PANRE-LA

[rev ronin]

13 hours ago, deltawave said:

Gosh, what a complicated and archaic idea. To recert in the first place is asinine. Now to make it last a whole year. Thumbs down. 
hopefully in 8 more years they can do away with this process and settle for CME. That is unless we are granted FPA, then I can see a somewhat more reasonable reason for repetitive board certification exams. Even then-  

Here's how the argument goes:

NPs have independent practice.
NPs do 500 hours of shadowing and never recertify.
PAs do 1500+ hours of supervised clinical practice (no shadowing and calling it good) and recertify every 10 years.
Therefore, PAs should have independent* practice.

* As a perpetual disclaimer, I mean administrative independence. I refer to specialists and allied health all the time, because medicine is a team sport. I don't want to be a lone ranger; I want to care for my patients without someone else getting paid for providing no value: If my patients need a doc, I refer and the consultant sees the patient themselves.

So yes, I'll do PANRE-LA.

[sas5814]

The independence argument has very little to do with reality and everything to do with politics and money. If we had the numbers, money, and most important, the strength of will the NPs have we wouldn't be having this discussion.....again.

Sadly AAPA seems to be going backwards. I am happily unplugged from all that now but I haven't seen anything about autonomy or independence from AAPA. I suspect states (most of them) are doing something about it and that is where the real work gets done. I haven't heard much from the states in the last year or so either but, as stated, I'm not paying much attention anymore. I have 3 years to retire. The young PAs are the ones who have to plot their own future.

[deltawave]

13 hours ago, rev ronin said:

Here's how the argument goes:

NPs have independent practice.
NPs do 500 hours of shadowing and never recertify.
PAs do 1500+ hours of supervised clinical practice (no shadowing and calling it good) and recertify every 10 years.
Therefore, PAs should have independent* practice.

* As a perpetual disclaimer, I mean administrative independence. I refer to specialists and allied health all the time, because medicine is a team sport. I don't want to be a lone ranger; I want to care for my patients without someone else getting paid for providing no value: If my patients need a doc, I refer and the consultant sees the patient themselves.

So yes, I'll do PANRE-LA.

No, the argument is valid. The PANRE-LA is still a burden to administrative freedom. 
There in no need to recertify or retest at all, so long as we are under such a close relationship with a physician.  I do realize many have no close actual or personal relationship with an SP, but on paper you do. Thus, legitimacy and autonomy are degraded. As is the cash flow. 

[rev ronin]

1 hour ago, deltawave said:

No, the argument is valid. The PANRE-LA is still a burden to administrative freedom. 
There in no need to recertify or retest at all, so long as we are under such a close relationship with a physician.  I do realize many have no close actual or personal relationship with an SP, but on paper you do. Thus, legitimacy and autonomy are degraded. As is the cash flow. 

I don't follow at all.

Yes, any recertification is a cash cow for NCCPA. BUT, that doesn't necessarily follow that all recertification is a net negative. If NCCPA would get off their butts and spend more time arguing that PA-C makes PAs better than NPs, rather than trying to legislatively defeat efforts to allow PAs to practice without the -C, they would clearly be a net positive to the profession, seeing as how they have MORE MONEY than the AAPA.

The paper SP is a bigger threat to patient safety than the PANRE-LA. Anything that takes an SP out risks the continuity of care of any patients the "supervised" PA cares for. I really don't want to consider what that would look like for my patients, since I take the "problem" cases no one else will.

[charlottew]

Getting back to the original topic, I work strictly inpatient in critical care, so my experience with primary care and pediatric presentations is very limited!

That said, I was able to get through the questions without too much difficulty. Being able to check an online reference (there is definitely time to check, scan a few pages maybe) was very helpful for the anxiety (mine), and maybe helped shape an answer or two.

I definitely like the format - it makes us at least somewhat accountable, but without any need for cramming/studying and in a relatively low-pressure setting. Seven quarters (at least) to go!