Search

In this 3rd part of our 6-part series on value-informed nursing practice-practice that focuses on both achieving desired patient outcomes and minimizing the use of costly resources to achieve these outcomes-we focus on the importance of nurses in improving environmental outcomes and reducing costly environmental waste. We also propose how nursing education needs to change to prepare the next generation of nurses to effectively address environmental problems through providing value-informed nursing practice.

Nurses make decisions about the use of costly resources in countless care delivery settings 24 hours a day. Consequently, nurses are inseparably connected to not only the quality and safety of care, but to the cost-of-care as well. This article is Part 1 of a 6-part series on value-informed nursing practice. It describes the concept of 'value-informed nursing practice'-practice that focuses not only on outcomes, but also on the cost of care-as a new way to envision nursing practice.

Different staffing configurations in primary and geriatric care practices could have implications for how best to deliver services that are essential for a growing population of older adults. Using data from a 2018 survey of physicians (MDs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) working in primary and geriatric care, we assessed whether different configurations were associated with better or worse performance on a number of standard process measures indicative of comprehensive, high-quality primary care. Practices with a large concentration of MDs had the highest estimated labor costs. Practices high in NPs and physician assistants (PAs) were most common in states that grant full scope of practice to NPs. The high-NP/PA configuration was associated with a 17-percentage-point greater probability of facilitating patient visits and a 26-percentage-point greater probability of providing the full bundle of primary care services compared with the high-MD model. Team-based configurations had a 27.7-percentage-point greater probability of providing the full bundle of primary care services. The complex needs of older adults may be best served by team-based practices with a broad provider mix that can provide a range of services in the office and the community.

Rural registered nurses (RNs) play an integral role in providing care for an underserved population with worse health outcomes than urban counterparts. However, little information is available on the profile of this workforce, which is necessary to understand the capacity of these nurses to provide quality and demanded care presently and in the future.We utilize data from the American Community Survey to provide a contemporary analysis on the supply of rural RNs in the United States.While the number of physicians serving rural populations has decreased in recent years, and rural nurse practitioners (NPs) remain in short supply, rural RNs have steadily grown in numbers at a rate comparable to urban RNs. Rural RNs are markedly less diverse than the populations they serve and only half of rural RNs had a bachelor's degree or higher compared to over 70% for urban RNs. In their supply, young rural nurses appear on pace with urban nurses to adequately replace older nurses and continue to grow the workforce, based on data through 2019.The rural RN workforce is projected to steadily grow amidst declining rural physicians and limited rural NPs. The burgeoning investments in the rural health workforce present opportunities to help diversify, increase educational access, and further rural readiness for rural RNs moving forward.

With the ongoing transition to value-based health care, a strong command of foundational economic concepts, like cost and value, and the ability to thoughtfully engage in value-informed nursing practice have become essential for the future of the nursing profession. Earlier in this six-part series, we explained value-informed nursing practice, its historical, economic, and ethical foundation, its promise for an environmentally responsible, innovation-driven future health care, and why its adoption requires a reframing of some of the nursing's professional norms and behaviors. This paper concludes the series with one of the most important issues-education for value-informed nursing practice. We begin by setting forth our vision of how nursing students will learn and apply value informed nursing practice, consider challenges that nurse educators will face, and offer some suggestions for engraining value into the consciousness of the nursing profession.

Background The U.S. health care system faces increasing pressures for reform. The importance of nurses in addressing health care delivery challenges cannot be overstated. Purpose To present a Nursing Health Services Research (NHSR) agenda for the 2020s. Method A meeting of an interdisciplinary group of 38 health services researchers to discuss five key challenges facing health care delivery (behavioral health, primary care, maternal/neonatal outcomes, the aging population, health care spending) and identify the most pressing and feasible research questions for NHSR in the coming decade. Findings Guided by a list of inputs affecting health care delivery (health information technology, workforce, delivery systems, payment, social determinants of health), meeting participants identified 5 to 6 research questions for each challenge. Also, eight cross-cutting themes illuminating the opportunities and barriers facing NHSR emerged. Discussion The Agenda can act as a foundation for new NHSR – which is more important than ever – in the 2020s.

