Issues in Nursing

 Type: Assignments

Subject: Issues in Nursing

Subject area: Nursing

Education Level: Masters Program

Length: 1 pages

Referencing style: APA

Preferred English: US English

Spacing Option: Double

Title: Role and Naming Conventions Guidelines for Advance Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) licensure, education, certification and education (LACE) are here to stay. For this discussion:

Instructions: 1. share your thoughts on one positive aspect of the lace guidelines 2. discuss the controversy kindled by that individual item 3. discuss the controversy surrounding the naming conventions for aprns.

Also Read: Best Online Nursing Research Paper Help

Issues in Nursing

Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course

Instructor

Date

Introduction

The APRN Consensus Model is a framework that outlines guidelines for standard APRN licensure certification, and training (together called LACE) requirements in all states in America. The Model's fundamental aim is to bring together the public, medical professionals and the national and state governments in their knowledge of the APRN's function and promote the ability of the APRN to practice as far as possible (Cherry & Jacob, 2016). 

Positive Aspect of the LACE Guidelines

Clearly, the implementation of the APRN consensus model presents both opportunities and obstacles for CNSs. If it succeeds, LACE will become much cleaner in the contemporary CNS "messy house." Clinical nursing professionals will maintain their historical position in advanced practice and will present people a deeper understanding of their contributions to public health and wellbeing (Federal Trade Commision & U.S. Dept of Justice, 2014).

Controversy Kindled by the APRN LACE Model

The legal scope of practice for APRN LACE model is determined uniquely by each state. While there are state-by-state differences in APRN regulation, each state frontier constitutes a possible obstacle to the capacity of APRNs to provide highly efficient and high quality patient health care. Limited research has been published that deals with the specific problems or concerns of the APRN Consensus Model implementation process (Cherry & Jacob, 2016). There is no research to handle the stakeholder's attitudes and perspectives of model implementation comprehensively to the understanding of the author (Rose & Regan-Kubinski,  2017).

Controversy Surrounding the Naming Conventions for APRNs

Many people are excited about the profession of nursing. The naming of APRNs is wrapped up by numerous controversies, one of which is a technical controversy. The objectives of healthcare reforms are clearly defined by the requirement for additional APNs. These skills include improving the quality, setting policies and establishing evidence. Nevertheless, not everyone agrees with assessments to decide whether someone is qualified to join the profession of APRN. Educational criteria for RNs have already been tried successfully (Federal Trade Commision & U.S. Dept of Justice, 2014). The statement of urgency requires practitioners to obtain a bachelor's degree for chosen profession. Most practitioners nowadays do not hold the bachelor's degree but allowed to practice. This raises the idea that some of the conditions are worthwhile after professional conflict has failed. Another dilemma surrounding the APRN is the question of the workforce. Arguments for MS retention based on labor and economic problems are published against practitioners. There are many who think that the APRN education in the nursing program would endanger society (Rose & Regan-Kubinski,  2017).

References

Cherry, B., & Jacob, S. R. (2016). Contemporary nursing: Issues, trends, & management. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Federal Trade Commision & U.S. Dept of Justice. (2014). Improving health care: A dose of competition. Retrieved from: http://www.ftc.gov/reports/helathcare/040723healthcarept.pdf.

Rose, L., & Regan-Kubinski, M. J. (2017). Update on advanced practice registered nurse regulation: licensure, accreditation, certification and education. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 24(6). 440-441.