In this Discussion, you examine a national healthcare issue and consider how that issue may impact your work setting. You also analyze how your organization has responded to this issue.
· Review the Resources and select one current national healthcare issue/stressor to focus on.
· Reflect on the current national healthcare issue/stressor you selected and think about how this issue/stressor may be addressed in your work setting.
Post a description of the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected for analysis, and explain how the healthcare issue/stressor may impact your work setting. Then, describe how your health system work setting has responded to the healthcare issue/stressor, including a description of what changes may have been implemented. Be specific and provide examples.
National healthcare Issue I selected= Removing restrictions on nurse practitioners’ scope of practice in New York State: Physicians’ and nurse practitioners’ perspectives
The Journal/Reading below
Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners
Issue: Volume 30(6), June 2018, p 354-360
Copyright: (C) 2018 American Association of Nurse Practitioners
Publication Type: [Qualitative Research]
Keywords: Nurse practitioners, scope of practice, primary care, policy
[Qualitative Research] « Previous Article Table of Contents Next Article »
Removing restrictions on nurse practitioners’ scope of practice in New York State: Physicians’ and nurse practitioners’ perspectives
Poghosyan, Lusine PhD, RN, FAAN1; Norful, Allison A. PhD, RN, ANP-BC2; Laugesen, Miriam J. PhD3
1Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY
2Columbia University School of Nursing, Columbia University Medical Center Irving Institute for Clinical and Translational Research
3Department of Health Policy & Management, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health
Correspondence: Lusine Poghosyan, PhD, RN, FAAN, Columbia University School of Nursing, 630 W. 168th Street, Mail Code 6, New York, NY 10032. Tel: 212-305-7081; Fax: 212-305-0722; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Funding: The study was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the National Institute of Nursing Research (T32NR014205), and the National Institute of Health (TL1TR001875).
Presentation: The study was presented as a poster at Annual Research Meeting at AcademyHealth in June 2017.
Competing interests: The authors report no conflict of interests.
Authors’ contributions: Lusine Poghosyan (data analysis; manuscript writing; editing and revisions); Allison A. Norful (interviewer; data analysis; manuscript writing; editing and revisions); Miriam J. Laugesen (manuscript writing; editing and revisions).
Received in revised form October 30, 2017
|Conclusions: Policy makers and administrators should make efforts to remove barriers and promote facilitators to assure the law achieves its maximum impact.|
|Physicians, nurse practitioners (NPs), and physician assistants currently provide the bulk of primary care in the United States (U.S.) to meet the demands of an aging population and expansion of insurance coverage ( Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2014 ; Colwill, Cultice, & Kruse, 2008; DeVol & Bedroussian, 2007; Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of, 2010 ). One projection suggests an additional 52,000 physicians will be needed by 2025 to meet the primary care demand (Petterson et al., 2012); however, the supply of these providers is expected to decrease ( Association of Medical Colleges Center for Workforce Studies, 2015 ). Conversely, NP workforce is expected to grow. In 2013, NPs comprised about 19% of the U.S. primary care provider workforce, and the number of NPs will increase by 93% by 2025 ( Health Resources and Services Administration, 2016 ), potentially expanding the primary care capacity ( Auerbach, et al., 2013 ; Green, Savin, & Lu, 2013 ).|
|However, the ability of NPs to care for patients has been limited by state-level scope of practice (SOP) regulations that determine the services NPs provide. Nurse practitioner state-level scope of practice laws vary across states. In 2017, 22 states and the District of Columbia authorize NPs to deliver care according to their competencies ( Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2017 ). The remaining states impose restrictions, including the requirement of NPs to have supervisory or collaborative relationships with physicians. Some states require NPs to have such relationships both for delivering care and prescribing medication and services, other states impose restrictions only on one aspect. The Federal Trade Commission, the National Governors Association, and the National Academy of Medicine have criticized these laws and recommend removal of these restrictions to improve access to care ( Federal Trade Commission, 2014 ; Institute of Medicine, 2010 ; National Governors Association, 2012 ). Indeed, states granting NPs greater SOP authority experience expanded health care utilization (Kuo, Loresto, Rounds, & Goodwin, 2013; Xue, Ye, Brewer, & Spetz, 2016).|
|In 2015, New York State (NYS) implemented the Nurse Practitioners Modernization Act ( New York State Department of Education, 2015 ). The law removed the required written practice agreement between NPs and physicians for experienced NPs with more than 3,600 hours of practice. New NPs with less than 3,600 hours of practice still are required to have this agreement. The outdated policy requiring NPs to have a written practice agreement with physicians limited NPs’ ability to independently care for their patients and practice in underserved areas with shortage of primary care physicians. This policy change aimed to promote NP independent practice and address the misdistribution of primary care services across NYS by allowing experienced NPs to practice independently in underserved areas ( Center for Health Workforce Studies, 2013 ). In this study, we assessed the perspectives of physicians and NPs on the barriers and facilitators of implementing the NP Modernization Act 18 months after the policy adoption.|
