Nurse practitioners' degrees and associations with time use, functional autonomy, and job outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Doctorate of Nursing Practice preparation is recommended for entry to nurse practitioner (NP) practice but there are few comparative studies, and their designs conflate educational pathways. PURPOSE: To investigate time use, functional autonomy, and job outcomes among NPs without a doctorate, NPs whose initial NP preparation and doctorate were separated by 2 or more years, and NPs whose NP preparation and doctorate were concurrent. METHOD: We selected all NPs from the 2018 National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses, except those whose doctorates focused on research. We controlled for confounding and applied sample weights to produce nationally representative results. DISCUSSION: NPs' educational pathways are associated with distinct practice roles and, moving forward, policy should be informed by evidence that accounts for their differences. CONCLUSION: Concurrent NPs had higher levels of functional autonomy compared with NPs without a doctorate, but patterns of time use were essentially the same. Separate doctoral education was associated with teaching and administration.

Estimating the Primary Care Workforce for Medicare Beneficiaries Using an Activity-Based Approach.

BACKGROUND: The enumeration of the primary care workforce relies on potentially inaccurate specialty designations sourced from licensure registries and clinician surveys. OBJECTIVE: To use an activity-based measure of primary care to estimate the number of physicians, nurse practitioners (NPs), and physician assistants (PAs) providing primary care to Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Observational study using Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims data. SUBJECTS: All clinicians in the US billing Medicare in 2019 and their fee-for-service Medicare patients. MAIN MEASURES: We construct three measures that together distinguish primary care from specialty clinicians: (1) presence of evaluation and management (E&M) services in a setting consistent with primary care, (2) the dispersion of clinical care across International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) chapters, and (3) the extent of provided services that are atypical of primary care (e.g., surgical procedure). We apply parameters to the measures to identify the clinicians likely providing primary care and compare the resulting classifications across provider type. KEY RESULTS: Of physicians with at least 50 Medicare beneficiaries, 19-22% provide primary care. Of medical generalists (i.e., family medicine, internal medicine) with at least 50 beneficiaries, 61-68% provide primary care. We estimate that 40-45% of NPs and 27-30% of PAs meeting the panel size threshold are primary care providers in FFS Medicare. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that based on a primary care practice style, the number of primary care physicians in FFS Medicare is likely smaller than conventional estimates. However, compared to prior estimates, the number of primary care NPs is larger and the number of PAs is similar.

Eliminate the buprenorphine DEA X waiver: Justification using a policy analysis approach.

INTRODUCTION: Drug overdoses have reached a historic milestone of over 100,000 deaths in a single year, 75,673 related to opioids. The acceleration in opioid-related deaths coupled with stark health inequities demands a close examination of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment barriers and swift consideration of policy changes. DESIGN: The aim of this buprenorphine policy analysis is to summarize existing buprenorphine barriers and present policy solutions to improve access and actualize the contributions of Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs). METHODS: The policy analysis follows five sequential steps: (1) defining the problem, (2) identifying key stakeholders, (3) assessing the landscape of relevant policies, (4) describing viable policy options, and (5) making final recommendations. RESULTS: Although there are laudable efforts to improve buprenorphine access, such as the new buprenorphine guidelines issued in April 2021, without larger-scale changes to federal, state, and scope of practice laws, overdose rates will continue to rise. We recommend a multipronged policy approach to improve buprenorphine treatment access, including eliminating the DEA X waiver, improving OUD education, and adopting full practice authority for APRNs in all states. CONCLUSION: Incremental change is no longer sufficient to address opioid overdose deaths. Bolder and coordinated policy action is possible and necessary to empower the full clinical workforce to apply evidence-based life-saving treatments for OUD. The critical contributions of nurses in advancing equitable access to OUD care are emphasized in the National Academy of Medicine's Report, Future of Nursing: Charting a Path to Achieve Health Equity. Nurses are named as instrumental in improving buprenorphine access. Policy changes that acknowledge and build on evidence-based treatment expansion strategies are sorely needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: One of the most robust tools to combat opioid overdose deaths is buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist, and gold standard medication treatment for OUD, but only 5% of the prescribing workforce possess the required Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) X waiver. A growing body of evidence demonstrates that Advanced Practice Registered Nurses are accelerating the growth in waiver update and buprenorphine use, despite the considerable barriers and limitations described in this policy analysis.

Nurse Performance Metrics: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this scoping review are: 1) to identify instances in the literature that describe measuring individual nurse performance and 2) characterize those metrics. BACKGROUND: The impact of nurses on patient outcomes has been demonstrated at the unit or hospital level, with nurses measured in aggregate. There is an opportunity to evaluate individual nurse performance by creating metrics that capture it. METHODS: A scoping review based on the framework published by the Joanna Briggs Institute was performed. RESULTS: Researchers identified 12 articles. Three themes were trended: the emerging nature of these metrics in the literature, variability in their applications, and performance implications. CONCLUSIONS: Individual nurse performance metrics is an emerging body of research with variability in the types of metrics developed. There is an opportunity for future researchers to work with nurse leaders and staff nurses to optimize these metrics and to use them to support nursing practice and patient care.

