Posts Tagged ‘nurse practitioner’

h1

Some Recent Notable Posts from Nursing Blogs

January 25, 2013

Some posts of interest from the nursing blogs (those that are currently active; a fair number of familiar bloggers seem to be taking breaks, having kids, starting new jobs):

“Certified Medical Assistants Calling Themselves Nurses” can be found at The Nurse Practitioner’s Place. It’s not just inaccurate to do so, says the author. It’s often illegal.

Photo from otisarchives4, via Flickr.

Photo from otisarchives4, via Flickr.

At My Strong Medicine, a short post about men, women, USPSTF guidelines, becoming an NP, and reaching a certain age, called “Heard While Studying: Everything Falls Apart at Age 40.”

One blogger, among others, who has been pretty quiet for some months (and who used to organize a regular “blog carnival” that helped create a community among nurse bloggers) is Kim McCallister at Emergiblog. She popped back up several weeks ago with a post called “The Voice,” which is about exactly that—how a nurse blogger lost the sense of freedom she started with as a staff nurse jotting down experiences, and instead internalized a “Sister Superego” that cautioned her to be “prim and proper,” rapping her knuckles until she just fell silent instead. Frustration with computerized charting and the general state of health care seems to be part of it as well. We hope the spirit moves her to write more soon.

Lastly, there’s a nice post by Megen Duffy (who often writes AJN‘s iNurse column, and who writes some pretty funny tweets as well) at her blog (Not Nurse Ratched). It’s called “Gratitude: Lessons from Patients,” and I was glad I read it on a Friday, because it’s about the possibility of change, and is actually pretty hopeful.—Jacob Molyneux, senior editor

Bookmark and Share

h1

ECRI Conference Notes: Creating and Replicating ‘Systemness’ within Health Care Delivery

December 5, 2012

By Joyce Pulcini, PhD, RN, FAAN, Policy and Politics contributing editor, AJN

The ECRI Institute’s 19th annual conference (November 28–29) looked at system-level innovation and quality in the health care system. It brought together experts from many fields, including medicine, nursing, hospital or health system administration, informatics, health care quality, policy makers, journalists, and academics. ECRI Institute is an independent, nonprofit organization that researches the best approaches to improving the safety, quality, and cost-effectiveness of patient care. The goals of the conference were to address the following:

  1. What is “systemness”?
  2. Which elements within mature health care systems result in the best clinical outcomes?
  3. Are approaches taken by long-established systems transferable to smaller, newer, or less integrated systems?
  4. Are financial incentives enough to drive change?
  5. How can electronic health records (EHRs) help improve “systemness”?
  6. Do transformation units within health care systems produce results?

The conference essentially tried to attack in a creative way the issues around the creation of systems that function optimally. Truly changing culture and providing optimal care delivery should always result in putting the patient at the center of care. The conversation was open and the conference succeeded in fostering important dialogue among the speakers and the audience.  A major focus was on creating systems, looking at technological or financial solutions, and measuring outcomes.

The session on team care (“Creating teams to improve inter- and intra-health care systems: Does evidence show a benefit?”)  highlighted the vexing issues around how to truly foster optimal teams. Lisa Schilling, RN, MPH, VP National HC Performance Improvement, Director, Center for Health Care Systems Performance, was one of the speakers. She started in her role in 2008 and by 2010 published the results of her efforts, which led to a 30-day readmission rate after hospitalization reduction of 9% (Schilling et al, 2010) and a dramatic reduction of mortality from severe sepsis, which saved 1,100 lives. The solution, she says, was to focus on culture, with leaders and teams working together from the ground up to create learning organizations with clearly measured outcomes. She emphasized that while leaders manage variation, change culture, and manage team-based improvement, change begins at the front lines and alignment in health systems is a key factor in systemness.