Concerns about physician shortages have led policy makers in the US public and private sectors to advocate for the greater use of nurse practitioners (NPs). We examined recent changes in demographi...

ImportanceA better understanding of the association between family structure and sex gaps in physician earnings and hours worked over the life cycle is needed to advance policies addressing persistent sex disparities.ObjectiveTo investigate differences in earnings and hours worked for male and female physicians at various ages and family status.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective, cross-sectional study used data on physicians aged 25 to 64 years responding to the American Community Survey between 2005 and 2019.ExposuresEarned income and work hours.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOutcomes included annual earned income, usual hours worked per week, and earnings per hour worked. Gaps in earnings and hours by sex were calculated by family status and physician age and, in some analyses, adjusted for demographic characteristics and year of survey. Data analyses were conducted between 2019 and 2022.ResultsThe sample included 95 435 physicians (35.8% female, 64.2% male, 19.8% Asian, 4.8% Black, 5.9% Hispanic, 67.3% White, and 2.2% other race or ethnicity) with a mean (SD) age of 44.4 (10.4) years. Relative to male physicians, female physicians were more likely to be single (18.8% vs 11.2%) and less likely to have children (53.3% vs 58.2%). Male-female earnings gaps grew with age and, when accumulated from age 25 to 64 years, were approximately $1.6 million for single physicians, $2.5 million for married physicians without children, and $3.1 million for physicians with children. Gaps in earnings per hour did not vary by family structure, with male physicians earning between 21.4% and 23.9% more per hour than female physicians. The male-female gap in hours worked was 0.6% for single physicians, 7.0% for married physicians without children, and 17.5% for physicians with children.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study of US physicians, marriage and children were associated with a greater earnings penalty for female physicians, primarily due to fewer hours worked relative to men. Addressing the barriers that lead to women working fewer hours could contribute to a reduction in the male-female earnings gap while helping to expand the effective physician workforce.

Different staffing configurations in primary and geriatric care practices could have implications for how best to deliver services that are essential for a growing population of older adults. Using data from a 2018 survey of physicians (MDs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) working in primary and geriatric care, we assessed whether different configurations were associated with better or worse performance on a number of standard process measures indicative of comprehensive, high-quality primary care. Practices with a large concentration of MDs had the highest estimated labor costs. Practices high in NPs and physician assistants (PAs) were most common in states that grant full scope of practice to NPs. The high-NP/PA configuration was associated with a 17-percentage-point greater probability of facilitating patient visits and a 26-percentage-point greater probability of providing the full bundle of primary care services compared with the high-MD model. Team-based configurations had a 27.7-percentage-point greater probability of providing the full bundle of primary care services. The complex needs of older adults may be best served by team-based practices with a broad provider mix that can provide a range of services in the office and the community.

Modernizing Scope-of-Practice Regulations Many health care organizations are experimenting with new ways of unleashing their workforce’s potential. Such approaches require reconfiguring of provider...

Background Little is known about the extent of ordering low-value services by. Purpose To compare the rates of low-value back images ordered by primary care physicians (PCMDs) and primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs). Method We used 2012 and 2013 Medicare Part B claims for all beneficiaries in 18 hospital referral regions (HRRs) and a measure of low-value back imaging from Choosing Wisely. Models included random clinician effect and fixed effects for beneficiary age, disability, Elixhauser comorbidities, clinician sex, the emergency department setting, back pain visit volume, organization, and region (HRR). Findings PCNPs (N = 231) and PCMDs (N = 4,779) order low-value back images at similar rates (NP: all images: 26.5%; MRI/CT: 8.4%; MD: all images: 24.5%; MRI/CT: 7.7%), with no detectable significant difference when controlling for covariates. Discussion PCNPs and PCMDs order low-value back images at an effectively similar rate.