Advancement of research on nurse practitioners: Setting a research agenda.

BACKGROUND: Primary care delivered by nurse practitioners (NPs) helps to meet the United States' growing demand for care and improves patient outcomes. Yet, barriers impede NP practice. Knowledge of these barriers is limited, hindering opportunities to eliminate them. PURPOSE: We convened a 1.5-day conference to develop a research agenda to advance evidence on the primary care NP workforce. METHODS: Thirty experts gathered in New York City for a conference in 2022. The conference included plenary sessions, small group discussions, and a prioritization process to identify areas for future research and research questions. DISCUSSION: The research agenda includes top-ranked research questions within five categories: (a) policy regulations and implications for care, quality, and access; (b) systems affecting NP practice; (c) health equity and the NP workforce; (d) NP education and workforce dynamics, and (e) international perspectives. CONCLUSION: The agenda can advance evidence on the NP workforce to guide policy and practice.

State Variation in the Utilization of Nurse Practitioner-Provided Home-Based Primary Care: A Medicare Claims Analysis.

Nurse practitioners (NPs) provide an increasing proportion of home-based primary care, despite restrictive scope of practice laws in approximately one half of states. We examined the relationship between scope of practice laws and state volume of NP-provided home-based primary care by performing an analysis of 2018 to 2019 Medicare claims. For each state we calculated the proportion of total home-based primary care visits by NPs and the proportion of all NPs providing home-based primary care. We used the 2018 American Association of Nurse Practitioners classification of state practice environment. We performed chi-square tests to assess the significance between volume and practice environment. We found that 42% of home-based primary care is delivered by NPs nationally, but substantial variation exists across states. We did not find a discernible or statistically significant pattern of uptake of NP-provided home-based primary care across full, reduced, or restricted states. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 49(5), 11-17.].

Certification alignment of nurse practitioners in acute care.

BACKGROUND: The Consensus Model specifies distinct education preparations for acute care and primary care nurse practitioners (NP), but incomplete implementation and employer hiring practices risk misalignment of certification and practice. PURPOSE: Report the prevalence of acute care certification among NPs working in acute care, investigate the factors associated with alignment, and explore the impact of alignment on nurse outcomes. METHODS: Using the 2018 National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses, we selected NPs practicing acute care and compared employment, education, and nurse outcomes by certification alignment. FINDINGS: A minority of NPs (44.5%) held acute care certification. Controlling for NP characteristics, those practicing in states that restrict a NP's practice to their area of certification had 47% higher odds of acute care certification. DISCUSSION: Understanding patterns of alignment in the NP workforce and the factors that produce them is critical to an appropriate regulatory framework for advanced practice nursing.

The Effect of Supervision Waivers on Practice: A Survey of Massachusetts Nurse Practitioners During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: While optimal utilization of the nurse practitioner (NP) workforce is an increasingly popular proposal to alleviate the growing primary care shortage, federal, state, and organizational scope of practice policies inhibit NPs from practicing to the full extent of their license and training. In March of 2020, NP state-specific supervisory requirements were temporarily waived to meet the demands of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Massachusetts. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the impact of temporarily waived state practice restrictions on NP perception of care delivery during the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic in Massachusetts. RESEARCH DESIGN: Mixed methods descriptive analysis of a web-based survey of Massachusetts NPs (N=391), conducted in May and June 2020. RESULTS: The vast majority (75%) of NPs believed the temporary removal of practice restriction did not perceptibly improve clinical work. Psychiatric mental health NPs were significantly more likely than other NP specialties to believe the waiver improved clinical work (odds ratio=6.68, P=0.001). NPs that experienced an increase in working hours during the pandemic surge were also more likely to report a positive effect of the waiver (odds ratio=2.56, P=0.000). CONCLUSIONS: Temporary removal of state-level practice barriers alone is not sufficient to achieve immediate full scope of practice for NPs. The successful implementation of modernized scope of practice laws may require a collective effort to revise organizational and payer policies accordingly.

