Multistate Regulation on Nursing Discussion Project

December 6, 2022

Multistate Regulation on Nursing Discussion Project

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Multistate Regulation on Nursing Discussion Project

[Order Now]

Regulation refers to the implementation of rules, as established by law by a regulatory body; in nursing state practice acts are implemented by respective state boards of nursing (Loversidge, 2021).

The Nurse Licensure Compact (NLC) as adopted by the National council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) is the present framework for multi-state regulation of the nursing profession. The NLC allows nurses to be licensed in one home state while concurrently having the flexibility to practice in any other state whose legislature and Board of Nursing has passed and implemented the compact (NCSBN, 1998).

The NLC was originally adopted in 1997 and received a comprehensive update in 2015 that included addition of an APRN compact model (NCSBN, 2017). Currently, 38 states have at least partial implementation of the NLC for RNs (NCSBN, 2021a), but only North Dakota and Delaware have adopted APRN compact legislation (NCSBN, 2021b).

Advantages

There are numerous advantages of implementation of multistate regulation for APRNs for both patients and practitioners. First, APRN compact legislation allows APRNs to practice unencumbered among member states while allowing states to retain full autonomy and authority of their respective nurse practice acts (NCSBN, 2021c).

This is advantageous to APRNs, ensuring portability of licensure and certification. Compact legislation also eliminates redundant regulatory processes and unnecessary fees. Ensuring portability of licensure for APRNS allows them to fulfill their original purpose; to meet the increased demand for healthcare in the face of a shortage of physicians (Loversidge, 2021).

As remote delivery of health services becomes more common, the ability for practitioners to work across state lines using telehealth will become a significant benefit for all parties (Oyeleye, 2019). Fluid, regional needs for healthcare are best met by a highly mobile workforce.

APRNs with the flexibility to practice across state lines poses a boon for healthcare consumers by providing increased access to primary care services. In addition, multi state regulation may enhance disaster preparedness response in emergent conditions by eliminating regulatory barriers to practice (NCSBN, 2021c).

While redundant regulatory barriers are removed, the APRN compact model actually facilitates public protection in cases of adverse actions and events, by facilitating interstate investigations and sharing of information (NCSBN, 2021c).

Disadvantages

One potential disadvantage of Compact licensure for APRNs is the reality that increased privileges carry increased risk. A practitioner who is being investigated or disciplined in one compact state would be unable to practice in any compact state until the issue was resolved (Oyeleye, 2019).

Another potential disadvantage to healthcare consumers would be the potential for practitioners to have less continuing education. If a practitioner from a home state with scant requirements for continuing education were in a state with more robust requirements, the compact license would allow them to practice without meeting the requirements (OPPAGA, 2006).

Similarly, background check requirements may not be met by providers who have a home state with less stringent requirements (OPPAGA, 2006). These problems do create a healthcare system where there is potential for patients to not receive care from practitioners who have met the full requirements of practice in their state.

Analysis

Ultimately, it appears that for both patients and NPs, multistate licensure would be a net positive. Widespread adoption of the APRN compact model would enable greater flexibility of NPs to practice in person and through telehealth to meet the burgeoning needs of underserved populations.

Though the argument can be made that patients in states with more stringent requirements may be short-changed with less prepared providers, it is hard to argue that a provider who does meet the appropriate requirements in one state is unfit for practice in another. In fact, the NCSBN has already proposed a consensus model for APRN licensure that would negate this issue entirely (NCSBN, 2008).

The enhanced portability of credentials and licensure that a multi-state regulatory model would provide for APRNs would be a major benefit to the profession, and ought to be an active legislative priority for all APRNs and students. The NCSBN and FNA both provide avenues to become involved in legislative advocacy to remove unnecessary hindrances and barriers to practice for NPs across state borders.

[Order Now]

Reference

Loversidge, J. M. (2021) Government response: Regulation. In S. M. DeNisco (Ed.), Advanced practice nursing: Essential knowledge for the profession (4th ed., pp. 211- 236). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN). (1998, April). Multi state regulation task force communique. NCSBN.

National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN). (2008, July 7). Consensus model for APRN regulation: Licensure, accreditation, certification & education. https://www.ncsbn.org/Consensus_Model_for_APRN_Regulation_July_2008.pdf (Links to an external site.)

National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN). (2021a). Nurse licensure compact. https://www.ncsbn.org/nurse-licensure-compact.htm (Links to an external site.)

National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN). (2021b). APRN compact. www.ncsbn.org/aprn-compact.htm (Links to an external site.)

National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN). (2021c). About the APRN compact.

https://www.aprncompact.com/about.htm

Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability (OPPAA). (2006, January). Nurse licensure compact would produce some benefits but not resolve the nurse shortage. https://oppaga.fl.gov/Documents/Reports/06-02.pdf (Links to an external site.)

Oyelaye, O. A. (2019, May 20). The nursing licensure compact and its disciplinary provisions: What nurses should know. Online
Journal of Issues in Nursing, 24(2). https://ojin.nursingworld.org/MainMenuCategories/ANAMarketplace/ANAPeriodicals/OJIN/TableofContents/Vol-24-2019/No2-May-2019/Articles-Previous-Topics/What-Nurses-Should-Know.html

Multistate Regulation on Nursing Discussion Project

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.