Little is known about practice pattern differences between nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs). We compared the rates of low-value back images ordered by NPs and PAs. For this comparison, we used 2012-2013 Medicare Part B claims for all beneficiaries in 18 hospital referral regions and a measure of low-value back imaging from the Choosing Wisely recommendations. Models included a random clinician effect and fixed effects for beneficiary age, disability, Elixhauser comorbidities, clinician type, the emergency department setting, and region. NPs ( N = 234) order low-value back images significantly less than PAs ( N = 204) (NPs 25.5% vs. PAs 39.2%, p < .0001). Controlling for relevant factors, NPs are 10.0 percentage points ( p < .0001) less likely to order a low-value back image than PAs. NPs and PAs have distinct patterns of low-value back imaging, which is likely a reflection of their different practice settings.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Objective: Applied to value-based health care, the economic term “individual productivity” refers to the quality of an outcome attributable through a care process to an individual clinician. This study aimed to (1) estimate and describe the discharge preparation productivities of individual acute care nurses and (2) examine the association between the discharge preparation productivity of the discharging nurse and the patient’s likelihood of a 30-day return to hospital [readmission and emergency department (ED) visits]. Research Design: Secondary analysis of patient-nurse data from a cluster-randomized multisite study of patient discharge readiness and readmission. Patients reported discharge readiness scores; postdischarge outcomes and other variables were extracted from electronic health records. Using the structure-process-outcomes model, we viewed patient readiness for hospital discharge as a proximal outcome of the discharge preparation process and used it to measure nurse productivity in discharge preparation. We viewed hospital return as a distal outcome sensitive to discharge preparation care. Multilevel regression analyses used a split-sample approach and adjusted for patient characteristics. Subjects: A total 522 nurses and 29,986 adult (18+ y) patients discharged to home from 31 geographically diverse medical-surgical units between June 15, 2015 and November 30, 2016. Measures: Patient discharge readiness was measured using the 8-item short form of Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale (RHDS). A 30-day hospital return was a categorical variable for an inpatient readmission or an ED visit, versus no hospital return. Results: Variability in individual nurse productivity explained 9.07% of variance in patient discharge readiness scores. Nurse productivity was negatively associated with the likelihood of a readmission (−0.48 absolute percentage points, P

Care management programs have become more widely adopted as health systems try to improve the coordination and integration of services across the continuum of care, especially for frail older adults. Several models of care suggest the inclusion of registered nurses (RNs) and social workers to assist in these activities. In a 2018 national survey of 410 clinicians in 363 primary care and geriatrics practices caring for frail older adults, we found that nearly 40 percent of practices had no social workers or RNs. However, when both types of providers did work in a practice, social workers were more likely than RNs to be reported to participate in social needs assessment and RNs more likely than social workers to participate in care coordination. Physicians' involvement in social needs assessment and care coordination declined significantly when social workers, RNs, or both were employed in the practice.

Overuse and inappropriate use of emergency departments (EDs) remains an important issue in health policy. After implementation of Medicaid expansion, many states experienced an increase in ED use, but the magnitude varied. Differential access to primary care might explain such variation.To determine whether the increase in ED use among Medicaid enrollees following Medicaid expansion was smaller in states that allowed greater access to primary care providers by permitting nurse practitioners (NPs) to practice without physician oversight.Examining data on ED use by Medicaid beneficiaries, we estimated random effects models to examine changes in ED visits. Models for 8 different clinical conditions were estimated, with each model including a linear time trend, indicators for Medicaid expansion and for the absence of physician oversight requirements, and an interaction between these 2 indicators.States requiring physician oversight of NPs had a 28% increase in ED visits relative to the preexpansion period, while states allowing NP practice without physician oversight had only a 7% increase. The increase in the share of visits covered by Medicaid in no-oversight states was 40% of the size of the increase in oversight states.Allowing NPs to practice without physician oversight was associated with a reduction in the magnitude of increase in ED use following Medicaid expansion. States that restrict NP practice should weigh the costs of maintaining these restrictions against the potential benefits of lower ED use. States considering Medicaid expansion should also consider relaxing NP scope-of-practice laws.

Among the many trends influencing health and health care delivery over the next decade, three are particularly important: the transition to value-based care and increased focus on population health; the shift of care from acute to community-based settings; and addressing the vulnerability of rural health care systems in North Carolina.

