Mapping Nurse Practitioners' Scope of Practice Laws: A Resource for Evaluating Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Prescriptions
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Salvant Valentine S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8804241 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundBuprenorphine is a life-saving medication for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). U.S. federal law allows advanced practice clinicians (APCs), such as nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs), to obtain a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine in office-based practices. However, states regulate APCs' scope of practice (SOP) variously, including requirements for physician supervision. States may also have laws entirely banning NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing or requiring that supervising physicians have a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. We sought to identify prevalence of state laws other than SOP laws that either 1) prohibit NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing entirely, or 2) require supervision by a federally waivered physician.MethodsWe searched for state statutes and regulations in all 50 states and Washington D.C. regulating prescribing of buprenorphine for OUD by APCs during summer 2021. We excluded general scope of practice laws, laws only applicable to Medicaid-funded clinicians, laws not applicable to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and laws only applicable to NPs/PAs serving licensed SUD treatment facilities. We then conducted content analysis.ResultsOne state prohibits all APCs from prescribing buprenorphine for OUD, even though the state's general SOP laws permit APC buprenorphine prescribing. Five states require PA supervision by a federally waivered physician. Three states require NP supervision by a federally waivered physician.ConclusionsAside from general scope of practice laws, several states have created laws explicitly regulating buprenorphine prescribing by APCs outside of licensed state SUD facilities.
| S-EPMC9167216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansions increased demand for care whereas the Scope of Practice (SOP) laws for nurse procatitioners affect the supply of primary care providers. It is important to udnerstand the interaction of the demand and supply side policies on measures of access to care and health status.PurposeTo examine whether effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansions on access to care and health status are moderated by state scope of practice (SOP) laws for nurse practitioners.MethodsUsing data from the 2011 to 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, the study used a difference-in-differences design that compared outcome changes between expansion and non-expansion states and evaluated whether these changes differed by state SOP laws.DiscussionFollowing Medicaid expansion, forgoing a needed doctor's visit due to cost declined more in expansion states with full SOP laws than states with reduced SOP laws by 3.0 percentage-points in years 1 to 3 after the expansion (p < .05). Furthermore, completing a routine checkup with a doctor increased more in expansion states with full SOP laws by 3.2 percentage-points in 4 to 6 years (p < .05).ConclusionThe ACA Medicaid expansions were associated with larger gains in certain access measures in states with full SOP laws.
| S-EPMC9007859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNonadherence to medications is costly and improving adherence is difficult, requiring multifactorial solutions, including policy solutions.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of one policy strategy on medication adherence. Specifically, we examine the effect on adherence of expanding scope-of-practice regulations for nurse practitioners (NPs) to practice and prescribe without physician supervision.DesignWe conducted three difference-in-difference multivariable analyses of commercial insurance claims.ParticipantsPatients who filled at least two prescriptions in one of three chronic therapeutic medications: anti-diabetics (n = 514,255), renin angiotensin system antagonists (RASA) (n = 1,679,957), and anti-lipidemics (n = 1,613,692).Main measuresMedication adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC). We used one continuous (PDC 0-1) and one binary outcome (PDC of > .8), the latter indicating good adherence.Key resultsPatients taking anti-diabetic medications had a 1.9 percentage point higher medication adherence rate (p < 0.05) and a 2.7 percentage point higher probability of good adherence (p < 0.001) in states that expanded NP scope-of-practice. Medication adherence for patients taking RASA was higher by 2.3 percentage points (p < 0.001) and 3.4 percentage points (p < 0.01) for both measures, respectively. Patients taking anti-lipidemics saw a smaller, but statistically insignificant, improvement in adherence.ConclusionsResults indicate that scope-of-practice regulations that allow NPs to practice and prescribe without physician oversight are associated with improved medication adherence. We postulate that the mechanism for this effect is increased access to health care services, which in turn increases access to prescriptions. Our results suggest that policies allowing NPs to maximally use their skills can be beneficial to patients.
| S-EPMC7878646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFull practice authority laws that permit nurse practitioners (NPs) to practice independently and prescribe medications may influence NPs' workforce outcomes.PurposeTo examine whether implementation of full practice authority laws affect NP self-employment, average earnings, and likelihood of residing in a primary care health professional shortage area (HPSA).MethodsA nationally representative U.S. sample of 9,782 NPs employed in health care during 2010 to 2018 was drawn from the American Community Survey. Difference-in-differences regression was used to estimate covariate-adjusted mean differences in NPs' workforce outcomes after full practice authority implementation.FindingsAmong full-time employed NPs, full practice authority was associated with an increased probability of residing in a HPSA (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]:2.34, 95%CI 1.14, 4.83) and with a higher mean probability of self-employment (aOR:4.97, 95%CI 1.00, 24.86).DiscussionFull practice authority implementation improves access to primary care providers in health professional shortage areas and may increase practice ownership among NPs.
