Reference no: EM131636986

Case Scenario

You are attending a large continuing education conference for primary care providers. In the audience are physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants from all over the country. Seated at your table are physicians and nurse practitioners. Following the lecture on teamwork and interdisciplinary collaboration, a debate ensues at your table. One physician stated:

I am against nurse practitioners who want to take my job. There is a huge difference in the two professions. Primary-care physicians receive extensive and diverse medical education and clinical experience. The nurse practitioner should not function as an independent healthcare provider...they should only function in an integrated practice arrangement under the direction and responsible supervision of a practicing, licensed physician.

A fellow NP at the table responded:

An increasing number of practices are scrapping the traditional one-on-one doctor-patient relationship. Instead, patients are receiving care from a group of health professionals who divide up responsibilities that once would have largely been handled by the doctor in charge. While the supervising physician still directly oversees patient care, other medical professionals-nurse practitioners, physician assistants and clinical pharmacists-are performing more functions. These include adjusting medication dosage, ensuring that patients receive tests and helping them to manage chronic diseases.

QUESTION TO ANSWER:

The Federal Trade Commission has weighed in on several state battles over scope of practice, arguing that physician groups have no valid reason for blocking such laws other than to thwart competition.

Discussion Question:

How does "restraint of trade" apply to NP practice limitations? Provide evidence for your response.