Ensuring and Sustaining a Pandemic Workforce It seems clear that health care delivery organizations, educators, and government leaders all have to be willing to cut through bureaucratic barriers an...

Highlights • MDs report that MDs are their team leaders in most circumstances; NPs are less likely to indicate that MDs lead their teams. • Less than half of MD or NP clinicians agree that they experience excellent team work in their units • Significantly more MDs than NPs agree their role in the care team is clear, Importance The delivery of emergency, trauma, critical and intensive care services requires coordination among all members of the care team. Perceived teamwork and role clarity may vary among physicians (MDs) and nurse practitioners (NPs). Objective To examine differences in perceived roles and responsibilities of NPs and MDs practicing in emergency, trauma, critical and intensive care. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s) Key clinical activities, perceptions of role clarity, teamwork and preparedness to function as a team in disaster Design Secondary Analysis of the National Survey of Emergency, Intensive and Critical Care Nurse Practitioners and Physicians, a 2015 cross-sectional national survey of clinicians. Setting Mail survey of randomly selected stratified cross-sectional samples of MDs and NPs drawn from national lists of clinicians in eligible specialties working in emergency, trauma, intensive and critical care units in the United States. Participants 814 clinicians (351 NPs and 463 MDs) recruited from national by postal mail survey. Our initial sample included n=2063 clinicians, n=1031 NPs and n=1032 MDs in eligible specialties. Of these, 63.5% of NPs and 70.1% of MDs completed and returned the survey excluding those who were ineligible due to lack of current practice in a relevant specialty Results NPs in ICU/CCU are more likely to be female and report working fewer hours than do MDs and provide direct care to more patients. 55% of NPs and 82% of MDs agree that their individual role in their unit is clear (p

To describe physicians' and nurse practitioners' perceptions of the national and local PICU physician and other provider supply in institutions that employ PICU nurse practitioners, assess for differences in perceptions of supply, and evaluate the intent of institutions to hire additional nurse practitioners to work in PICUs.National, quantitative, cross-sectional descriptive study via a postal mail survey from October 2016 to January 2017.Institutions (n = 140) identified in the 2015 American Hospital Association Annual Survey with a PICU who employ PICU nurse practitioners.PICU physician medical directors and nurse practitioners.None.There were 119 respondents, representing 93 institutions. Responses were received from 60 PICU medical directors (43%) and 59 lead nurse practitioners (42%). More than half (58%) of all respondents reported the national supply of PICU physicians is less than demand and 61% reported the local supply of PICU providers (physicians in all stages of training, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) is less than demand. Of the respondents from institutions that self-reported a local provider shortage (n = 54), three fourths (78%) reported plans to increase the number of PICU nurse practitioners in the next 3 years and 40% were likely to expand the nurse practitioner's role in patient care.Most PICU medical directors and lead nurse practitioners in institutions that employ PICU nurse practitioners perceived that national and local supply of providers to be less than the demand. Nurse practitioners are employed in PICUs as part of interdisciplinary models of care being used to address provider demand. The demand for more PICU nurse practitioners with expanded roles in care delivery was reported. Further evaluation of models of care and provider roles in care delivery can contribute to aligning provider supply with demand for care delivery.

Objective: To describe the members of pediatric intensive care unit interdisciplinary provider teams and labor inputs, working conditions, and clinical practice of pediatric intensive care unit nurse practitioners. Methods: A national, quantitative, crosssectional, descriptive postal survey of pediatric intensive care unit medical directors and nurse practitioners was administered to gather information about provider-team members, pediatric intensive care unit nurse practitioner labor inputs, working conditions, and clinical practice. Descriptive statistics, cross-tabulations, and χ2 tests were used. Results: Responses from 97 pediatric intensive care unit medical directors and 59 pediatric intensive care unit nurse practitioners representing 126 institutions were received. Provider-team composition varied between institutions with and without nurse practitioners. Pediatric intensive care units employed an average of 3 full-time nurse practitioners; the average nurse practitioner-to-patient ratio was 1 to 5. The clinical practice reported by medical directors was consistent with practice reported by nurse practitioners. Conclusion: Nurse practitioners are integrated into interdisciplinary pediatric intensive care unit teams, but institutional variation in team composition exists. Investigating models of care contributes to the understanding of how models influence positive patient and organizational outcomes and may change future role implementation.

