Paramedic Practitioners

here's an rx for norco for pain/ abx for the infection, & be done with it.

Narcotic scripts delivered right to your door? I can only imagine how much the call volume would increase if folks knew they could get written for narcs and not have to leave their own couch.

One of the big problems with this paramedic practitioner/EMS 2.0 stuff is that there is simply no good way to finance it. Most viable ambulance services are large private companies or one's who derive the majority of their revenue from non-emergent transports or ones attached to city's or large hospitals who can sustain the ambulance with other revenue sources. You would have to completely overhaul the current insurance system or charge up front payment to sustain an advanced practitioner. Besides there are already plenty of mobile NP/PA's that offer home health services already out there, but these are only utilized by folks who can afford it.

In 7 years of EMS I can't think of any situation where an expanded scope of practice or prescribing rights would have significantly affected patient outcome. The utility of a midlevel provider staffing a routine 911 truck would be so limited that it would be financially untenable. Unnecessary transports are a problem and a financial drain but I seriously doubt an advanced provider will solve this problem. No amount of advanced procedures or years in training is going to reduce abuse of the system. It is simply cheaper and more efficient in our current system to take the patient to the provider than to take the provider to the patient. If you want to do home health as a midlevel then become a midlevel and do home health.

Now if there is a need in your particular system for expanded scope then you need to sit down with your medical director and ask to have whichever procedure or drug permitted and then train your personnel sufficiently on said procedure/drug.

Now I'll agree that the current state of paramedic education is weak at best and could stand to be improved. More basic science, clinical exposure and an increased emphasis on caring for chronic care pt.'s is needed. However there's already EMT-B's, EMT-IV's, AEMT's, EMT-I's, and paramedics. The last thing we need is to add another level of prehospital provider to the mix.

It makes for interesting conversation and is nice to think about but I seriously doubt that a paramedic practitioner is practical in the US. It may be a pessimistic approach but being a medic means accepting the limitations that go along with it. There are plenty of ways already in existence to advance yourself professionally.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree, but mid level providers are cheaper right? At least that's what we've been told in school. In terms of NP vs MD/DO

Bold faced lie.

Most hospitals now have MDs who bill people (for seeing them) to act as a supervisor to a midlevel provider who also creates a bill for service to follow a mindless protocol that some guy off the street could do.

Which means you are getting billed twice for the same thing. Which in almost every case is inferior.

Since they are only taught to handle "common" problems, you run the risk of them missing something uncommon and delaying treatment.

If they actually identify a problem over their head, which in my experience with PAs or DNPs is everything or nothing, then you are going to pay a doctor anyway.

The real solution isn't to increase midlevel providers, it is to increase doctors. Simple economics, if there is abundance of supply, then value goes down. AKA price goes down.

I would never consent to being seen by a PA or NP. If I am paying for a doctor, I want a doctor, not her protocol lackey. If you are already seeing a doctor, why would you pay again for something less?

Healthcare management is not a part of medical school. It is all about patient care.

Any doctor who sees their patients less than their lackey is not worthy to be called a doctor and certainly shouldn't be paid for that nonsense.

No PA or NP should operate where there is a doctor. I was once told the purpose of them was to act where there was none. Like out in the sticks not in a medical center.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bold faced lie.

Most hospitals now have MDs who bill people (for seeing them) to act as a supervisor to a midlevel provider who also creates a bill for service to follow a mindless protocol that some guy off the street could do.

Which means you are getting billed twice for the same thing. Which in almost every case is inferior.

Since they are only taught to handle "common" problems, you run the risk of them missing something uncommon and delaying treatment.

If they actually identify a problem over their head, which in my experience with PAs or DNPs is everything or nothing, then you are going to pay a doctor anyway.

The real solution isn't to increase midlevel providers, it is to increase doctors. Simple economics, if there is abundance of supply, then value goes down. AKA price goes down.

I would never consent to being seen by a PA or NP. If I am paying for a doctor, I want a doctor, not her protocol lackey. If you are already seeing a doctor, why would you pay again for something less?

Healthcare management is not a part of medical school. It is all about patient care.

Any doctor who sees their patients less than their lackey is not worthy to be called a doctor and certainly shouldn't be paid for that nonsense.

No PA or NP should operate where there is a doctor. I was once told the purpose of them was to act where there was none. Like out in the sticks not in a medical center.