| S-EPMC7581487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Increased engagement of nurse practitioners (NPs) has been recommended as a way to address care delivery challenges in settings that struggle to attract physicians, such as primary care and rural areas. Nursing homes also face such physician shortages. We evaluated the role of state scope of practice regulations on NP practice in nursing homes in 2012-2019. Using linear probability models, we estimated the proportion of NP-delivered visits to patients in nursing homes as a function of state scope of practice regulations. Control variables included county demographic, socioeconomic, and health care workforce characteristics; state fixed effects; and year indicators. The proportion of nursing home visits conducted by NPs increased from 24% in 2012 to 42% in 2019. Expanded scope of practice regulation was associated with a greater proportion and total volume of nursing home visits conducted by NPs in counties with at least 1 NP visit. These relationships were concentrated among short-stay patients in urban counties. Removing scope of practice restrictions on NPs may address clinician shortages in nursing homes in urban areas where NPs already practice in nursing homes. However, improving access to advanced clinician care for long-term care residents and for patients in rural locations may require additional interventions and resources.
| S-EPMC10901290 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims and objectivesTo describe the nature and scope of nurse-midwifery practice in Texas and to determine legislative priorities and practice barriers.BackgroundAcross the globe, midwives are the largest group of maternity care providers despite little known about midwifery practice. With a looming shortage of midwives, there is a pressing need to understand midwives' work environment and scope of practice.DesignMixed methods research utilising prospective descriptive survey and interview.MethodsAn online survey was administered to nurse-midwives practicing in the state of Texas (N = 449) with a subset (n = 10) telephone interviewed. Descriptive and inferential statistics and content analysis was performed.ResultsThe survey was completed by 141 midwives with eight interviewed. Most were older, Caucasian and held a master's degree. A majority worked full-time, were in clinical practice in larger urban areas and were employed by a hospital or physician group. Care was most commonly provided for Hispanic and White women; approximately a quarter could care for greater numbers of patients. Most did not clinically teach midwifery students. Physician practice agreements were believed unnecessary and prescriptive authority requirements restrictive. Legislative issues were typically followed through the professional organisation or social media sites; most felt a lack of competence to influence health policy decisions. While most were satisfied with current clinical practice, a majority planned a change in the next 3 to 5 years.ConclusionsAn ageing midwifery workforce, not representative of the race/ethnicity of the populations served, is underutilised with practice requirements that limit provision of services. Health policy changes are needed to ensure unrestricted practice.Relevance to clinical practiceRobust midwifery workforce data are needed as well as a midwifery board which tracks availability and accessibility of midwives. Educators should consider training models promoting long-term service in underserved areas, and development of skills crucial for impacting health policy change.
| S-EPMC7992184 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study examined if the variation in physician assistant (PA) state scope of practice (SOP) laws across states are associated with number of employed PAs, PA demographics and PA/population ratio per state. The hypothesis was that less restrictive SOP laws will increase the demand for PAs and the number of PAs in a state.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional analysis at three time points: 1998, 2008, 2017.SettingFifty states and the District of Columbia.ParticipantsEmployed PAs in 1998, 2008, 2017.MethodsSOP laws were categorised as permissive, average and restrictive. Three national datasets were combined to allow for descriptive analysis of employed PAs by year and SOP categories. We used linear predictive models to generate and compare PA/population ratio least square means by SOP categories for each year. Models were adjusted for percent female PA and PAs mean age.ResultsThere was a median PA/population ratio of 23 per 100 000 population in 1998 and 33 in 2017. A heterogeneous expansion of SOP laws was seen with 17 states defined as super expanders while 15 were never adopters. In 2017, comparing restrictive to permissive states showed that in adjusted models permissive SOP laws were associated with 11.7 (p .03) increase in ratio of employed PAs per 100 000 population, demonstrating that states with permissive SOP laws have an increased PA density.ConclusionsThere has been steady growth in the mean PA/population ratio since the turn of the century. At the same time, PA SOP laws in the USA have expanded, with just 10 states remaining in the restrictive category. Permissive SOP laws are associated with an increase in the ratio of employed PAs per state population. As states work to meet the projected physician need, SOP expansion may be an important policy consideration to increase the PA workforce.