Drivers of Cost Differences Between Nurse Practitioner and Physician Attributed Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Although recent research suggests that primary care provided by nurse practitioners costs less than primary care provided by physicians, little is known about underlying drivers of these cost differences. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: Identify the drivers of cost differences between Medicare beneficiaries attributed to primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs) and primary care physicians (PCMDs). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional cost decomposition analysis using 2009-2010 Medicare administrative claims for beneficiaries attributed to PCNPs and PCMDs with risk stratification to control for beneficiary severity. Cost differences between PCNPs and PCMDs were decomposed into payment, service volume, and service mix within low-risk, moderate-risk and high-risk strata. RESULTS: Overall, the average PCMD cost of care is 34% higher than PCNP care in the low-risk stratum, and 28% and 21% higher in the medium-risk and high-risk stratum. In the low-risk stratum, the difference is comprised of 24% service volume, 6% payment, and 4% service mix. In the high-risk stratum, the difference is composed of 7% service volume, 9% payment, and 4% service mix. The cost difference between PCNP and PCMD attributed beneficiaries is persistent and significant, but narrows as risk increases. Across the strata, PCNPs use fewer and less expensive services than PCMDs. In the low-risk stratum, PCNPs use markedly fewer services than PCMDs. CONCLUSIONS: There are differences in the costs of primary care of Medicare beneficiaries provided by nurse practitioners and MDs. Especially in low-risk populations, the lower cost of PCNP provided care is primarily driven by lower service volume.

Comparing the rates of low-value back images ordered by physicians and nurse practitioners for Medicare beneficiaries in primary care.

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.

Quality of Primary Care Provided to Medicare Beneficiaries by Nurse Practitioners and Physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in the quality of care provided by primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs), primary care physicians (PCMDs), or both clinicians. DATA SOURCES: Medicare part A and part B claims during 2012-2013. STUDY DESIGN: 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. EXTRACTION METHODS: 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. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

The quality of primary care provided by nurse practitioners to vulnerable 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.

Racial and ethnic disparities in ED use among older adults with asthma and primary care nurse practitioner work environments.

Background: Nurse practitioners (NPs) increasingly deliver primary care in the United States. Yet, poor working conditions strain NP care. We examined whether racial/ethnic health disparities in ED visits among older adults with asthma are moderated by primary care NP work environments. Methods: Survey data on NP work environments in six states were collected from 1,244 NPs in 2018-2019. 2018 Medicare claims data from 46,658 patients with asthma was merged with survey data to assess the associations of all-cause and ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) ED visits with NP work environment and race/ethnicity using logistic regression. Results: NP work environment moderated the association of race (Black patients versus White patients) with all-cause (odds ratio [OR]: 0.91; p-value = 0.045) and ACSC (OR: 0.90; p-value = 0.033) ED visits. Conclusions: Disparities in ED visits between Black and White patients with asthma decrease when these patients receive care in care clinics with favorable NP work environments.

American Association of Nurse Practitioners Research Agenda, 2023-2028.

ABSTRACT: This report highlights the 2023-2028 American Association of Nurse Practitioners Research Agenda (AANP-RA), which focuses on the research goals of AANP as an organization and is based on its mission and strategic plan. The purpose of the AANP Research Agenda is to outline research priorities that advance the AANP Strategic Plan and concurrently address gaps in nursing science. American Association of Nurse Practitioners supports research studies that are rigorously designed and conducted using quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods approaches, as well as implementation science with the potential to positively impact both NP practice and patient health outcomes. The AANP-RA strategy is guided by the PEARL acronym: examining NP Practice, Education, policy Advocacy, Research, and Leadership. A discussion of each area is presented along with suggested topics.

Emergency Removal of Supervision Requirements for Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioners: A Mixed-Methods Survey.

OBJECTIVE: Physician supervision of nurse practitioners (NPs) was temporarily waived in Massachusetts in response to a state of emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors examined the impact of the scope-of-practice changes and pandemic-related demands on psychiatric mental health NPs (PMHNPs) during the state's first COVID-19 surge. METHODS: A mixed-methods Web-based survey was conducted in May and June of 2020. Fisher's exact test was used to compare associations across certification types, and inductive content analysis was applied to open-ended responses. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 41% (N=389 of 958), consisting of 26 PMHNPs and 363 other NPs. Compared with other NPs, PMHNPs were significantly more likely to work in a telehealth setting (42% vs. 11%, p<0.001), to spend more time working during the initial surge (50% vs. 26%, p<0.05), and to believe that the waiver improved clinical work (52% vs. 25%, p<0.01). Content analysis of PMHNPs' open-ended responses identified four themes: the supervision waiver reduced burden on PMHNPs, collaboration and mentorship models persisted, the pandemic exacerbated the already high demand for psychiatric care, and telehealth helped meet the high demand for such care. CONCLUSIONS: PMHNPs may be more sensitive to the scope-of-practice changes and telehealth expansion than other NPs because of the constraints of the psychiatrist shortage and high relative uptake of telehealth in psychiatric care. The interactions of workforce supply, telehealth expansion, and scope-of-practice laws are important to consider in the development of policies to improve access to mental health care.