As an educated end-user, I love seeing a NP. I get a provider who is not rushed to see 8-10 patients an hour, who has delved deeply into a specialty and is extremely practiced and interested in just the "boring" day to day office visits. Especially in the peds setting, where people are learning how to care for their children, it is excellent to have a NP to be able to take the time to do the teaching. It is not the same role as a physician, but a different and (arguably) necessary role in this culture where everyone expects needed information to be handed to them.

In the clinic setting, NPs fill a needed role. For standard primary care, I don't see any other type of provider.
 
Any doctor who sees their patients less than their lackey is not worthy to be called a doctor and certainly shouldn't be paid for that nonsense.

No PA or NP should operate where there is a doctor. I was once told the purpose of them was to act where there was none. Like out in the sticks not in a medical center.

The role is needed because the doctor is not doing his/her job.

Care and education is the role of the physician. If the physician is too busy, it is the failure of the physician.

No person in any system should be paying more or getting lesser care because their doctor is not doing what they are supposed to.

I can think of no other industry that hires and paysa second person to do the job the first person they hired was responsible for.

Nobody can spend 8-10 minutes with a patient and do them any good.I wouldn't pay a doctor for crappy care either, and it is ashame the American healthcare consumers do not hold their medical providers to task for poor care.
 
I agree, but mid level providers are cheaper right? At least that's what we've been told in school. In terms of NP vs MD/DO



I think this would be awesome!


Omg my skin crawled just thinking about doing a CVC in some of the filthy houses I've stepped foot in. I do however think that for the 99% of bs calls or at least seem like bs at first having a PP/PA whatever doing assessments like say the people who call 911 for a tooth abscess x 2 weeks , 2months whatever... The PP could assess them and say either ya you need serious medical intervention or go to a dentist in the morning or here's an rx for norco for pain/ abx for the infection, & be done with it.

The idea as the the PP could act as a field triage. If its legit, take them in, if not, have the director clear them via radio or something and take the next call.

I honestly don't believe we absolutely NEED a midlevel in the field. It'd be nice, but from a logistical standpoint, it'd be terrible.
What I'm saying is starting small. Put medics on par with BSNs. This would give them more opportunities for ER work as well as supervisory positions in the field.

Going into graduate level territory isn't something a lot of medics who just want to practice are going to do. And masters programs for midlevels are already in place. Why add another?

From an academic standpoint, it also seems to me that the grad level and beyond for medicial specialties gets into more esoterica and more advanced procedure that wouldn't have much practical place in the field.
 
I am surprised to hear that some of you that are so against the mid level practitioner level paramedics.

In case you have not noticed the USA has the lowest educational requirements for normal ALS Paramedics as it is(compared to most other major western country's that use them) Not only would this help us advance as a profession...
We also are the only modern western country I know of that uses the death penalty, has an embarrassingly extraordinarily high percentage of over weight people, under educated people, and does not provide basic health care of our citizens.
As an american working abroad and a Paramedic, I am embarrassed from not only the country I come from but the educational requirements behind my profession compared to my international colleagues.

I really encourage you guys to open your eyes and do some research on google or something about how these higher educated Paramedics practitioner are working so well in Aus and UK and maybe even some hard data/study's that show some facts regarding it.
 
I really encourage you guys to open your eyes and do some research on google or something about how these higher educated Paramedics practitioner are working so well in Aus and UK and maybe even some hard data/study's that show some facts regarding it.

There are a multitude of differences between the US health care system and that of other countries. Just because something works well there doesn't mean it will work here.

Speaking of hard data/studies, there are several out there that call into question the abilities of paramedics to perform at the current level, saying nothing of the ability to perform as a midlevel.

It's supply and demand...if there was sufficient demand for a midlevel paramedic I would have no problem with supplying one. However there is no feasible way to fund them without a massive infusion of tax dollars or charging patients up front out of pocket.

Where I work the ER midlevels make about 2.5x as much as a medic for 1/3rd less of the hours. If my service were to sink that much money into hiring a field midlevel, not counting the cost of liability coverage or finding an insurance carrier willing to write coverage for a treat and release program, I'd much rather they spend it on hiring more medics so we could run more trucks, reduce response times, ease the workload on the current crews, increased training opportunities, etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a lengthly thread on the PA forum currently about this very topic. http://www.PhysicianAssistantForum.Com/forums/showthread.php/25974-To-PAs-in-pre-hospital-EMS

There are several pilot programs already seeking to address some of these problems. IE wake's advanced paramedic, king county's ICU (?) medic, and our " community" paramedic program being used by several agencies here in rural CO.
EMS is growing quickly, even though some people can not/ refuse to see it. Bachelors level paramedic certification will eventually become standard, just like it has in nursing, hopefully this will come with an increase in scope of practice. In my opinion it is much more important to grow the standard training and scope of practice of paramedicine as a whole. It does not make sense to add an extra level of practice, especially if an already existing profession could easily be modified to meet these demands.