|One researcher (AN), an experienced NP in NYS with expertise in qualitative designs, conducted all interviews using a semistructured interview guide that allowed for probing for additional information. The researcher kept a reflexivity journal prior to and during the interviews to reduce bias. We developed the questions from existing evidence. Interviews started with questions regarding the practice, participants’ roles, and then about the NP Modernization Act. Table 1 presents key questions.||
|Each interviewee signed a consent form. Interviews and data analysis were conducted concurrently ( DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006 ). As interviews progressed, participants provided information, which was further explored in subsequent interviews. All interviews were conducted in the participant’s practice office with no others present during the interview. Interviews were audio-taped and lasted between 25 and 45 minutes. The interviewer took notes. Demographic and practice characteristic information was also collected. Data collection took place in the summer-fall of 2016.|
|Twenty-three interviews were completed initially (12 NPs and 11 physicians) and analyzed to identify codes and themes ( Miles & Huberman, 1984 ). To further explore the codes and themes and develop an exhaustive description, we conducted three additional interviews with two NPs and one physician. In alignment with qualitative research principles (Sandelowski, 2007), data collection ended when interviews were not producing new information. This was reached after the 26th interview.|
|Interview audio-recordings were transcribed verbatim by a transcriptionist. We imported the data into the qualitative software package, Atlas, and using iterative content analysis ( Bradley, Curry, & Devers, 2007 ), we analyzed the data. Two researchers independently read and reread transcripts for overall understanding and inductively coded the data ( Hsieh & Shannon, 2005 ). We reviewed data line-by-line and when a concept became apparent, we assigned a code. We used constant comparison to refine codes and had regular in-person meetings to review discrepancies and achieve consensus. After identifying all concepts, we linked them to develop themes relating to barriers and facilitators of the law’s implementation. We also conducted a comparative analysis in two groups (physicians and NPs) by retrieving data coded with both conceptual and participant codes. This comparison showed whether certain concepts were reported differently between two groups. Findings were shared with participants to obtain feedback. Demographic data were analyzed using SPSS v24.|
|Table 2 includes information about the 14 NP and 12 physician participants. The mean age was 41 years for NPs and 45 years for physicians. The mean years of experience for NPs was about 7 years and for physicians was 13 years. Twelve of 14 NPs (85.7%) were experienced NPs with at least 3,600 hours of clinical practice. The majority of NPs and physicians worked in practices affiliated with hospitals or medical centers. We identified four barriers and two facilitators toward the law’s implementation ( Table 3 ), which emerged both in NP and physician interviews; thus, findings are combined.||
|The following barriers emerged: stagnant organizational policy; lack of awareness of NP competencies; lack of knowledge about the NP Modernization Act; and physician autonomy and resistance to change.|
|Stagnant organizational policy|
|Lack of awareness of NP competencies|
|Lack of knowledge about the NP Modernization Act|
|Physician autonomy and resistance to change|
|Two factors emerged as facilitators: NP and physician collegiality and positive perceptions of the benefits of NP independence and the law.|
|Nurse practitioner and physician collegiality|
|Positive perceptions of the benefits of NP independence and the law|
|Our study represents one of the first comprehensive assessments of the NYS NP SOP policy change implementation. Despite the attention on the NP workforce and the regulatory trend of loosening NP SOP restrictions nationwide ( Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2017 ), no study has assessed how these laws are implemented. The response to policy change is important to understand because translation from policy into practice is a necessary step in realizing the law’s goals. Our study reveals some important barriers toward the law’s implementation, which should be addressed by policy makers and administrators to assure NPs in NYS practice according to the law. Despite that NP SOP is different in NYS, our findings may inform policy makers in other states considering reform of NP SOP laws. New York State has had a slow response to SOP law change compared with other policies. Research on other state policy changes has shown immediate and measurable responses (Gresenz, Edgington, Laugesen, & Escarce, 2012; Gresenz, Laugesen, Yesus, & Escarce, 2011; Laugesen et al., 2014; Sabik & Laugesen, 2012). Both NPs and physicians believe that their organizations lack the ability to embrace policy innovations and no efforts are undertaken to implement the law. These findings are consistent with previous research showing how implementation is frequently overlooked after legislation is passed ( Pressman & Wildavsky, 1984 ).|
|Most practices had not changed their bylaws in accordance with the law. These findings contribute to new knowledge that legislative change alone is not adequate to maximize the contributions of the NP workforce to our health care system. For the NP Modernization Act to achieve maximum impact, many stakeholders, including physicians and administrators, should get involved in efforts to embrace the law at the organizational level. With more NPs employed in practices associated with hospitals or medical centers, it is particularly important to work with leadership because these organizations seem to be more resistant to expanding NP SOP. Currently, about 32% of NPs in NYS practice in such settings ( Poghosyan, Boyd, & Knutson, 2014 ). Supporting NP practice according to the state laws promotes patient safety ( O’Grady, 2008 ).|