The behavioral health workforce, which encompasses a broad range of professions providing prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation services for mental health conditions and substance use disorders, is in the midst of what is considered by many to be a workforce crisis. The workforce shortage can be attributed to both insufficient numbers and maldistribution of workers, leaving some communities with no behavioral health providers. In addition, demand for behavioral health services has increased more rapidly as a result of federal legislation over the past decade supporting mental health and substance use parity and by healthcare reform. In order to address workforce capacity issues that impact access to care, the field must engage in extensive planning; however, these efforts are limited by the lack of timely and useable data on the behavioral health workforce. One method for standardizing data collection efforts is the adoption of a Minimum Data Set. This article describes workforce data limitations, the need for standardizing data collection, and the development of a behavioral health workforce Minimum Data Set intended to address these gaps. The Minimum Data Set includes five categorical data themes to describe worker characteristics: demographics, licensure and certification, education and training, occupation and area of practice, and practice characteristics and settings. Some data sources align with Minimum Data Set themes, although deficiencies in the breadth and quality of data exist. Development of a Minimum Data Set is a foundational step for standardizing the collection of behavioral health workforce data. Key challenges for dissemination and implementation of the Minimum Data Set are also addressed. Supplement information This article is part of a supplement entitled The Behavioral Health Workforce: Planning, Practice, and Preparation, which is sponsored by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

To examine differences in the quality of care provided by primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs), primary care physicians (PCMDs), or both clinicians.Medicare part A and part B claims during 2012-2013.Retrospective cohort design using standard risk-adjustment methodologies and propensity score weighting assessing 16 claims-based quality measures grouped into 4 domains of primary care: chronic disease management, preventable hospitalizations, adverse outcomes, and cancer screening.Continuously enrolled aged, disabled, and dual eligible beneficiaries who received at least 25% of their primary care services from a random sample of PCMDs, PCNPs, or both clinicians.Beneficiaries attributed to PCNPs had lower hospital admissions, readmissions, inappropriate emergency department use, and low-value imaging for low back pain. Beneficiaries attributed to PCMDs were more likely than those attributed to PCNPs to receive chronic disease management and cancer screenings. Quality of care for beneficiaries jointly attributed to both clinicians generally scored in the middle of the PCNP and PCMD attributed beneficiaries with the exception of cancer screening.The quality of primary care varies by clinician type, with different strengths for PCNPs and PCMDs. These comparative advantages should be considered when determining how to organize primary care to Medicare beneficiaries.

Background Studies suggest nurse practitioners are heavily represented among primary care providers for vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries. Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare quality indicators among three groups of vulnerable beneficiaries managed by MDs and nurse practitioners (NPs). Methods The methods include retrospective cohort design examining 2012 and 2013 Medicare claims for three beneficiary groups: (a) initially qualified for the program due to disability, (b) dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, and (c) both disabled and dually eligible. Validated quality indicators in four domains were analyzed. Discussion Gaps in outcomes suggest better performance for primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs) in preventable hospitalizations and adverse outcomes. Outcome gaps suggesting better performance for primary care physicians in chronic disease management were diminished for beneficiaries who were both disabled and dually eligible suggesting improved performance for PCNPs within this subpopulation. Conclusion These findings add new evidence indicating the quality of primary care provided to vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries by PCNPs is generally consistent with clinical guidelines and the less intensive use of costly health care services.

Four challenges face the nursing workforce of today and tomorrow: the aging of the baby boom generation, the shortage and uneven distribution of physicians, the accelerating rate of registered nurse retirements, and the uncertainty of health care reform. This article describes these major trends and examines their implications for nursing. The article also describes how nurses can meet these complex and interrelated challenges and continue to thrive in an ever-changing environment.

