How the DNP Improves Nursing (Not Medicine)

Anyone who has met me in person has heard (and tuned-out) my impassioned soliloquies advocating  nurses embrace role and practice purpose during one of our most critical periods in professional identity. Though I am a DNP and support the transition of making it the minimum entry to advanced practice, I do not automatically endorse current NP practitioners to pursue it. For those starting NP education in 2015, they will not have a choice, but for those with an MSN, there is likely no foreseeable benefit to pay thousands of dollars in tuition and to take time out of their current clinical role to return to school. For a brief history on this changeover and the controversy, read Dr. Nurse: Development and Implications for the Clinical Nursing Doctorate

Afaf Meleis, one of my favorite nursing theorists, has long been an opponent of this transition (ironic, since her theory IS transitions!). I respectfully disagree with her contention "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." I do not believe the MSN is broken, but it is getting worn around the edges, particularly for those in leadership and clinical roles. I am on board with residency or supervisory models toward full licensure in NP practice provided they are guided by peer-NPs, but why would we beef up the MSN rather than incorporate these improvements into a degree when the MSN is one step below parity with every other mainstream and complementary health care provider?

This is the same for nursing leadership. There is so much more to running a hospital than staffing, mediating personnel conflicts, and generating patient loyalty. Expertise in emerging technology for care delivery and communication, initiating clinical research, implementing evidenced-based practice, and meeting the ever-growing core measurements for reimbursement are no longer realistic as an RN "with a little extra training" at the MSN level. When you see more and more MDs going back to school for MBAs so they can meet leadership demands, you know times have changed. We have to change with them, and take responsibility for our educational choices.

Though many argue the DNP is not a pure practice or clinical doctorate because it is not for APRNs only, remember that a significant portion of clinical nursing involves education and mentoring of other nurse clinicians rather than direct patient care and management. Running the hospital is clinical practice. In the leadership role the focus is on providers who treat all populations rather than on the individual patient.  While the DNP leadership clinician may not directly deliver interventions to the individual, they must be just as versed in clinical practice guidelines and standards of care among all nursing levels and specialties as those that work at the bedside and clinics.

For those that believe there is no added benefit for making doctoral study the minimum entry to practice for FNPs because it will not help us catch up to physician training, you are right. It should be obvious but it bears repeating: it is not a medical degree, it is not supposed to become a medical degree, it is not a replacement for a medical degree, it is not a short-cut to becoming a physician equivalent, and it does not now nor ever will train you to be a medical doctor. Again and again, role crossover does not equate to role redundancy.  There are many NPs who incorrectly believe they practice medicine, or worse, actually do. This is partially because we have allowed medicine to oversee our advanced practice and have accepted the inappropriate role of physician extender.  I am an advocate for our discipline practicing independently to the full scope of our training, but not beyond it.  Know what a nurse is and what the role is supposed to entail. See the Guide to the Gray Area

Just as the BSN improves on the ADN in overall knowledge and delivery of RN-level care, the DNP improves upon the MSN with the increased focus on role, systems, theory, and clinical-based research.

When you become a better "thinker," you become a better provider.