The Distribution of Advanced Practice Nurses Within the Psychiatric Workforce

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela J. Beck ◽  
Cory Page ◽  
Jessica Buche ◽  
Maria Gaiser
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
The United States ◽  
Psychiatric Nurses ◽  
Advanced Practice ◽  
Psychiatric Nurse ◽  
Care Needs ◽  
Clinical Nurse ◽  
Clinical Nurse Specialists ◽  
Child Psychiatric

OBJECTIVE: To examine the size and distribution of the advanced practice psychiatric nurse workforce relative to the total psychiatry workforce to determine whether nurses are predominantly working in areas with higher or lower levels of behavioral health specialists. METHODS: State-level data for psychiatric nurses were obtained from the American Nurses Credentialing Center, and included mental health psychiatric nurse practitioners, adult psychiatric nurse practitioners, child psychiatric clinical nurse specialists, and adult psychiatric clinical nurse specialists. Supply estimates of the full psychiatry workforce were calculated for comparison purposes. State population estimates were obtained from U.S. Census Bureau data. State workforce estimates were converted to a 1:100,000 provider-to-population ratio to analyze the density of providers across states. RESULTS: In 2018, the psychiatric workforce supply was estimated to be composed of 66,740 providers, including psychiatrists ( n = 47,046; 71%), psychiatric nurses ( n = 17,534; 26%), physician assistants ( n = 1,164; 2%), and psychiatric pharmacists ( n = 966; 1%). Overall, psychiatric providers appeared to be most densely concentrated in the northeast region of the United States. A dearth of providers was most pronounced within areas in the 12-state Midwest region, southern states, California, and Nevada. The average concentration of psychiatric workers was 22.61 per 100,000 population. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study find inconsistent pattern of how psychiatric nurses are distributed relative to the rest of the workforce, but reinforce the idea that they are essential in addressing care needs in areas with low concentrations of psychiatry specialists—especially if they are authorized to work to the full extent of their training/education.

scholarly journals Advanced Practitioners as Allies and Advocates

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth Faiman, PhD, MSN, APRN-BC, AOCN®, FAAN
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health Care Team ◽  
Care Team ◽  
National Commission ◽  
Clinical Nurse ◽  
Clinical Nurse Specialists

Advanced practitioners (APs) are a growing proportion of the health-care team. As of 2019, there were approximately 325,000 nurse practitioners, 7,000 clinical nurse specialists, and nearly 140,000 physician assistants in the United States (American Academy of Nurse Practitioners, 2021; National Association of Clinical Nurse Specialists, 2020; National Commission on Certification of Physician Assistants, 2019). Although this totals up to 500,000, it is hard to say how many of these APs focus their practice on hematology/oncology, as certification is not required, which is a major method to track these data. Pharmacists are also integral members of the health-care team. As of April 2021, there were 3,600 board-certified oncology pharmacists (BCOP), although this underestimates the number of pharmacists who practice in hematology and oncology who are not BCOP certified (Board of Pharmacy Specialties, 2021).

Activities Performed by Acute and Critical Care Advanced Practice Nurses: American Association of Critical-Care Nurses Study of Practice

2006 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Becker ◽  
Roberta Kaplow ◽  
Patricia M. Muenzen ◽  
Carol Hartigan
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
American Association ◽  
Critical Care Nurses ◽  
Advanced Practice ◽  
Clinical Nurse ◽  
Care Nurse ◽  
Clinical Nurse Specialists

• Background Accreditation standards for certification programs require use of a testing mechanism that is job-related and based on the knowledge and skills needed to function in the discipline. • Objectives To describe critical care advanced practice by revising descriptors to encompass the work of both acute care nurse practitioners and clinical nurse specialists and to explore differences in the practice of clinical nurse specialists and acute care nurse practitioners. • Methods A national task force of subject matter experts was appointed to create a comprehensive delineation of the work of critical care nurses. A survey was designed to collect validation data on 65 advanced practice activities, organized by the 8 nurse competencies of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses Synergy Model for Patient Care, and an experience inventory. Activities were rated on how critical they were to optimizing patients’ outcomes, how often they were performed, and toward which sphere of influence they were directed. How much time nurses devoted to specific care problems was analyzed. Frequency ratings were compared between clinical nurse specialists and acute care nurse practitioners. • Results Both groups of nurses encountered all items on the experience inventory. Clinical nurse specialists were more experienced than acute care nurse practitioners. The largest difference was that clinical nurse specialists rated as more critical activities involving clinical judgment and clinical inquiry whereas acute care nurse practitioners focused primarily on clinical judgment. • Conclusions Certification initiatives should reflect differences between clinical nurse specialists and acute care nurse practitioners.