On that token, I do think that there should be an EMS/remote medical residency for PAs. It would train PAs to not only be functional in EMS, but also extremely competent to work solo coverage in critical access ED's as well as oil rig/ expedition/ remote site practice. These residencies would emphasize more advanced procedures, and emergent thinking skills under austere conditions. Maybe these PA's need to be dual certed as medics, maybe they don't.
I could see PA's working in two ways for EMS agencies, possibly in a referral system where a EMT/Medic 911 crew arrives on scene with a pt that could be released, calls a regional PA in a fly car who sees the PT on scene and releases the rig. This PA could respond emergent for extended extrication, mass casualty or field amputation.
I also think EMS PA's would be fantastic in a HEMS setting with high acuity patients. Where Nurses excel at transporting and maintaining ICU pts, admittedly some are not the best choice to be on a scene flight. An EMS PA with medic experience could perform very advanced life saving procedures that are out of the scope of an RN. The flight PA could begin semi-definitive medical treatment en route, especially with the advent of smaller and smaller medical devices along+ advanced training in the medical model.
Financially this could be feasible, especially because you are now billing PTs for definitive treatment through there insurance. This becomes even more realistic with the advent of socialized healthcare, which you will notice, every country with a really advanced EMS system has.
As someone going the medic--->PA route I really do foresee something like this becoming reality in the not so distant future.
 
Might I remind everyone that the evidence is not indicating the need for widespread midlevel super-ALS, and that the need for the current level of paramedic is only useful in very limited situations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21092256


If you are dreaming that American EMS as a whole will evolve into some kind of preventative/primary care entity...well, you are dreaming. However everyone is entitled to their own dreams and opinions...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Might I remind everyone that the evidence is not indicating the need for widespread midlevel super-ALS, and that the need for the current level of paramedic is only useful in very limited situations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21092256


If you are dreaming that American EMS as a whole will evolve into some kind of preventative/primary care entity...well, you are dreaming. However everyone is entitled to their own dreams and opinions...

It's a good study and I agree, but the study does not really address EMS as a whole, it address a fairly small subset of injuries and illnesses. The absence of a study confirming something as "best practice" does not automatically discredit an action, it just means that more research needs to be done.

Look at EMS use of pain control--surely giving pain control for an isolated extremity fracture will not do anything to improve the patient's mortality (or even any degree of outcome for that matter). It is going to be difficult to quantify the mitigation of pain and suffering, but it is surely something that EMS should be doing, right? Surely EMS should not adopt the view that since pain control is not empirically proven to improve outcomes in the prehospital setting, we should simply not bother?
 
it address a fairly small subset of injuries and illnesses.

There is only a fairly small subset of injuries and illnesses where paramedic level makes a difference.

Not sure what your getting at with the pain management issue, it is a well established practice.
 
There is only a fairly small subset of injuries and illnesses where paramedic level makes a difference.

Not sure what your getting at with the pain management issue, it is a well established practice.

Exactly, it's a well established practice with no empirical evidence backing it. My point is that not everything we do will be evidence based, but it will still be the best practice.
 
Might I remind everyone that the evidence is not indicating the need for widespread midlevel super-ALS, and that the need for the current level of paramedic is only useful in very limited situations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21092256


If you are dreaming that American EMS as a whole will evolve into some kind of preventative/primary care entity...well, you are dreaming. However everyone is entitled to their own dreams and opinions...

Actually, I consider it a required step if EMS is going to remain a viable industry.

For what it does not it is really overreimbursed and if it is to maintain feasability, EMS is going to have to add something of value.

No different from the advancement of the fire service really.
 
Forgive my cynicism......

Its not going change any time soon. It's simply not economically feasible to staff 911 trucks with midlevels. EMS is viable as it is. It is not viable, however, as a high paid private advanced profession. The economics of the market will keep thing were they are..unless you get some kind of massive intervention from the government. Someone has to move people to and from the hospital. As the population ages the demand for EMS will increase. More trucks, lower response times, better training...all of these things are better uses of our limited healthcare dollars than placing a whole bunch of midlevels in the field.

