![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
penkEdited at 8:34 Changed 'Phd' to MD. Sorry bout that.
For reasons that I don't need to go into right now (but I"ll letcha all know soon), I needed to quickly see a doctor. My PCP at acton medical was unavailable, but I asked if there was someone available I could see immediately. The office person scheduled me with a nurse practitioner, who I saw an hour and a half later.
I was... very impressed. Professional, communicative, knowledgable, friendly... we worked through a whole slew of symptoms and background history and narrowed down to what we're pretty sure the problem is. Lab work is in progress, and she's keeping me informed on the phone as things get discovered and discarded.
This is far better service than I get from my PCP, who has been unavailable (or has had very long lead times) previously. If I had my druthers, I'd much rather see this NP rather than my PCP whenever possible.
My question is - is this the right path? I read a bunch about NP's, and it seems they're as certified, trained, and licensed as your standard MD, but without the MD label. Am I right?
My gut feel is that this person is just as knowledgeable as your average young doctor (she was youngish, but not "omg, you have no experience" young), though she may lack some of the extensive education a MD would have, but for things like this first line evaluation, diagnosis, and recommendation of further tests if warranted - she has all the experience I need. I also feel that if she's unsure about something, she would handily refer to so someone more senior to find out more details. I worry that my american-bred brain is saying "NOT A DOCTOR! GET THE REAL THING!" - but I suspect that's not really appropriate...
Am I right here? Suggestions? I'll happily refer more people to her... she's pretty awesome so far.
(Also, how do I refer to her? nurse x? NP X? :)
For reasons that I don't need to go into right now (but I"ll letcha all know soon), I needed to quickly see a doctor. My PCP at acton medical was unavailable, but I asked if there was someone available I could see immediately. The office person scheduled me with a nurse practitioner, who I saw an hour and a half later.
I was... very impressed. Professional, communicative, knowledgable, friendly... we worked through a whole slew of symptoms and background history and narrowed down to what we're pretty sure the problem is. Lab work is in progress, and she's keeping me informed on the phone as things get discovered and discarded.
This is far better service than I get from my PCP, who has been unavailable (or has had very long lead times) previously. If I had my druthers, I'd much rather see this NP rather than my PCP whenever possible.
My question is - is this the right path? I read a bunch about NP's, and it seems they're as certified, trained, and licensed as your standard MD, but without the MD label. Am I right?
My gut feel is that this person is just as knowledgeable as your average young doctor (she was youngish, but not "omg, you have no experience" young), though she may lack some of the extensive education a MD would have, but for things like this first line evaluation, diagnosis, and recommendation of further tests if warranted - she has all the experience I need. I also feel that if she's unsure about something, she would handily refer to so someone more senior to find out more details. I worry that my american-bred brain is saying "NOT A DOCTOR! GET THE REAL THING!" - but I suspect that's not really appropriate...
Am I right here? Suggestions? I'll happily refer more people to her... she's pretty awesome so far.
(Also, how do I refer to her? nurse x? NP X? :)
no subject
Date: 2010-12-28 02:00 am (UTC)In other words: Things with NPs have generally turned out quite well for me. Have they turned out as well as they would have with MDs? I suspect so, but I have no way of knowing. And even if they *did* turn out as well as with MDs, would that continue to be the case if I had more interactions with them? I suspect so, but I have no way of knowing.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-28 02:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-12-28 03:55 am (UTC)Occasionally, we have reason to think that if we were better educated, we *would* have at least a better idea of what lay down the other path.
This seems to me to be one of those occasions, which is what I intended to convey by the word "incompetent". It still strikes me as a good word choice, though "uneducated" might have been better.