|Although NPs gained legal SOP in NYS in 1988 ( Elwell & Ferrara, 2014 ), there remains a lack of awareness among some physicians about NP competencies. Evidence is clear that NPs deliver high-quality care ( Kurtzman & Barnow, 2017 ; Newhouse et al., 2011 ). Therefore, increasing awareness about NP competencies could promote the implementation of the NP Modernization Act. Also, although the law affects both NPs and physicians, many physicians are unfamiliar with it. Raising awareness about the law, particularly how it can positively affect the practice of NPs and physicians, patient care, and the overall health care system may motivate its implementation.|
|Nurse practitioner and physician collegiality and leadership’s positive perceptions of NP independence and the law facilitate the law’s implementation. Physicians speak favorably about the NPs they work with and support NP independent practice if they already have favorable relationships. Our findings suggest that physicians’ greater familiarity with NPs increases support for NPs. These findings are consistent with research showing that physicians practicing with NPs have positive attitudes toward them ( Street & Cossman, 2010 ). As the number of NPs grows, it may lead to improved relationships between NPs and physicians and subsequently to a better implementation of laws aimed at loosening restrictions on NP SOP.|
|Our findings reinforce existing research showing that support for NPs depends on organizational leadership ( Poghosyan et al., 2013 ). In organizations where leadership does not share resources with NPs and/or do not communicate with NPs, teamwork between NPs and physicians suffers, thereby inhibiting state policy adoption ( Poghosyan & Liu, 2016 ). Efforts should promote the relationship between NPs and leadership to aid the implementation of the policy at the practice level.|
|The NP Modernization Act is a major policy accomplishment in NYS. Policy makers and administrators should make efforts to remove the barriers and promote facilitators of the law’s implementation to assure the law achieves its maximum impact.|
|Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2014). Primary care workforce facts and stats No. 3: Distribution of the U.S. primary care workforce. Retrieved from https://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/factsheets/primary/pcwork3/index.html . [Context Link]|
|Association of Medical Colleges Center for Workforce Studies. (2015). Physician supply and demand through 2025: Key findings. Retrieved from https://www.aamc.org/download/426260/data/physiciansupplyanddemandthrough2025keyfindings.pdf . [Context Link]|
|Auerbach D. I., Chen P. G., Friedberg M. W., Reid R., Lau C., Buerhaus P. I., Mehrotra A. (2013). Nurse-managed health centers and patient-centered medical homes could mitigate expected primary care physician shortage. Health Affairs, 32, 1933-1941. Bibliographic Links [Context Link]|
|Bradley E. H., Curry L. A., Devers K. J. (2007). Qualitative data analysis for health services research: Developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Services Research, 42, 1758-1772. Bibliographic Links [Context Link]|
|Center for Health Workforce Studies. (2013). The health care workforce in New York, 2012: Trends in the supply and demand for health workers. Retrieved from http://chws.albany.edu/archive/uploads/2013/04/nytracking2013.pdf . [Context Link]|
|Colwill J. M., Cultice J. M., Kruse R. L. (2008). Will generalist physician supply meet demands of an increasing and aging population? Health Affairs, 27, w232-w241. [Context Link]|
|DeVol R., Bedroussian A. (2007). An unhealthy America: The economic burden of chronic disease. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Institute. [Context Link]|
|DiCicco-Bloom B., Crabtree B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40, 314-321. [Context Link]|
|Elwell J., Ferrara S. (2014). The elimination of practice barriers for nurse practitioners in new york state: An historical perspective. Retrieved from https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.thenpa.org/resource/resmgr/Headline_News/EliminationofPracticeBarrier.pdf . [Context Link]|
|Federal Trade Commission. (2014) Policy perspectives: Competition and the regulation of advanced practice nurses. Retrieved from https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/policy-perspectives-competition-regulation-advanced-practice-nurses/140307aprnpolicypaper.pdf . [Context Link]|
|Green L. V., Savin S., Lu Y. (2013). Primary care physician shortages could be eliminated through use of teams, nonphysicians, and electronic communication. Health Affairs, 32, 11-19. [Context Link]|
|Gresenz C. R., Edgington S. E., Laugesen M. J., Escarce J. J. (2012). Take-up of public insurance and crowd-out of private insurance under recent CHIP expansions to higher income children. Health Services Research, 47, 1999-2011. [Context Link]|
|Gresenz C. R., Laugesen M. J., Yesus A., Escarce J. J. (2011). Relative affordability of health insurance premiums under CHIP expansion programs and the ACA. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 36, 859-877. Bibliographic Links [Context Link]|
|Health Resources and Services Administration. (2016). National and regional projections of supply and demand for primary care practitioners: 2013-2025. Retrieved from https://bhw.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/bhw/health-workforce-analysis/research/projections/primary-care-national-projections2013-2025.pdf . [Context Link]|
Use the following coupon code :