Besides, there are already midlevels in the field...google and you'll find np's doing house calls. And the market for them is extremely limited. These folks actually have reimbursement systems in place for the care they provide and the market barely sustains them. So, without massive infusions of cash from the government, it's a pretty safe bet that you'll never be an working on an ambulance as an advanced home health prescription writing super provider.


Tigger you've lost me. Are you now suggesting that pain management has no grounding in the literature?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The reason we have midlevels now, and the reason why they proliferate is because they make people money. The reason why there are no midlevels on the ambulance is because they make nobody money.


It's as simple as that.


Now, if it were economically feasible...it would be totally cool.
 
Forgive my cynicism......

Its not going change any time soon. It's simply not economically feasible to staff 911 trucks with midlevels. EMS is viable as it is. It is not viable, however, as a high paid private advanced profession.?

$300+ is not a viable taxi ride.

Fielding enough units to answer increasing 911 calls because of both an aging population and ultraspecialization of society is not feasable.

The economics are that it is not worth paying what is paid now, and as healthcare becomes less affordable, EMS will have to demonstrate some value.

I don't see the need of some "midlevel" super provider, in fact I see all mid levels as a complete drain on the system. The idea was for them to operate where there were no physicians, not to add a redundant level in established facilities, so said facility can add that service to the bill, where most of them find employ.

But I do think that EMS will have to become more involved with things such as healthcare education, public health initiatives, and illness prevention.

I don't think it will require a greatly advanced clinical practicioner, and definately won't require handing out prescriptions.

As many of our collegues from AU and NZ point out regularly, sometimes help navigating the system is what is needed, or perhaps some minor care and attention at home.

I cannot recall the number of times I went on a 911 call to be asked if the person was sick enough merit spending the money on a doctor. These consumers are absolutely right. There is definately not a need to transport everyone to the ED. The price is simply outrageous. Both for the transport and the facility.

As it has become, once you confine medicine to ivory towers where the most important question is "how much can you afford" a provider for the masses will be needed. While some cultures actually have to use something like a shamen for this, I think that modern civilizations could use a healthcare provider who has at least some basic knowledge other that the handful of tricks for the sickest patients, which make up a minority of all volume.

If you were operating a business, would you want to spend more effort on 5% or 95% of your customers?

The current US EMS system was created for a different time, with different challenges. It is easy to bury a head in the sand and pretend the world doesn't change, but it does. There are many vocations that have been lost to history.


The economics of the market will keep thing were they are..unless you get some kind of massive intervention from the government. Someone has to move people to and from the hospital. As the population ages the demand for EMS will increase. More trucks, lower response times, better training...all of these things are better uses of our limited healthcare dollars than placing a whole bunch of midlevels in the field.

I do not think the economics will support the constantly advancing standard of prehospital medicine on the reimbursement schedule it has now.

I don't think controlling healthcare costs is conducive to spending hundreds of dollars per person per dialysis trip.

I also think that EMS is such a minor stakeholder in healthcare, that when reform is forced by the economic realities, that its interests will be completely overshadowed by more major players.

I have said many times, totally eliminating mid level providers and techs, forcing doctors and nurses back to the bedside and out of managing healthcare will save lots and lots of money.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The current US EMS system was created for a different time, with different challenges. It is easy to bury a head in the sand and pretend the world doesn't change, but it does. There are many vocations that have been lost to history.

This is solid gold.

EMS, Emergency Medicine even, is a hot sloppy mess, with no easy fix. I don't think there is anyone who even knows how to begin to fix it. Physicians and medics have little involvement in politics and politics=power.

Now what EMS does not need to do is start accumulating more and more primary care responsibility, which alot of people advocate doing and in my opinion is wishful thinking at best and lunacy at worst.


Honestly (at the risk of being flamed), I often think it would work better if we went back to the olden days with ambulances being staffed with basic first aid technicians and a ride to the hospital. Paramedics should still exist, but they need not be deployed on every ambulance. A waste, as it currently is. I often got frustrated at the conditions of my employment as an ambulance medic, but then I realized I was doing a job that probably shouldn't exist in the first place.

I have been watching old Emergency! episodes. They represent a much more logical approach to EMS response. They also represent a much more logical patient population....

