. they exist for one reason, and one reason only, to protect the financial interests of EM physicians. ACEP has always been more pragmatic in their approach, but it seems AAEM is dragging everyone in on this. https://www.aaem.org/resources/statements/position/aaem-takes-a-stand-against-moonlighting-residents https://www.aaem.org/current-news/aaem-takes-a-stand-on-the-use-of-apps-in-ed https://www.aaem.org/resources/statements/position/em-training-programs-for--pas-and-nps https://www.aaem.org/resources/publications/common-sense/issues/from-the-editors-desk/what-is-acep-thinking https://epmonthly.com/article/expanding-legitimacy-for-non-certified-docs-a-step-in-the-wrong-direction/ 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFatMan Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 @LT_Oneal_PAC Oh man. Thanks for expanding on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cideous Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 Ouch, their statement was a bit harsh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PACali Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 This is nothing but a political statement. It provide nothing valuable to the real life on ground ED providers. However, I do hope SEMPA and AAPA respond to it, just to make a point that we are trained and qualify to provide patient care within our scope. As of now, they are not getting rid of us in the ED or any other settings. Physicians who work in the in trenches love to work with us. It is either working with us or see all the pt by themselves. What we need to do is really advertise our value. We shouldn't be afraid to come up with our "own system". They don't want us to call "residency" or "fellowship" I think they are being too sensitive and insecure ( I am talking about the organizations). Either way, call it a different name, but postgraduate training for PA/NP is here to stay. The physician in the trenches do not give a **** what we call our postgraduate training lol. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted September 4, 2020 Author Moderator Share Posted September 4, 2020 It’s crap like this that just makes me want to push back harder. Every time they try to take something or disparage us, I’m just thinking, okay, I’ll give you a war. could’ve just supported us and worked alongside us, treated us with respect, like colleagues, helped us compete with NPs (a problem we share), but noooo....has to do it the hard way for everyone. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAdamsPAC Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said: It’s crap like this that just makes me want to push back harder. Every time they try to take something or disparage us, I’m just thinking, okay, I’ll give you a war. could’ve just supported us and worked alongside us, treated us with respect, like colleagues, helped us compete with NPs (a problem we share), but noooo....has to do it the hard way for everyone. As I've said before our profession has a history of passivity when challenged. "We" need to become known as The Honey Badger of healthcare when attacked or threatened, the Gadsden Flag says it all. Edited September 4, 2020 by CAdamsPAC 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted September 4, 2020 Author Moderator Share Posted September 4, 2020 7 minutes ago, CAdamsPAC said: As I've said before our profession has a history of passivity when challenged. "We" need to become known as The Honey Badger of healthcare when attacked or threatened, the Gadsden Flag says it all. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpackelly Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 If they arbitrarily restrict the terms “residency” or “fellowship” without going through the appropriate state legislative channels, it is meaningless and unenforceable. Those terms, unlike “doctor”, are not Officially protected in any state. Their statement is anti-competitive and could be reviewed by the FTC; this has actually happened with other initiatives issued by professional organizations who have been warned against restraint of trade issues. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFatMan Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 I see now that ACEP is having Deepak Chopra as their keynote speaker at ACEP 20 - so at least now I know their poor judgement doesn't just involve PAs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiovolffemtp Posted September 5, 2020 Share Posted September 5, 2020 SEMPA is an affiliate organization of ACEP. Unfortunately that doesn't mean that that ACEP advocates for PA's in EM. I hope SEMPA issues a very strong response very quickly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediMike Posted September 5, 2020 Share Posted September 5, 2020 Hopefully a response with some variation of the words "childish", "ridiculous", "disingenuous"...I'm sure there are more we can add to the list... