Politics of Health Care Politics: A Call to Action.

Nursing has been perceived as an apolitical profession. Although some advancements in legislation and political engagement for nursing have occurred, the perception remains; it is considered to be a relatively silent profession in the political and policy arenas. Authors, when trying to describe this phenomenon, have raised questions about whether the nursing profession is political. In addition, the motivation for participation and advocacy, as well as the barriers to these activities, have limited investigation, making it difficult to understand the real reasons behind nursing's political and policy immobility. The purpose of this article is to familiarize readers with politics, policy, and advocacy; levels of state and federal government; and the lawmaking process in different states. The goal is to offer information and identify factors that increase confidence and efficacy when engaging with the political system.

Political Efficacy and Participation of Nurse Practitioners.

Twenty-eight states have laws and regulations limiting the ability of nurse practitioners (NPs) to practice to the full extent of their education and training, thereby preventing patients from fully accessing NP services. Revisions to state laws and regulations require NPs to engage in the political process. Understanding the political engagement of NPs may facilitate the efforts of nurse leaders and nursing organizations to promote change in state rules and regulations. The purpose of this study was to describe the political efficacy and political participation of U.S. NPs and gain insight into factors associated with political interest and engagement. In the fall of 2015, we mailed a survey to 2,020 NPs randomly chosen from the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners' database and 632 responded (31% response rate). Participants completed the Trust in Government (external political efficacy) and the Political Efficacy (internal political efficacy) scales, and a demographic form. Overall, NPs have low political efficacy. Older age ( p≤.001), health policy mentoring ( p≤.001), and specific education on health policy ( p≤.001) were all positively associated with internal political efficacy and political participation. External political efficacy was not significantly associated with any of the study variables. Political activities of NPs are largely limited to voting and contacting legislators. Identifying factors that engage NPs in grassroots political activities and the broader political arena is warranted, particularly with current initiatives to make changes to state laws and regulations that limit their practice.

Musculoskeletal Workforce Needs: Are Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners the Solution? AOA Critical Issues.

Growth estimates and demographic shifts of the population of the United States foreshadow a future heightened demand for musculoskeletal care. Although many articles have discussed this growing demand on the musculoskeletal workforce, few address the inevitable need for more musculoskeletal care providers. As we are unable to increase the number of orthopaedic surgeons because of restrictions on graduate medical education slots, physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) represent one potential solution to the impending musculoskeletal care supply shortage. This American Orthopaedic Association (AOA) symposium report investigates models for advanced practice provider integration, considers key issues affecting PAs and NPs, and proposes guidelines to help to assess the logistical and educational possibilities of further incorporating NPs and PAs into the orthopaedic workforce in order to address future musculoskeletal care needs.

Integrating advanced practice providers into medical critical care teams.

Because there is increasing demand for critical care providers in the United States, many medical ICUs for adults have begun to integrate nurse practitioners and physician assistants into their medical teams. Studies suggest that such advanced practice providers (APPs), when appropriately trained in acute care, can be highly effective in helping to deliver high-quality medical critical care and can be important elements of teams with multiple providers, including those with medical house staff. One aspect of building an integrated team is a practice model that features appropriate coding and billing of services by all providers. Therefore, it is important to understand an APP's scope of practice, when they are qualified for reimbursement, and how they may appropriately coordinate coding and billing with other team providers. In particular, understanding when and how to appropriately code for critical care services (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code 99291, critical care, evaluation and management of the critically ill or critically injured patient, first 30-74 min; CPT code 99292, critical care, each additional 30 min) and procedures is vital for creating a sustainable program. Because APPs will likely play a growing role in medical critical care units in the future, more studies are needed to compare different practice models and to determine the best way to deploy this talent in specific ICU settings.

Revisiting scope of practice facilitators and barriers for primary care nurse practitioners: a qualitative investigation.

Revisiting scope of practice (SOP) policies for nurse practitioners (NPs) is necessary in the evolving primary care environment with goals to provide timely access, improve quality, and contain cost. This study utilized qualitative descriptive design to investigate NP roles and responsibilities as primary care providers (PCPs) in Massachusetts and their perceptions about barriers and facilitators to their SOP. Through purposive sampling, 23 NPs were recruited and they participated in group and individual interviews in spring 2011.The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Data were analyzed using Atlas.ti 6.0 software, and content analysis was applied. In addition to NP roles and responsibilities, three themes affecting NP SOP were: regulatory environment; comprehension of NP role; and work environment. NPs take on similar responsibilities as physicians to deliver primary care services; however, the regulatory environment and billing practices, lack of comprehension of the NP role, and challenging work environments limit successful NP practice.