Quote:
Originally Posted by zx10guy
PAs and NPs can still be decent for the initial consultation. When I was referred to my GI doc via my PCP, I saw the NP for the practice before I ever met my GI doc. I only met him the day of the colonoscopy that found the 3cm tumor in my descending colon. The NP I saw was very good at tunneling through the various questions and didn't screw around with getting me scheduled for a colonoscopy. When all of this was happening I was 42. So I could have been brushed off as having symptoms from other causes. It pains me to see case after case of young patients being brushed off with diagnoses that it's something else without just getting in there and finding out via a colonoscopy. And many of these situations were by doctors that kept thinking it's anything else but cancer.
Also, I'm a bit biased as my brother is a PA. Based on what I've seen, PAs and NPs are pretty necessary with how many practices need to run patients through per day.
|
That is fortunate you had a solid NP who was an asset in the process (and that you got to the issue when you did). I do think the odds of better care from a NP or PA are greater at a specialist than a PCP.
I also agree they are necessary the way primary care practices are run but have found more times than not, when I meet with a PA or NP in a PCP office, they often (but not always) seem not nearly knowledgeable enough, and are pressed for time themselves. Fine when going in for a sinus infection, sore throat or other minor issues, but when I take the time to go in for an annual physical I like to talk to a doctor and I am fortunate to find one with whom I spend a little time each year now. He still uses PAs and NPs for various things, but he examines and talks with me, and personally I think that is an important part of the physical vs. just being pushed through the process by someone who probably won't be there the next time I visit.