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuisG Posted September 5, 2020 Share Posted September 5, 2020 Hi guys, I just read this joint statement (find link below) regarding post-graduate training of PAs, but I found it confusing since I am not yet a PA myself. I figured I would post it here as I'm curious to hear your opinions on the matter. I found the statement to be too condensed for an outsider to understand its scope and purpose. https://www.aaem.org/UserFiles/file/AllEMorgjointstatementrepostgradtrainingofNPandPAs.pdf Thank you guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vb315 Posted September 5, 2020 Share Posted September 5, 2020 ' The terms “resident,” “residency,” “fellow,” and “fellowship” in a medical setting must be limited to postgraduate clinical training of medical school physician graduates within GME training programs.' The above is from the joint statement. Does this apply to other such non-physician residents and fellows (dentists, optometrists, pharmacists, etc.) who are pursuing clinical post-graduate training? Or just the ones that they're afraid might take the jobs they're "entitled" to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggySRNA Posted September 5, 2020 Share Posted September 5, 2020 1 hour ago, vb315 said: ' The terms “resident,” “residency,” “fellow,” and “fellowship” in a medical setting must be limited to postgraduate clinical training of medical school physician graduates within GME training programs.' The above is from the joint statement. Does this apply to other such non-physician residents and fellows (dentists, optometrists, pharmacists, etc.) who are pursuing clinical post-graduate training? Or just the ones that they're afraid might take the jobs they're "entitled" to? The latter. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iconic Posted September 5, 2020 Share Posted September 5, 2020 They have too much time on their hands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted September 5, 2020 Author Moderator Share Posted September 5, 2020 Like alphabet soup, Dr. Moreno? How many times have we heard them complain about this? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediMike Posted September 5, 2020 Share Posted September 5, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sk732 Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Saw this on Twitter yesterday...still shaking my head and I'm Canadian, but also a member of SEMPA and therefore kinda sorta a member of ACEP by virtue. Makes me reconsider whether I should keep paying them money and go back to CAEP (SEMPA is cheaper). On a similar note, got to deal with a national medical magazine here picking up an article written by a "health law" specialist lawyer that stinks of rhetoric from the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario and slags down PA's. All the phuquewits are coming out of the woodwork this week it seems. SK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfw6er Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 15 hours ago, sk732 said: Saw this on Twitter yesterday...still shaking my head and I'm Canadian, but also a member of SEMPA and therefore kinda sorta a member of ACEP by virtue. Makes me reconsider whether I should keep paying them money and go back to CAEP (SEMPA is cheaper). On a similar note, got to deal with a national medical magazine here picking up an article written by a "health law" specialist lawyer that stinks of rhetoric from the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario and slags down PA's. All the phuquewits are coming out of the woodwork this week it seems. SK Care to share the article? I'm kind of curious about how the PA profession is faring in other countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sk732 Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 https://www.canadianhealthcarenetwork.ca/physicians/discussions/doctors-should-not-be-treating-pas-as-substitutes-60022?utm_source=EmailMarketing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Physician_Newsletter&oly_enc_id=4125D3764701J7Y or: https://www.ttlhealthlaw.com/health-law-blog/details/health-law-blog/2020/08/26/doctors-should-not-be-treating-physician-assistants-as-substitutes Thing is, Ontario has ZERO regulation for PA's - they work under delegation and medical directives. I'm regulated in Manitoba by the Regulated Health Professions Act and The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba. However, the article is poorly researched, has scope of practice all out to lunch and really does smell of deliberate disinformation. SK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medic25 Posted September 8, 2020 Share Posted September 8, 2020 SEMPA is an affiliate organization of ACEP. Unfortunately that doesn't mean that that ACEP advocates for PA's in EM. I hope SEMPA issues a very strong response very quickly.To clarify, SEMPA is an independent organization and is in no way an affiliate organization of ACEP. Once professional societies reach a big enough size, many of them contract with a professional management company to run things like daily operations, conference planning, etc. SEMPA is one of several medical organizations that contract with ACEP’s management services to provide these services. The two organizations have traditionally had a good working relationship, but they are two completely independent entities.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BirdDogPA Posted September 11, 2020 Share Posted September 11, 2020 Good for SEMPA in putting out a strong statement https://www.sempa.org/professional-development/response-to-joint-statement/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted September 11, 2020 Author Moderator Share Posted September 11, 2020 AAPA rebuttal was brief and underwhelming. https://www.aapa.org/news-central/2020/09/aapa-response-to-em-physician-groups-joint-statement-regarding-post-graduate-training-for-nurse-practitioners-and-physician-assistants/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.