Patient perspective. Another speaker, Jesse Gruman, a patient and consumer advocate, asked some heartfelt questions about who teams benefit. She answered quite honestly that patients do not really understand how teams will benefit them. Patients want to have a relationship with their “doctors,” not with teams. They are not really interested in being the leader of the teams either, as some of the rhetoric suggests. When they are sick, patients need people who can help them get better and the patient cannot lead this aspect of care.

She challenged us to think about what happens when teams do not work together well. She was concerned about the large “cast of characters” patients must often face while hospitalized. One solution, which was proposed by Children’s Hospital Boston, was a patient app called “My Passport App,” which had pictures of staff who were on their team (as an alternative to the old whiteboard solution). Family as well as patients could see who was on the care team, know what to do at home, and actually see their own plan of care.

Who really benefits from teams? One speaker asked who teams really benefit. In the end, the perception of the value of teams did not always reach the consumer. If the patient does not see the value of team care, we have a long way to go if this concept is to succeed. Patients should not have to receive the mixed messages and experience the poor communication often inherent in modern health care. Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Evidence Contradicts AAFP: NPs Ideal for Leading Patient-Centered Medical Homes

October 3, 2012

By Karen Roush MS, RN, FNP-C, AJN clinical managing editor

What will it take to end the turf war physicians are waging  against nurse practitioners? The latest foray is over who should lead patient-centered medical homes (PCMH). According to the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), only physicians should. They insist that nurse practitioners do not have the knowledge or skills to do so and that expanding the NP’s role in primary care would create a “two-tiered health system,” with patients who are cared for by an NP receiving a lower level of care.

That’s not what the evidence says. Or patients for that matter. Studies consistently find that when care provided by NPs is compared to care provided by physicians, the care is similar as far as prescriptions ordered and referrals made—most important, outcomes are the same.

Well, there is one area where differences keep showing up: patient satisfaction. Patients consistently say that they are more satisfied with care provided by nurse practitioners. They say that nurse practitioners listen better, spend more time with them, and provide them with more information.

Not only are nurse practitioners capable of leading medical homes, their education and skills make them ideal for this role. Whereas physicians focus on pathology and have the depth of knowledge and skill to manage highly complex patients, NPs focus on the “human response to disease” and take a more holistic approach to patient care. Nurses coordinate care all the time, identifying the need for and arranging home care, rehabilitative care, nutritional support, and so on. Combine this with an NP’s well-documented diagnostic and patient management skills, and their qualification for this role is obvious.

There already exists a two-tiered health system in this country—but not the one AAFP is imagining. It’s between those who have access to care and those who do not. Expanding the role of nurse practitioners in primary care is one of our best hopes for alleviating that. We know it, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) knows it, and patients know it. It’s time for physicians to accept it.

Bookmark and Share

h1

Web Roundup: Changing Specialties, Measuring Quality, Caring and Freeloading, More

September 19, 2012

by Ramon Peco/via Flickr

Here are a few things worth noting on the Web today. At Code Blog, “Rookie Mistake” is illuminating on the subject of switching nursing specialties. Here’s a short excerpt:

My new hospice job is going pretty well.  I really like it.  It’s been an adjustment, but worth the stress of change.

Overall, I’ve been pretty surprised at how little I know/knew about how people die naturally.

In ICU, if you are actively dying, you look terrible.  In most cases, people dying in the ICU are there because we were or are trying to save their life.  This requires some treatments that cause other problems. . . . That is what dying looked like to me for 14 years.  Turns out it’s a pretty exaggerated version of how it is when people naturally die without life-saving interventions.

Also notable: a short post that many may relate to about paperwork and burnout, at The Nurse Practitioner’s Place.

In other news, Kaiser Health News reports that the Joint Commission is releasing its annual list of hospitals that have done well in following certain crucial procedures and protocols:

The commission is recognizing 620 hospitals (download list as PDF or .xls file) – 18 percent of those it accredits — as “top performers” for following recommended protocols at least 95 percent of the time.