| S-EPMC8118013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To understand clinicians' beliefs about practice variation and how variation might be reduced.We surveyed board-certified physicians (N = 178), nurse practitioners (N = 60), and physician assistants (N = 12) at an academic medical center and two community clinics, representing family medicine, general internal medicine, and cardiology, from February-April 2016. The Internet-based questionnaire ascertained clinicians' beliefs regarding practice variation, clinical practice guidelines, and costs.Respondents agreed that practice variation should be reduced (mean [SD] 4.5 [1.1]; 1 = strongly disagree, 6 = strongly agree), but agreed less strongly (4.1 [1.0]) that it can realistically be reduced. They moderately agreed that variation is justified by situational differences (3.9 [1.2]). They strongly agreed (5.2 [0.8]) that clinicians should help reduce healthcare costs, but agreed less strongly (4.4 [1.1]) that reducing practice variation would reduce costs. Nearly all respondents (234/249 [94%]) currently depend on practice guidelines. Clinicians rated differences in clinician style and experience as most influencing practice variation, and inaccessibility of guidelines as least influential. Time to apply standards, and patient decision aids, were rated most likely to help standardize practice. Nurse practitioners and physicians assistants (vs physicians) and less experienced (vs senior) clinicians rated more favorably several factors that might help to standardize practice. Differences by specialty and academic vs community practice were small.Clinicians believe that practice variation should be reduced, but are less certain that this can be achieved. Accessibility of guidelines is not a significant barrier to practice standardization, whereas more time to apply standards is viewed as potentially helpful.
| S-EPMC5792011 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe global expansion of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) includes health systems that face a shortage of skilled health care workers (HCWs). We estimated the human resource needs and costs for providing PrEP in nurse-led primary care clinics in Eswatini. Furthermore, we assessed potential cost savings from task sharing between nurses and other HCW cadres.MethodsWe conducted a time-and-motion and costing study in a PrEP demonstration project between August 2017 and January 2019. A form for recording time and performed activities ("motion") was filled by HCWs of six primary care clinics. To estimate the human resource needs for specific PrEP activities, we allocated recorded times to performed PrEP activities using linear regression with and without adjusting for a workflow interruption, that is, if a client was seen by different HCWs or by the same HCW at different times. We assessed a base case in which a nurse provides all PrEP activities and five task shifting scenarios, of which four include workflow interruptions due to task sharing between different HCW cadres.ResultsOn average, PrEP initiation required 29 min (95% CI 25-32) of HCW time and PrEP follow-up 16 min (95% CI 14-18). The HCW time cost $4.55 (uncertainty interval [UI] 1.52-9.69) for PrEP initiation and $2.54 (UI 1.07-4.64) for PrEP follow-up when all activities were performed by a nurse. Time costs were $2.30-4.25 (UI 0.62-9.19) for PrEP initiation and $1.06-2.60 (UI 0.30-5.44) for PrEP follow-up when nurses shared tasks with HCWs from lower cadres. Interruptions of the workflow added, on average, 3.4 min (95% CI 0.69-6.0) to the time HCWs needed for a given number of PrEP activities. The cost of an interrupted workflow was estimated at $0.048-0.87 (UI 0.0098-1.63) depending on whose time need increased.ConclusionsA global shortage of skilled HCWs could slow the expansion of PrEP. Task shifting to lower-cadre HCW in nurse-led PrEP provision can free up nurse time and reduce the cost of PrEP provision even if interruptions associated with task sharing increase the overall human resource need.
| S-EPMC9590230 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis integrative review synthesises research studies that have investigated the perceptions of nurse practitioners and medical practitioners working in primary health care. The aggregation of evidence on barriers and facilitators to working collaboratively and experiences about the processes of collaboration is of value to understand success factors and factors that impede collaborative working relationships.MethodsAn integrative review, which used systematic review processes, was undertaken to summarise qualitative and quantitative studies published between 1990 and 2012. Databases searched were the Cochrane Library, the Joanna Briggs Institute Library, PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Informit and ProQuest. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for quality. Study findings were extracted relating to a) barriers and facilitators to collaborative working and b) views and experiences about the process of collaboration. The findings were narratively synthesised, supported by tabulation.Results27 studies conducted in seven different countries met the inclusion criteria. Content analysis identified a number of barriers and facilitators of collaboration between nurse practitioners and medical practitioners. By means of data comparison five themes were developed in relation to perceptions and understanding of collaboration. Nurse practitioners and medical practitioners have differing views on the essentials of collaboration and on supervision and autonomous nurse practitioner practice. Medical practitioners who have a working experience with NPs express more positive attitudes towards collaboration. Both professional groups report concerns and negative experiences with collaborative practice but also value certain advantages of collaboration.ConclusionsThe review shows that working in collaboration is a slow progression. Exposure to working together helps to overcome professional hurdles, dispel concerns and provide clarity around roles and the meaning of collaboration of NPs and MPs. Guidelines on liability and better funding strategies are necessary to facilitate collaborative practice whether barriers lie in individual behaviours or in broader policies.
| S-EPMC3846155 | biostudies-literature