Nurse Practitioners and Controlled Substances Prescriptive Authority: Improving Access to Care

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Ambrose ◽  
Denise Tarlier
2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-14
Author(s):  
Jean B. Lazarus ◽  
Belinda (Wendy) Downing

Nurses are on the front lines of pain management, yet in Alabama and eleven other states they are not legally authorized to prescribe any controlled pain medications. In this survey of certified registered nurse practitioners in Alabama, 83 percent of the nurses responding to a question about the connection between prescriptive authority and pain management said that the lack of prescriptive authority for controlled substances delays pain management treatment, and 88 percent of those proffering an opinion about the importance of prescriptive authority said that expanding their prescriptive authority to include those medications would improve patient outcomes.At the same time, however, many nurses indicated that they are not adequately prepared to prescribe and manage pain medications. Fifty-five percent of the nurses responding to a question about whether they were prepared to make decisions when working under protocols related to controlled substances answered no. And 44 percent of the respondents to a question about the nurse practitioner educational curricula said that they did not feel their education had adequately prepared them for prescribing controlled pain medications.


2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524
Author(s):  
Brent Pollitt

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.


2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 312-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. McMichael ◽  
Barbara J. Safriet ◽  
Peter I. Buerhaus

Patients can hold physicians directly or vicariously liable for the malpractice of nurse practitioners under their supervision. Restrictive scope-of-practice laws governing nurse practitioners can ease patients’ legal burdens in establishing physician liability. We analyze the effect of restrictive scope-of-practice laws on the number of malpractice payments made on behalf of physicians between 1999 and 2012. Enacting less restrictive scope-of-practice laws decreases the number of payments made by physicians by as much as 31%, suggesting that restrictive scope-of-practice laws have a salient extraregulatory effect on physician malpractice rates. The effect of enacting less restrictive laws varies depending on the medical malpractice reforms that are in place, with the largest decrease in physician malpractice rates occurring in states that have enacted fewer malpractice reforms. Relaxing scope-of-practice laws could mitigate the adverse extraregulatory effect on physicians identified in this study and could also lead to improvements in access to care.


Author(s):  
Alycia Bischof ◽  
Sherry Greenberg

Reimbursement parity of nurse practitioners (NPs) and physicians is appropriate now more than ever. Studies have demonstrated that NPs provide the same quality of care as physicians, yet they do not receive the same reimbursement. The rise in full practice authority states, as well as nurse managed clinics and retail clinics, has led to more NPs practicing independently. The COVID-19 pandemic opened a need for NPs to provide a greater amount of care in more settings, and thus led to temporary removals of practice restrictions to increase access to care. This article offers a review of the issues, such as “incident to” billing; direct and indirect reimbursement; and quality of care. We consider MedPAC and reimbursement policy, post COVID-19 policy solutions, and action steps to move forward to seek reimbursement parity. The COVID-19 pandemic serendipitously led to the removal of many restrictions on NP practice, offering an opportunity for NPs to work with MedPAC to achieve full reimbursement for care provided.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document