Congrats to those who made the list. But a caveat: The article does note that there’s “an ongoing debate” about whether process measures or outcome measures better reflect quality of care. And in truth, we’ve heard complaints from many nurses about process measures and their potential unfairness/inaccuracy. What’s your take?

Note also this article on the retirement of a “nursing legend,” and a fantastic piece at the Health Affairs blog called “Caring, Freeloading, and the Fate of the Affordable Care Act,” which makes this observation:

At the heart of the case for medical coverage for all isn’t the public’s health; it’s private tragedy.  Serious illness plunges people into a realm of Dickensian choice.

And if you haven’t, check out the CE articles in this month’s AJN: “Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients” and “Outcomes and Complications After Bariatric Surgery.”

Lastly, “At the Eye of the Storm,” this month’s AJN Reflections essay, is by a nurse who describes the struggle to make the right decision, along with siblings, about her gravely ill father’s care. Wanting to avoid overly aggressive measures, she nevertheless does her best to respect what her father would have wanted.
Bookmark and Share

h1

What’s New on the Nursing Blogs?

August 22, 2012

By Jacob Molyneux, AJN senior editor/blog editor

Matthew Bowden/Wikimedia Commons

So what’s new on the nursing blogs. I’ve been checking around today, and here are a few good things I’ve found so far. Please let me know if there are any really new and lively nursing blogs we should add to our nursing blogs page. We need some new voices, and I’m sure they’re out there.

Burnout. At Nursing in Hawaii (this blog changes its name periodically to reflect the current location of its peripatetic owner), we find a pretty interesting and roundabout kind of post, “Nurse Burnout, Reality Shock, Marlene Kramer,” that addresses the stages of nurse burnout in a really useful and practical way (after discussing an early seminal book on the topic, what this has to do with the development of the Magnet program, and a few other items). Here’s an excerpt, but I’d suggest reading the whole thing for a look at this seemingly universal issue for nurses.

the honeymoon. This is where the new nurse is still being oriented and everything is wonderful. The preceptor is so smart! The staff is amazing! The paycheck is HUGE! we all love to be around such a person and delight in the innocence of youth.

crash and burn. the onset of this is hard to predict, but usually about the six-month mark. Takes place when the nurse starts getting feedback from every direction, not all of it is easy to take because people are telling him or her that they are not perfect. The nurse is now saying “These people are jerks. This hospital has its priorities wrong. nobody is listening. Why did I ever want to be a nurse?”  This person can be angry and depressed.  Nothing is wonderful anymore. The road has a fork in it. One choice is to leave; the other choice is to stay.  When the nurse  leaves (regardless of where they go), it  causes the cycle to repeat with new nurses.  Turnover of this nature is expensive for all concerned. The National Council of State Boards of Nursing has recently recognized that up to 25% of staff nurses who do get a job, leave their first position within a year, which has caused the NCSBN to work on what they call “Transition to Practice” issues. In this way, we wonder if anything has changed since the 1970s……

recovery.  This is a phase of letting go of anger and depression, characterized by the return of a sense of humor. The preferred outcome of crash and burn.  The nurse wakes up and realizes that some things are good, some are bad and not everything is perfect. Or Burnout the nurse quits the job and goes to another job (to enjoy another honeymoon!) or maybe leaves bedside nursing altogether.

and resolution. where the nurse develops a sense of perspective and is able to contribute effectively.

For something more immediately practical, here’s a post at In the Round, “Lab Values and DKA.” What are some lab values that tip you off that a patient has diabetic ketoacidosis? Also check out their post “Spotlight on Men’s Health,” which details the crucial role that prevention should be playing in men’s health and notes that “more than half of all premature deaths among men are preventable.”

Lest we forget the policy side of things, which really does matter: At INQRI, the Blog of the Interdisciplinary Nursing Quality Research Initiative (rolls right off the tongue, doesn’t it?), we find a post on the primary care challenge in U.S. health care and the role nurses can or should be playing in alleviating the problem.

