State The Problem

First, the state licensure regulates NP practice and it has been a big issue since NPs are not able to practice to the fullest extent despite of their education and training. NPs practice is regulated by state licensure and only about one-third of the nation has adopted full practice authority licensure and practice laws for NPs (Hain & Fleck, 2014). The American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP) reports that, under a full practice authority model, NPs are still required to meet

This paper explores the perception of clinical practitioners to the change in policy related to the advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) full practice authority. The author conducts a one-on-one, open-ended interview of 5 nurse practitioners and 5 physicians licensed to practice in Maryland on their perceptions of the recent passage of the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse Full Practice Authority. A literature review was conducted in a policy report by the professional nursing organization, and discussion within the peer-reviewed article supported an overview, regulatory differences among 50 states, including the District of Columbia. Their policy implication for enhancing APRNs role nationally. The author discusses a critical component

The APRN Consensus Model was released in July of 2008 to define advanced practice registered nurse, identify the titles to be used by APRNs, and define specialty area of practice. The Consensus Model also describes population foci, suggests a process for recognition of new APRN roles, and recommends requirements for implementation (American Nurses Association [ANA], 2010). The APRN regulatory model helps uniform scope of practice of APRN across the United States, which benefit individual APRN, enhance patient outcomes, and improve the quality of care. Consensus Model consists of Licensure, Accreditation, Certification, and Education. The Education criteria in LACE Consensus Model relate to all APRN programs regardless of master’s or doctoral

Poghosyan and Knutson conducted a survey of 278 APRNs to better understand their independence and role in New York State primary care settings. Forty two percent of the APRNs surveyed stated they have their own patient panel and do not share panel with physicians and two thirds are able to review the outcome measures of the care they deliver. The study found that despite the restrictions on APRNs they freely apply their clinical knowledge

Many studies exist which highlight the benefits of APRN full practice authority. One study from Duke University, by Conover and Richard (2015), contained this strong statement regarding APRN practice, “studies vary in their methodological rigor, each has concluded that APRN practice outcomes are equivalent or better to those of physicians” (pg. 4). The study goes on to say that three cost effective benefits to full practice authority APRNs are: lower training costs, lower compensation and limited use of expensive resources or procedures. The study also discusses how full practice laws would increase access to care by decreasing primary care provider shortages (pg. 6).

The customs and practices of the APRN has been restricted in many states. The sociocultural aspects of APRN have been a collaborative effort with a physician under the standards of care agreement. When a patient needs to be seen by a provider the APRNs have

According to the Pearson Report, there is a total of 147,295 Nurse Practitioners throughout the United States (Pearson, 2009). However, for NPs in some states the battle continues over some forms of prescriptive authority or physician involvement in NP prescribing, such as the state of Pennsylvania. State regulatory approaches to NP prescribing range from no authorization for prescribing (in Georgia, 2006 legislation passed which recognized NPs as prescribers, but the rules have not been approved at the time of this writing) to unencumbered prescriptive authority (Arizona, DC, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming) (Lugo, O’Grady, Hodnicki & Hanson, 2007).

Also, a DNP provider would be able to promote legislative changes in the community or state to ensure APRNs can practice to their full capacity. The Appalachian region is multi-state and providers are unable to practice without having an understanding of the scope of practice and license for the state in which they locate. This is especially problematic when practicing in an area where more than one state is located near a geographic location and could potentially limit access to treatment due to different practice guidelines in each state. DNP prepared practitioners are equipped with the knowledge of policy advocacy and should utilize each opportunity to advocate for standard scope of practice that would enable access to care, despite geographic

Since the inception of the Nurse Practitioner (NP) role in the 1960s, NPs have thrived in the delivery of primary healthcare and nurse case management. Despite patient satisfaction with NPs ' style of care, nurses have been critical of NPs, while physicians have been threatened by NP encroachment on MD practice. Balancing assessment, diagnosis, and treatment with caring defines NPs ' success as primary care providers. Understand the role and Scope of Practice of NPs is sometimes difficult for some to understand. The purpose of this paper is to define the role and history of NP, compare and contrast licensure versus certifications, understand NP Scope Of Practice and Standards of Care, discuss how the State Practice Acts regulate FNP practice, discuss credentialing and privileging, and differentiate between legislative and regulatory processes.

The Texas Nurses Association is a strong proponent of permitting APRN’s to practice with full authority using their clinical skills and education to their fullest potential (Cates, 2017, p. 2)l. The TNA is a member of the APRN Alliance, which encompasses four statewide associations (Cates, 2017, p. 2). The APRN Alliance joined forces with the Coalition for Health Care Access (CHCA). This coalition is comprised of “over 20 business, consumer-advocacy, and health care stakeholder groups” (Cusack, 2017, p. 2). Currently, APRN’s barriers include expenses associated with partnering physicians (Holmes & Kinsey-Weathers, 2016). Granting APRN’s full practice authority would results in a monetary loss to these physicians. The AMA and AAFP oppose the passing of HB 1415 (Hooker & Muchow, 2015, p. 89). The pushback from these organizations stands regardless of strong evidence of the positive outcomes with allowing APRN’s full practice authority.

Advanced practice nurse practitioners (APRNs) have been attempting for many years to eliminate barriers that prevent full practice authority nationwide. Each state has its own licensure and regulates APRN practice roles. APRNs benefit health care by addressing two pertinent needs: the lack of available physicians; and, the increase in patient comorbidities (Gray, 2016). Florida is about to experience a shortage of medical practitioners. According to the Physician Workforce Annual Report of 2014, statistics state 13.4% of medical providers are expected to retire within the following five years after 2014 due to an increase

Results indicated a 25% decline growth rate of NP’s was slower in the most restrictive states

As resistant as some states’ legislative and regulatory bodies are to grant APNs autonomy of practice, the damage being done by over-regulation is clear (Safriet, 1992). Physicians are forced into a position to either supervise the APN’s practice or be constantly consulted for approval of their practice decisions. Safriet (1992) described that in and of itself, this constant supervision may appear to patients that the APN is not competent to provide adequate or care equivalent to that of a physician. If the role of the APN is to bridge gaps in health care by relieving the medical establishment of some of the patient load by performing the same function as a physician in a primary care setting, it seems wholly unnecessary to restrain their scope of practice in those areas. This type of restrictions affect cost and patient care accessibility (Safriet, 1992). This was a problem stated in the article, however 25 years later, populations of patients remain unseen or cared for and APNs continue to be underutilized (Safriet, 1992). Rigolosi and Salmond (2014) cite the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP) when they state that not utilizing nurse practitioners due to practice restrictions costs $9 billion annually in the US (p. 649).

There is an increasing demand for nurse practitioners, which makes this a crucial period in the development of their practice and profession. Nurse practitioners must face increased opportunity and continuing opposition towards independent practice all while defining their role in health care delivery and establishing their connections. The practice of nurse practitioners still varies widely across the states. These inconsistencies make it difficult for nurse practitioners as well as patients when practice

As the young and rapidly-aging population continues to increase, the demands of primary, acute and chronic disease management will also increase. As a result, more health care professionals who provide primary care will be needed to meet these demands. Thus, the emergence of Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) evolve. APRN is a nurse who has completed a graduate degree and has acquired advanced knowledge and skills. APRNs are grounded with theory, concepts and principles that enable them to assess, diagnose, treat and manage their patients. APRNs can work in conjunction with other health care professionals or independently. APRNs improve access to health care by providing care in the rural and underserved areas. APRNs also reduce the cost to health care (Joel, 2013).