Introduction Nurse practitioner (NP) prescribing continues to be a contentious policy issue, and studies systematically examining NP prescribing are lacking. The aim of this study was to conduct a descriptive analysis comparing the prescribing services of NPs with those of primary care physicians (PCPs) in providing care to Medicare beneficiaries. Methods Part D drug claims of beneficiaries who saw an NP or a PCP in 2009 and 2010 were examined for differences in the types of medications prescribed, the volume of prescriptions, and the duration of prescriptions across all drug classes in Medicare Part D. Results Data for 164,681 beneficiaries were analyzed. Results showed the same top 20 types of medications and the same share of generic medications for NP and PCP prescriptions. Differences in prescribing patterns were found for the number of prescriptions and for the duration of the prescriptions (days' supply per claim). NP beneficiaries received, on average, approximately one more 30-day prescription per year than PCP beneficiaries. The mean duration for an NP prescription claim was 3 days shorter than that for a PCP prescription claim, indicating that NP beneficiaries need refills sooner than PCP beneficiaries. This pattern existed in most drug classes and was more pronounced in behavioral drug classes, such as antidepressants, antipsychotics, psychotherapeutics, and opioids and in patients with more comorbidities. Differences in state scope of practice laws did not affect these prescribing patterns. Conclusions Key differences were observed in the number and duration of prescriptions written by NPs and PCPs. Further research is needed to understand the impact of differences in NP and PCP patient populations on provider prescribing, such as the higher number of prescriptions issued by NPs for beneficiaries in moderate and high comorbidity groups and the implications of the duration of prescriptions for clinical outcomes, patient-provider rapport, costs, and potential gaps in medication coverage.

Growing Ranks of Advanced Practice Clinicians Nurse practitioners and physician assistants are providing an increasing share of health care services, and education programs have proliferated. These...

Implications of an Aging Rural Physician Workforce As fewer younger physicians enter rural practice in the United States, the rural physician workforce is graying and nearing retirement. The uneven...

Background Little is known about the geographic distribution of the overall primary care workforce that includes both physician and nonphysician clinicians--particularly in areas with restrictive nurse practitioner scope-of-practice laws and where there are relatively large numbers of uninsured. Objective We investigated whether geographic accessibility to primary care clinicians (PCCs) differed across urban and rural areas and across states with more or less restrictive scope-of-practice laws. Research design An observational study. Subjects 2013 Area Health Resource File (AHRF) and US Census Bureau county travel data. Measures The measures included percentage of the population in low-accessibility, medium-accessibility, and high-accessibility areas; number of geographically accessible primary care physicians (PCMDs), nurse practitioners (PCNPs), and physician assistants (PCPAs) per 100,000 population; and number of uninsured per PCC. Results We found divergent patterns in the geographic accessibility of PCCs. PCMDs constituted the largest share of the workforce across all settings, but were relatively more concentrated within urban areas. Accessibility to nonphysicians was highest in rural areas: there were more accessible PCNPs per 100,000 population in rural areas of restricted scope-of-practice states (21.4) than in urban areas of full practice states (13.9). Despite having more accessible nonphysician clinicians, rural areas had the largest number of uninsured per PCC in 2012. While less restrictive scope-of-practice states had up to 40% more PCNPs in some areas, we found little evidence of differences in the share of the overall population in low-accessibility areas across scope-of-practice categorizations. Conclusions Removing restrictive scope-of-practice laws may expand the overall capacity of the primary care workforce, but only modestly in the short run. Additional efforts are needed that recognize the locational tendencies of physicians and nonphysicains.

Research has shown male registered nurses (RNs) outearn their female colleagues by approximately $5,000 annually. The aim of this study was to explore differences in characteristics of female and male fulltime employed RNs, and to examine whether these differences help account for the female-male earnings gap in nursing. Specifically, the researchers tested whether the gender earnings gap could be explained by differences in career aspiration, workplace experience, time taken out of the labor force for child-rearing, and physical strength. While some evidence suggested motivational differences in career aspirations between female and male RNs exist, evidence supporting other hypotheses was not found. Given the expansion of nurses' roles in health care delivery, serious deliberations of how to respond to the earnings gap in nursing is warranted.