A related post, “Let Us Be Heard,” one with a more personal slant, can be found at A Nurse Practitioner’s View; the post takes issue with the New York Times coverage of the primary care shortage in the U.S.

Other notable posts you might want to check out:

“Don’t Wreck,” at See Jane Nurse

“An Ethical Nurse,” video interview at Nursing Ideas

Bookmark and Share

h1

An NP’s Plea: Hold That Specialist

August 2, 2012

By Karen Roush, MS, RN, FNP-C, AJN clinical managing editor

Recently someone I know woke up in the middle of the night with severe foot pain. In the morning he headed to the ED, where he was diagnosed with a fracture of one of the sesamoid bones in his foot and sent to an orthopedist. Over the three days between the ED visit and the orthopedist appointment, the pain began to ease. At the orthopedist it was determined that the problem wasn’t that little sesamoid bone, but gout.

And then they sent him to a rheumatologist.

Why? The condition was already improving and he had no comorbidities. So, why the need for a specialist visit at a cost of $500 just to walk through the door as a first-time patient? A primary care provider should be competent to manage a straightforward case of gout—order and review bloodwork, prescribe medications, educate the patient about their diet, and follow up on their progress. Then if the patient doesn’t respond to treatment or anything unusual develops, call in the specialist.

This happens all the time. When I was first diagnosed with hypothyroid I was sent off to an endocrinologist (under protest). There was nothing unusual in my presentation and I had no comorbidities or history that would indicate the need for a specialist. Again, a primary care provider is capable of reviewing thyroid panels, assessing the patient’s signs and symptoms, prescribing medication, and following up. But treatment was delayed for three weeks while I waited—feeling fatigued, achy, and depressed—for my visit with the specialist, at a cost of over $400.

Same thing recently when a friend of mine wanted to start on topical estrogen for atrophic vaginitis—her women’s health NP, who had seen her for years, insisted she go to a gynecologist. She had no comorbidities, no risk factors that would contraindicate the use of topical estrogen, which is a safe and straightforward treatment for most women. So, now she goes off to a physician who doesn’t know her for a repeat pelvic exam, a painful procedure in someone with vaginal atrophy, at the cost of $350 to walk through the door.

It’s not just a problem of delayed care and less continuity of care—multiply the above scenarios by the thousands of similar scenarios across the country and it’s obvious that the economic costs are tremendous. These costs are reflected in higher health care insurance premiums and costs of public programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

I practiced for years as an NP in a network of health centers serving a large rural population in the Adirondacks. I loved it—I saw everything and had the autonomy to manage patients through all kinds of urgent and primary problems, plus the physician support to back me up when I needed it. I managed countless people with gout and hypothyroid, and guided women through menopause and its myriad symptoms and associated problems. All of the primary care providers in the network did.

When a patient had complicating factors or greater risks of adverse outcomes, or didn’t respond as expected to treatment, then we sent them to a specialist. Even then, we often began with a phone consultation before referring them for a visit. This is how the family doctor or “GP” practiced for many years before us.

What changed? Worries about liability? The trend toward overspecialization of nursing and medicine? The expectations of health care “consumers”?  The increase in physicians entering specialty practices versus family practice? The health care reimbursement system?

Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Women’s Health: Paying Attention to an Invisible Group

July 5, 2012

By Karen Roush, MS, RN, FNP-C, AJN clinical managing editor

My sister Ellen is getting married in two weeks, so last Sunday I threw a surprise bridal shower. We had all the traditional trappings—flowers and favors and (much to another sister’s chagrin) a shower game and prizes. The only thing not traditional: at this shower there were two brides, my sister and her fiancée, Pat.

After years of standing by invisible while sisters and brothers married, danced with their partners at each other’s weddings, celebrated births and graduations, now it’s their turn. No longer on the periphery, no longer the ‘other,’ at least for this day, these few weeks, they are finally able to celebrate their love and commitment to each other just like the rest of us.

