NURS 6050 Discussion: Professional Nursing and State-Level Regulations Week 5
NURS 6050 Discussion: Professional Nursing and State-Level Regulations
Boards of Nursing (BONs) exist in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands. Similar entities may also exist for different regions. The mission of BONs is the protection of the public through the regulation of nursing practice. BONs put into practice state/region regulations for nurses that, among other things, lay out the requirements for licensure and define the scope of nursing practice in that state/region.
It can be a valuable exercise to compare regulations among various state/regional boards of nursing. Doing so can help share insights that could be useful should there be future changes in a state/region. In addition, nurses may find the need to be licensed in multiple states or regions.
To Prepare:
- Review the Resources and reflect on the mission of state/regional boards of nursing as the protection of the public through the regulation of nursing practice.
- Consider how key regulations may impact nursing practice.
- Review key regulations for nursing practice of your state’s/region’s board of nursing and those of at least one other state/region and select at least two APRN regulations to focus on for this Discussion..
Post a comparison of at least two APRN board of nursing regulations in your state/region with those of at least one other state/region. Describe how they may differ. Be specific and provide examples. Then, explain how the regulations you selected may apply to Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs) who have legal authority to practice within the full scope of their education and experience. Provide at least one example of how APRNs may adhere to the two regulations you selected.
Click here to ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT ON NURS 6050 Discussion: Professional Nursing and State-Level Regulations
Professional Nursing and State-Level Regulations SAMPLE
APRN practice is typically governed by the Board of Nursing and defined by the Nursing Practice Act. Besides, the method is impacted by various laws and regulations. According to Neff et al., (2018), although the rules may vary from one state to another, they all aim at securing the interest of public health safety by regulating activities of APRNs health care professionals. They explicitly state that the variation existing between APRNs and related state rules and regulations brings the need for nurses to explicitly understand their scope of practice as defined by the laws and regulations of the state. In light of this, the paper delves into giving an in-depth explanation of Georgia APRN Board of Nursing regulations, while comparing and contrasting with Ontario’s laws.
NURS 6050 Discussion: Professional Nursing and State-Level Regulations Week 5
In Georgia, the Board of Nursing is the regulatory body for APRNs. These boards are responsible for evaluating applications for nurse licensure, disciplinary actions, issuance, and renewal of nursing licenses. On the other hand, the College of Nurses of Ontario is the governing and regulatory body for APRNs. Although the criteria the two organizations use to give credentials are similar, there a significant difference in the scope of practice in Georgia and Ontario. APRN practice laws in Georgia are the most restrictive in the whole U.S. The regulations in Georgia requires an APRNs to engage in a protocol agreement with a supervising physician actively, so that other supervision requirements are comprehensively mandated. Besides, the regulations do not allow APRNs to write prescriptions for schedule II medications, which lowers the ability of the nurse to order diagnostic tests (Bosse et al., 2017). The prescription laws and regulations in Ontario contradict the ones in Georgia. It is common to find an APRNs in Ontario prescribing medication to patients. The state laws of Ontario allow nurses to prescribe controlled substances provided they have completed approved substance education. The government of Ontario in 2017 recommended changes of the regulations under the Nursing Act 1991 that gave power to APRNs to expand their scope of practice. In essence, the Nursing Act of 1991 is one example of a law that regulates the magnitude of APRNs in Ontario.
Georgia Board of Nursing through the licensure laws and regulations requires APRNs to hold an active Georgia registered nursing license before an individual can practice as a certified nurse practitioner in the state. On the other hand, APRNs that are considered independently licensed providers are supposed to work under protocol agreements, and Georgia Composite Medical Board controls their prescriptive authority. On the contrary, Ontario state licensure laws and regulations permit all NPs to exercise autonomy in practice. The nurse can assess patients, diagnose, order diagnostic tests, initiate and manage treatments, prescribe all medications, including control substances without a provider’s supervision after qualifying in Approved Substance Education. Allowing APRNs to have full practice access will enable an increase in experience and expand the talents inherent in nurse practitioners. Besides, it will encourage significant innovations in the nursing profession; it also motivates other NPs to spring up in filling the gap created by the shortage of providers in Canada.
In my practice, which is in Georgia, the state practice and licensure laws and regulations are restricting our ability as nurses to engage in at least one element of APRN practice. Besides, this regulation will ensure that all nurse in practice gets certification to practice as an APRN in Georgia. Moreover, the demand of Georgia states laws and regulations will ensure I appreciate career-long supervision, team management, and delegation to another health care provider so that as an APRN, I provide patients with quality care (Milstead & Short, 2019). In my practice, restriction of prescribing schedule III to V drug and substances is limiting the scope of practice of nurses. The prescriptive authority of a supervising physician by submitting a written protocol to the supervising physician and permission is granted, ensuring that nurse managers in my practice engage in supervision mandate. Georgia prescription laws and regulation demands are applicable in my training in the sense that we, the nurse, will are required to prescribe both legend drug and Schedules II-V controlled drugs only after certification.
APRNs in Georgia can adhere to licensure laws and regulations by visiting the Georgia Composite Medical Board website after being authorized to complete licensure requirements. Besides, after graduating from a nursing education program, a nurse should look for licensure by endorsement as a registered nurse (Peterson et al., 2015). A nurse should apply to evaluation. The Georgia Board of Nursing is responsible for evaluating applications for nurse licenses. In regards to prescription laws and regulations, Peterson et al., (2015) assert that APRNs can adhere to this regulation by ensuring that Schedule III and IV controlled substances cannot be filled or refilled more than five times or more than six months after the date the prescription was issued, whichever occurs first. Besides, a nurse should ensure that Schedule II prescriptions cannot be refilled. Under the Georgia State law, there is no expiration for a Schedule II prescription.
References
Bosse, J., Simmonds, K., Hanson, C., Pulcini, J., Dunphy, L., Vanhook, P., & Poghosyan, L. (2017). Position statement: Full practice authority for advanced practice registered nurses is necessary to transform primary care. Nursing Outlook, 65(6), 761–765. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2017.10.002
Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Neff, D. F., Yoon, S. H., Steiner, R. L., Bumbach, M. D., Everhart, D., & Harman J. S. (2018). The impact of nurse practitioner regulations on population access to care. Nursing Outlook, 66(4), 379–385. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2018.03.001. NURS 6050 Discussion: Professional Nursing and State-Level Regulations
Peterson, C., Adams, S. A., & DeMuro, P. R. (2015). mHealth: Don’t forget all the stakeholders in the business case. Medicine 2.0, 4(2), e4. doi:10.2196/med20.4349
LEARNING RESOURCES
1 Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
- Chapter 4, “Government Response: Regulation” (pp. 57–84)
2 http://www.nursingworld.org/
3Bosse, J., Simmonds, K., Hanson, C., Pulcini, J., Dunphy, L., Vanhook, P., & Poghosyan, L. (2017). Position statement: Full practice authority for advanced practice registered nurses is necessary to transform primary care. Nursing Outlook, 65(6), 761–765. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2017.10.002
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
5 https://www.ncsbn.org/index.htm
6 Neff, D. F., Yoon, S. H., Steiner, R. L., Bumbach, M. D., Everhart, D., & Harman J. S. (2018). The impact of nurse practitioner regulations on population access to care. Nursing Outlook, 66(4), 379–385. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2018.03.001
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
7 Peterson, C., Adams, S. A., & DeMuro, P. R. (2015). mHealth: Don’t forget all the stakeholders in the business case. Medicine 2.0, 4(2), e4. doi:10.2196/med20.4349
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6050_Module03_Week05_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6050_Module03_Week05_Discussion_Rubric