To describe the extent to which organizational regulation of pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) nurse practitioner (NP) practice and prescriptive authority aligns with state scope-of-practice (SSOP) regulations, to examine differences between PICU medical directors' and NPs' report of regulation, and to describe organizational-level restriction of PICU NP practice.A 34-item national, quantitative cross-sectional descriptive survey of US PICU medical directors and NPs included demographic, institutional characteristics, and PICU NP regulation and role-related questions. Invitations to participate were sent between October 2016 and January 2017.Respondents (n = 121, 60 PICU NPs and 61 PICU medical directors) reported that 30% of PICU NPs have additional organizational restrictions beyond their SSOP practice authority and 11% have prescriptive authority regulations that exceed those required by the SSOP regulations. Medical directors and lead NPs showed agreement in reports of NP practice regulation. Variation in organizational-level restrictions of privileging, billing, and reporting structure practices were identified.As more states move to full SSOP regulatory environments, organizational regulation of NP practice can impede attainment of full practice authority. Future research is needed to determine whether variations in regulation of PICU NP practice influence patient outcomes, interdisciplinary collaboration, and NP role actualization.

Objective This study is designed to assess the cost of services provided to Medicare beneficiaries by nurse practitioners (NPs) billing under their own National Provider Identification number as compared to primary care physicians (PCMDs). Data Source Medicare Part A (inpatient) and Part B (office visit) claims for 2009–2010. Study Design Retrospective cohort design using propensity score weighted regression. Data Extraction Methods Beneficiaries cared for by a random sample of NPs and primary care physicians. Principal Findings After adjusting for demographic characteristics, geography, comorbidities, and the propensity to see an NP, Medicare evaluation and management payments for beneficiaries assigned to an NP were $207, or 29 percent, less than PCMD assigned beneficiaries. The same pattern was observed for inpatient and total office visit paid amounts, with 11 and 18 percent less for NP assigned beneficiaries, respectively. Results are similar for the work component of relative value units as well. Conclusions This study provides new evidence of the lower cost of care for beneficiaries managed by NPs, as compared to those managed by PCMDs across inpatient and office-based settings. Results suggest that increasing access to NP primary care will not increase costs for the Medicare program and may be cost saving.

Background Projections of physician shortages, an aging population, and insurance expansions have increased interest in expanding the number of primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs) in the United States. Although information about the number and distribution of nurse practitioners is known, there is little information about the practice characteristics of PCNPs. The purpose of this study was to identify demographic and practice characteristics of PCNPs and compare these characteristics with primary care physicians (PCMDs). Methods From November 23, 2011, to April 9, 2012, we conducted a national postal mail survey of 972 clinicians (467 PCNPs and 505 PCMDs). Questionnaire domains included compensation and billing practices; characteristics of patients treated; PCNPs' use of their own National Provider Identification number to bill services; how PCNPs spend their time; clinical and nonclinical activities performed; and whether PCNPs have privileges to admit, round on (i.e., oversee the care provided to) patients, and write orders independently of physicians. The response rate was 61.2%. Discussion PCNPs are more likely than PCMDs to practice in urban and rural areas, provide care in a wider range of community settings, and treat Medicaid recipients and other vulnerable populations. Not only do most PCNPs work with PCMDs, but also the majority of both clinicians believe that increasing the supply of PCNPs will result in greater collaboration and team practice. Although PCNPs and PCMDs deliver similar services and spend their time in nearly identical ways, PCNPs work less hours and see fewer patients, and only a handful of PCNPs have their salary adjusted for productivity and quality performance. PCNPs cite government and local regulations as impeding their capacity to admit and round on patients in hospitals and long-term care facilities and write treatment orders without a physician cosignature. Conclusions Significant differences in demographic and practice characteristics exist between PCNPs and PCMDs. Whether working independently or with PCMDs, increasing the number of PCNPs can be expected to expand access to primary care, particularly for vulnerable populations, and for those gaining access to health insurance through the Affordable Care Act.