Why am I writing about this in a nursing blog? Because this invisibility, this sidelining of lesbians like my sister and her fiancée, doesn’t only affect their family life—it extends into their health care as well. Neither Ellen nor Pat ever got routine women’s health care—no Pap smears, no clinical breast exams or mammograms, no routine assessment for osteoporosis risk. They were never hooked into the health care system by reproductive health needs, contraception, or pregnancy and childbirth, as my other sisters and I were. They didn’t have a regular gynecologist who followed them through their reproductive years and would now advise them on preventive health care as they approached menopause.

This isn’t unusual among lesbians; according to the CDC, many avoid getting routine health care. And there is evidence that lesbians may be at greater risk for some health problems. For example, it is known that pregnancy and breastfeeding are protective against certain cancers such as ovarian and breast. Many lesbians never go through pregnancy and childbirth, yet they are less likely than other women to get routine Pap tests or mammograms. And they live with the constant stress of social stigma and discrimination, risk factors for depression, anxiety, and heart disease.

There are a number of reasons why lesbians don’t get necessary health care: lack of domestic partner benefits, which prevents them from qualifying for health insurance coverage through their partner’s plan; discomfort talking with their provider about their sexuality; being misinformed about their risks; and lack of knowledge on the part of their health care providers. According to the Institute of Medicine there is an urgent need for research—we know lesbians face unique problems and risks, but we don’t have an evidence-based understanding of exactly what they are or how to address them. Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Nurse Blog Notes: Generation Gaps, Hypothermia, Informatics, Nurses Writing

June 19, 2012

By Jacob Molyneux, AJN senior editor/blog editor

via Wikimedia Commons

Let’s skip the latest research findings, policy disputes, the unpleasant wait for the Supreme Court to decide the fate of health care reform. Here’s what we’re finding on the nursing blogs these days, a sample of recent posts you might find of interest:

The Nerdy Nurse offers “7 Tips to Be a Successful Clinical Informatics Nurse.” The post isn’t terribly technical; instead, it’s for nurses who might be thinking of going into this line of nursing, and to that end it highlights some strengths to emphasize in an interview.

At madness: tales of an emergency room nurse, a recent post called “There’s a Human Being Under There” sketches out a bit of what’s involved in inducing “therapeutic hypothermia” (for more detail, preview the July AJN CE “Therapeutic Hypothermia After Cardiac Arrest”), but then steps back far enough to remember that all of these processes involve an actual person.

Those Emergency Blues takes an undogmatic look at so-called “generation gaps” among nurses. Instead of throwing stones, dividing the world into ‘us’ and ‘them,’ this post takes a more sensible, fair-minded, probing approach:

Ultimately what I am trying to get at is while I am sure generation gaps exist on units, I do not believe it is entirely as a result of degree vs diploma more than it might be just personality related. Differing maturity levels, different interests, and people at different points in their lives not to mention the obvious that we are all individuals. I enjoy working with the tough take no nonsense 15 year nurse as much as I like working with the 35 year veteran nurse who still gives every patient a bed bath and the novice 2 year nurse who wants to learn about every patient condition possible. A few of my closest coworkers have nearly 10+ years on me with a couple who could even be my parent. . . . Gaps exist only if we let them and really, we are not here to make friends. When we do that’s great, however, we have a job to do.

“Modernizing Nurse Practitioner Regulations” at the blog A Nurse Practitioner’s View considers the recent progress toward passing the NP Modernization Act, which will “eliminate statutory collaboration between a physician and nurse practitioner in New York State.” The bill is opposed by some medical groups, but the author points out that a push from the Institute of Medicine Future of Nursing report has been crucial in moving this bill along.

In related scope of practice news: the California Supreme Court has ruled that specially trained unsupervised nurses can give anesthetics without a physician’s supervision.