An overview of clinical associate roles in the neurointerventional specialty

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 323-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa D Chittle ◽  
Teresa Vanderboom ◽  
Judith Borsody-Lotti ◽  
Suvranu Ganguli ◽  
Patricia Hanley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Clinical Nurse ◽  
Support Teams ◽  
Clinical Nurse Specialists ◽  
Clinical Support ◽  
Care Coordinators

Neurointerventionalists have long partnered with certain types of clinical associates to provide longitudinal care. This overview summarizes differences in education, background, roles, and scopes of practice of the various clinical associates (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, radiology practitioner assistants, radiologist assistants, and nursing care coordinators). Key differences and similarities are highlighted to alleviate confusion about the roles clinical associates can assume on a neurointerventional service. This overview is intended to guide practices as they consider broadening their clinical support teams.

scholarly journals Understanding the Role of Advanced Practice Providers in Oncology in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. e518-e532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suanna S. Bruinooge ◽  
Todd A. Pickard ◽  
Wendy Vogel ◽  
Amy Hanley ◽  
Caroline Schenkel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
The United States ◽  
Direct Patient Care ◽  
Advanced Practice ◽  
Patient Counseling ◽  
Number Of Patients

Purpose: Advanced practice providers (APPs, which include nurse practitioners [NPs] and physician assistants [PAs]) are integral members of oncology teams. This study aims first to identify all oncology APPs and, second, to understand personal and practice characteristics (including compensation) of those APPs. Methods: We identified APPs who practice oncology from membership and claims data. We surveyed 3,055 APPs about their roles in clinical care. Results: We identified at least 5,350 APPs in oncology and an additional 5,400 who might practice oncology. Survey respondents totaled 577, which provided a 19% response rate. Results focused on 540 NPs and PAs. Greater than 90% reported satisfaction with career choice. Respondents identified predominately as white (89%) and female (94%). NPs and PAs spent the majority (80%) of time in direct patient care. The top four patient care activities were patient counseling (NPs, 94%; PAs, 98%), prescribing (NPs, 93%; PAs, 97%), treatment management (NPs, 89%; PAs, 93%), and follow-up visits (NPs, 81%; PAs, 86%). A majority of all APPs reported both independent and shared visits (65% hematology/oncology/survivorship/prevention/pediatric hematology/oncology; 85% surgical/gynecologic oncology; 78% radiation oncology). A minority of APPs reported that they conducted only shared visits. Average annual compensation was between $113,000 and $115,000, which is approximately $10,000 higher than average pay for nononcology APPs. Conclusion: We identified 5,350 oncology APPs and conclude that number may be as high as 7,000. Survey results suggest that practices that incorporate APPs routinely rely on them for patient care. Given the increasing number of patients with and survivors of cancer, APPs are important to ensure access to quality cancer care now and in the future.

scholarly journals Responsive Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: A Review of New Features and Practical Guidance for Advanced Practice Providers

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Breanne Fisher ◽  
Julie A. DesMarteau ◽  
Elizabeth H. Koontz ◽  
Seth J. Wilks ◽  
Susan E. Melamed
Keyword(s):  
Vagus Nerve ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Vagus Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Healthcare Team ◽  
Advanced Practice ◽  
Drug Resistant ◽  
Clinical Nurse Specialists ◽  
Drug Resistant Epilepsy

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a safe and effective therapy that has been available for over 20 years for adults and children with drug resistant epilepsy (DRE). Since U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval in 1997, VNS has been implanted in over 100,000 patients including over 30,000 children as an adjunctive therapy in reducing the frequency of seizures in patients 4 years of age and older with focal seizures that are refractory to antiseizure medications. VNS Therapy® has evolved over time and currently offers closed-loop, responsive stimulation as well as advanced features that streamline dosing and patient management. Advanced Practice Providers (APPs) such as nurse practitioners, physician assistants and clinical nurse specialists are integral in a comprehensive healthcare team, and dedicated VNS clinics have formed at comprehensive epilepsy centers across the world that are often managed by APPs. This approach improves access, education, and continuity of care for those with VNS or those considering VNS. Here we provide a review for APPs on the VNS Therapy® system focused on new features, dosing, and troubleshooting strategies with the goal to provide guidance to those managing VNS patients.

Does the Employment of Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners Increase Liability?

2009 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 6-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roderick S. Hooker ◽  
Jeffrey G. Nicholson ◽  
Tuan Le
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Data Bank ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Advanced Practice Nurses ◽  
The United States ◽  
Advanced Practice ◽  
Practice Nurses ◽  
Missed Diagnosis ◽  
American Society ◽  
National Practitioner Data Bank

ABSTRACT We assessed whether physician assistant (PA) and nurse practitioner (NP) utilization increases liability. In total, 17 years of data compiled in the United States National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) was used to compare and analyze malpractice incidence, payment amount and other measures of liability among doctors, PAs and advanced practice nurses (APNs). From 1991 through 2007, 324,285 NPDB entries were logged, involving 273,693 providers of interest. Significant differences were found in liability reports among doctors, PAs and APNs. Physicians made, on average, malpractice payments twice that of PAs but less than that of APNs. During the study period the probability of making a malpractice payment was 12 times less for PAs and 24 times less for APNs. For all three providers, missed diagnosis was the leading reason for malpractice report, and female providers incurred higher payments than males. Trend analysis suggests that the rate of malpractice payments for physicians, PAs and APNs has been steady and consistent with the growth in the number of providers. There were no observations or trends to suggest that PAs and APNs increase liability. If anything, they may decrease the rate of reporting malpractice and adverse events. From a policy standpoint, it appears that the incorporation of PAs and APNs into American society has been a safe and beneficial undertaking, at least when compared to doctors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document