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.

Baby-boomer registered nurses (RNs), the largest segment of the RN workforce from 1981 to 2012, are now retiring. This would have led to nurse shortages but for the surprising embrace of the profession by millennials-who are entering the nurse workforce at nearly double the rate of the boomers. Still, the boomers' retirement will reduce growth in the size of the RN workforce to 1.3 percent per year for the period 2015-30.

Context: State scope of practice (SoP) laws impose significant restrictions on the services that a nurse practitioner (NP) may provide in some states, yet evidence about SoP limitations on the quality of primary care is very limited. Method: This study uses six different classifications of state regulations and bivariate and multivariate analyses to compare beneficiaries attributed to primary care nurse practitioners and primary care physicians in 2013 testing two hypotheses: (1) chronic disease management, cancer screening, preventable hospitalizations, and adverse outcomes of care provided by primary care nurse practitioners are better in reduced and restricted practice states compared to states without restrictions and (2) by decreasing access to care, SoP restrictions negatively affect the quality of primary care. Findings: Results show a lack of consistent association between quality of primary care provided by NPs and state SoP restrictions. Conclusion: State regulations restricting NP SoP do not improve the quality of care.

As the US population ages, primary care is expected to be the health care “home” for older adults, and several initiatives are aimed at helping to transform primary care practice to care for this population. Wide variation in staffing has been observed. Meyers et al proposed ideal models of primary care staffing for a general population and for a frail elderly population (2018). We developed the 2018 Survey of Primary Care and Geriatric Clinicians to measure optimal team configuration in clinical practices caring for older adults. A majority employed NPs, MDs and PAs, with [r = -.53] between % of clinician labor of NPs and physicians). High-NP practices are more likely located in states with full scope of practice, perform well for frail elders and are less expensive. Meyers' models, with fewer physicians, more SW and CHWs, more RNs, perform better for frail elders, and are less expensive.

Numerous forecasts have predicted shortages of primary care providers, particularly in light of an expected increase in patient demand resulting from the Affordable Care Act. Yet these forecasts could be inaccurate because they generally do not allow for changes in the way primary care is delivered. We analyzed the impact of two emerging models of care--the patient-centered medical home and the nurse-managed health center--both of which use a provider mix that is richer in nurse practitioners and physician assistants than today's predominant models of care delivery. We found that projected physician shortages were substantially reduced in plausible scenarios that envisioned greater reliance on these new models, even without increases in the supply of physicians. Some less plausible scenarios even eliminated the shortage. All of these scenarios, however, may require additional changes, such as liberalized scope-of-practice laws; a larger supply of medical assistants, licensed practical nurses, and aides; and payment changes that reward providers for population health management.

A b s t r ac t Background The U.S. health care system is at a critical juncture in health care workforce planning. The nation has a shortage of primary care physicians. Policy analysts have proposed expanding the supply and scope of practice of nurse practitioners to address increased demand for primary care providers. These proposals are controversial. Methods From November 23, 2011, to April 9, 2012, we conducted a national postal-mail survey of 972 clinicians (505 physicians and 467 nurse practitioners) in primary care practice. Questionnaire domains included scope of work, practice characteristics, and attitudes about the effect of expanding the role of nurse practitioners in primary care. The response rate was 61.2%. Results Physicians reported working longer hours, seeing more patients, and earning higher incomes than did nurse practitioners. A total of 80.9% of nurse practitioners reported working in a practice with a physician, as compared with 41.4% of physicians who reported working with a nurse practitioner. Nurse practitioners were more likely than physicians to believe that they should lead medical homes, be allowed hospital admitting privileges, and be paid equally for the same clinical services. When asked whether they agreed with the statement that physicians provide a higher-quality examination and consultation than do nurse practitioners during the same type of primary care visit, 66.1% of physicians agreed and 75.3% of nurse practitioners disagreed. Conclusions Current policy recommendations that are aimed at expanding the supply and scope of practice of primary care nurse practitioners are controversial. Physicians and nurse practitioners do not agree about their respective roles in the delivery of primary care. (Funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and others.)