Lastly, a plug to nurses who might live in or near New York City and who want to do more writing about their experiences, to develop a more sustainable writing practice. There’s a writing weekend for nurses cosponsored by the Center for Health Media and Policy at Hunter College and the Hunter-Bellevue School of Nursing coming up July 20–22, and it’s taught by some fantastic people. Also, we’d be remiss not to mention an upcoming weekend writing workshop (August 11–12) taught by AJN‘s clinical managing editor (and a marvelous scholar and poet) Karen Roush in Briarcliff, NY.

Bookmark and Share

h1

When Lawmakers and Physicians Hold Nurses Back

February 13, 2012

Editor’s Note: Toni Inglis, MSN, RN, CNS, FAAN, writes opinion for the Austin (TX) American-Statesman. She works at the Seton Healthcare Family in Austin as a neonatal ICU staff nurse and also writes a nursing blog for Seton and edits its monthly NursingNews. This article is a reprint of an April 22nd commentary in the Statesman. Toni was inspired to write the column after a particularly disappointing legislative session, in which Texas advanced practice nurses made fewer gains than in past sessions—despite Texas ranking last in access to health care and having the most restrictive laws in the country regarding APRN scope of practice and prescriptive authority. She believes the poor access and barriers to practice are related.

AJN finds the article particularly relevant as legislatures across the country deliberate on APRN barriers to practice. You can read her commentaries at ingliscommentary.com.

Here’s an idea that wouldn’t cost Texas a dime but would save millions of dollars every year: Remove all barriers restraining nurses from practicing to the full extent of their education and training.

by Brian Romig/via Flickr

No state needs primary care providers more than Texas, which has a severe shortage. Texas ranks last in access to health care and in the percentage of residents without health insurance. Of Texas’ 254 counties, 188 are designated by the federal government as having acute shortages of primary care physicians. Of that number, 16 counties have one and 23 have zero.

If every nurse practitioner and family doctor were deployed, we still couldn’t meet the need. Texans are desperate for health care.

Doing the math and to help meet the need, the Legislative Budget Board recommended autonomous practice of advanced practice nurses after a preceptorship.

In Texas, our legislature — session after session — keeps the most restrictive laws in the country. Nurse practitioners don’t want to perform brain surgery. They just want to provide primary care and are quick to refer cases to a doctor when necessary.

Most states with far less need do not legislate practice barriers to nurse practitioners. Given the severity of our problem, shouldn’t we at least bring ourselves in line with those other states? Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Nurse Practitioners Are Not ‘Physician Extenders’

November 11, 2011

By Karen Roush, MS, RN, FNP-C, AJN clinical managing editor

“Physician extender.” It’s way past time to kill that term.

A study published in the October issue of Surgery found that adding an NP to the surgical team decreased the number of unnecessary ED visits by 50% and increased the use of visiting nurse, physical therapy, and occupational therapy services. A Medscape article (registration required) on the study explained the importance of the findings in this way: “According to the researchers, physician ‘extenders,’ such as NPs, help maintain continuity of care while resident work hours are kept at a maximum of 80 per week. . . .”

Sure enough, the stated purpose of the study was to determine if “integrating this physician extender into the surgery team” would improve outcomes and resource allocation. Ouch.

Experts in our own right. Nurse practitioners are not physician extenders. We are highly skilled and educated nurses who provide evidence-based care grounded in the nursing model. We are not “extensions” of anyone. We are colleagues and collaborators, independent clinicians and experts in our own right. Our purpose is to provide comprehensive care, promote health, educate, and advocate. It is not to relieve interns, supplement physician education, or be the low-cost alternative when physicians have to “do more with less,” as Medscape quoted one of the study authors. Yes, we should be integrated into health care teams, surgical and otherwise—because nurses provide a distinctive aspect of care that research has repeatedly shown to be essential to good patient outcomes. Read the rest of this entry ?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 442 other followers