Ambulances will always exist because everyone has a right to a free ride to the hospital and free medical service at the ER right?? I mean, this is American after all. As far as the transports...yes it is absolutely ridiculous to send paramedics to do the granny shuffle/renal roundup/(whatever you call it) but this is where the money lies so services will bill away.

+1 to your views on midlevels and +1 to the fact that there is too much provider inflation in healthcare driving up the cost.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now what EMS does not need to do is start accumulating more and more primary care responsibility, which alot of people advocate doing and in my opinion is wishful thinking at best and lunacy at worst.

I have been watching old Emergency! episodes. They represent a much more logical approach to EMS response. They also represent a much more logical patient population....

Actually, I don't think it is wishful thinking or lunacy at all.

One of the things I have studies in my career is paleopathology, which explores the historical progression of human disease.

As we progress as a modern society, the types of patients seen on "Emergency" and in the minds of many providers, worthy of an ambulance, will become less and less.

The golden days of major trauma from car accidents has been replaced by the acute MI, and a majority of patients will end up calling EMS not for this, but for acute exacerbations of chronic diseases.

In the future, more likely because of the later. There simply won't be a need for paramedics as they exist today.

So you are left with only 2 possibilities, you (collective you) will retool to perform a need, or you will be gone.

If you consider the growing number of CCT transports, that is really where signs point to the paramedic being most needed. Those are transports of serious illness for one reason or another.

As we have seen studies, as well as revise our treatment of emergencies, even today the roles performed by US medics is largely ineffective and insufficent.

As we have seen with the professional fire service, with the exception of major cities, changes in building construction and frequency of fire has all but eliminated most of what they do as fire suppresion and rescuing people from fire.

A majority of the country is volunteer because they cannot economically support what a professional fire service does today or simply do not have the need.

As I stated in my above post, EMS will have to add value by performing a service needed by modern society, or the combination of technology and economic value will reduce it to a low level tech plugging you into some stuff on your way to the hospital and perhaps administering meds by protocol. (Which honestly does not take a medic now, it only takes a medic when a decision has to be made, which in protocol medicine is often a decision to withold)

As the shift towards chronic disease continues in modern societies, paramedics will have to shift towards primary care to have a viable job. It won't matter if there is 1 on every block or 1 for every 100 blocks. The current skill set and treatments will simply not be needed.

As evident by todays standards, of paramedics neededing less training than a barber to take you to the hospital and provide treatment, as a vocation, this will not be feasable as a living in the near future. Look at how difficult of a living it can be now in a majority of places. 2 to 3 jobs to live in the lower middle class.

Personally, I would rather help morph EMS into something relevant and sustainable in the modern world, but that is just my lunacy.(I call it giving back) :)

In all logical prediction the future of prehospital EMS will probably look nothing like we see today, and even less like the days of Johnny and Roy, which I grew up with, and providers of that generation barely could have imagined EMS as it is today.

Ambulances will always exist because everyone has a right to a free ride to the hospital and free medical service at the ER right?? I mean, this is American after all.

While many Modern societies actually have embodied in law of providing fire and ambulance service, the US is not one of those societies. (in fact the US is falling behind many modern societies on a number of levels, but watching Rome burn is a topic for a different forum)

In no modern society is that ambulance ride free. It is just a question of how it is paid for.

As far as the transports...yes it is absolutely ridiculous to send paramedics to do the granny shuffle/renal roundup/(whatever you call it) but this is where the money lies so services will bill away.

Today.

But do you honestly believe with the current problems (read crisis) in US healthcare spending that it will be even possible to spend the money that is being spent on this for long?

As the current reforms underway unfold, those groups with political power will protect thier money at the cost of others. Hospitals have political power, nurses do, doctors do, pharm does, as you accurately pointed out, EMS doesn't.

Logically that means EMS will take the cut first and it will likely be the deepest. The days of IFT getting what it does are limited, and I expect the bottoming out of it will come in my carrer.

I think most if not every EMS provider would love to only be handling emergencies as we have come to define them, but reality is, soon those days will be romanticized like knights on horseback. There are even groups playing (competing) EMS games which strongly resemble renaissance festivals. Dressing up with props to relive the by gone days of real emergencies and archaeic treatments.

Remember the days when there were numerous cases of scury and iodine deficency?

Me neither...

Change will come. Whether we agree on how or not.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top