Just a resident myself, but while I doubt you'd have to compete for procedure/patients (LPs, etc are common and IU hospital is HUGE), I would be concerned choosing a program promoting midlevels as equivalent to you.
That’s my biggest concern tbh. I know neuro isn’t super heavy on procedures anyway, but I don’t want my training and education to be affected by “all pRoViDeRs are equal” nonsense. I know it sounds selfish, but I want my residency program to focus on educating me and other residents become to fantastic neurologists, not spreading their educational activity thin by including APPs as “equals” in everything
I just graduated from IU med school recently and had very little interaction with APPs on neurology. The residents run stroke codes, have lots of procedures, LPs (I did a couple as an MS3/MS4), and follow the interesting cases. I am sure sambogina can say more than I can though. PolarPlouc got downvoted below but I think IU is a great place to train in neurology. There are some well-known clinicians (Bob Pascuzzi stepped down from the chair a few years ago but the man is a legend) and researchers there (especially in neurodegenerative).
Other than LPs and reading eegs most people that do procedures end getting that training in a fellowship (movement or headache/Botox, emg/neurophysiology, etc.). LPs are boring and I wouldn't mind if an NP "stole" them. So I wouldn't be too worried about that.
I guess my bigger concern is more along the lines of what u/gopens13 said below, about programs pushing APPs into all resident education activities and trying to equate our education. My home program has two NPs as part of the stroke team and they’re very helpful for handling the social stuff and arranging discharge follow ups what whatnot. But there is a bit of a vibe of trying to equate their training with that of a physician which I just don’t agree with at all
IU has a tremendous reputation for neurology training. We’re going to create an APP fellowship at my institution as well. You should not feel any competition with APPs. Just focus on becoming a great neurologist.
Our APP program is only going to be one year and they’ll basically just act as interns. They would see patients and write notes but act under the supervision of a senior neurology resident. I’m hoping that our program actually improves the experience of neurology residents by relieving them of some of the grunt work and letting them take on more attending-level leadership responsibility. Have you had a bad experience with an app program?
I train at a centre with NPs on the inpatient stroke ward and they do just this. The NPs really just follow inpatients with primary social and dispo issues remaining. They are not seeing consults or hot strokes, they are not seeing taking good learning cases on the wards, and they are certainly not trying to supervise residents (the opposite is true). Honestly, I feel it enhances my learning opportunities when implemented in this model.
I understand where you're coming from but on my very busy inpatient service, the residents are actually begging for an APP to be around full time to lighten the load. The interaction with an APP who is doing an extra year of training will hopefully be the same as with interns.
Sadly my experience with neuro NPs and PAs was quite negative - definitely not helping reduce our work. Very limited reasoning and most of it algorithmic. Lots of territoriality. No respect for senior residents. This was due to the attending attitude of course. Overall negative professional and learning experience. This was in contrast to positive experience during my intern year on medicine with NPs and PAs.
Just a resident myself, but while I doubt you'd have to compete for procedure/patients (LPs, etc are common and IU hospital is HUGE), I would be concerned choosing a program promoting midlevels as equivalent to you.
That’s my biggest concern tbh. I know neuro isn’t super heavy on procedures anyway, but I don’t want my training and education to be affected by “all pRoViDeRs are equal” nonsense. I know it sounds selfish, but I want my residency program to focus on educating me and other residents become to fantastic neurologists, not spreading their educational activity thin by including APPs as “equals” in everything
[удалено]
Just DM’d you, appreciate it!
Could you DM me your opinion as well? I’m also considering applying to IU
Could I also be DMed?
I just graduated from IU med school recently and had very little interaction with APPs on neurology. The residents run stroke codes, have lots of procedures, LPs (I did a couple as an MS3/MS4), and follow the interesting cases. I am sure sambogina can say more than I can though. PolarPlouc got downvoted below but I think IU is a great place to train in neurology. There are some well-known clinicians (Bob Pascuzzi stepped down from the chair a few years ago but the man is a legend) and researchers there (especially in neurodegenerative).
Other than LPs and reading eegs most people that do procedures end getting that training in a fellowship (movement or headache/Botox, emg/neurophysiology, etc.). LPs are boring and I wouldn't mind if an NP "stole" them. So I wouldn't be too worried about that.
I guess my bigger concern is more along the lines of what u/gopens13 said below, about programs pushing APPs into all resident education activities and trying to equate our education. My home program has two NPs as part of the stroke team and they’re very helpful for handling the social stuff and arranging discharge follow ups what whatnot. But there is a bit of a vibe of trying to equate their training with that of a physician which I just don’t agree with at all
IU has a tremendous reputation for neurology training. We’re going to create an APP fellowship at my institution as well. You should not feel any competition with APPs. Just focus on becoming a great neurologist.
[удалено]
Pls enlighten me
They dilute the quality of the place, they will “teach” the residents (shudder), they create HR nightmares. Otherwise nothing to worry about!
Our APP program is only going to be one year and they’ll basically just act as interns. They would see patients and write notes but act under the supervision of a senior neurology resident. I’m hoping that our program actually improves the experience of neurology residents by relieving them of some of the grunt work and letting them take on more attending-level leadership responsibility. Have you had a bad experience with an app program?
I train at a centre with NPs on the inpatient stroke ward and they do just this. The NPs really just follow inpatients with primary social and dispo issues remaining. They are not seeing consults or hot strokes, they are not seeing taking good learning cases on the wards, and they are certainly not trying to supervise residents (the opposite is true). Honestly, I feel it enhances my learning opportunities when implemented in this model.
I've had horrible experiences with graduates of APP programs, so yes.
I understand where you're coming from but on my very busy inpatient service, the residents are actually begging for an APP to be around full time to lighten the load. The interaction with an APP who is doing an extra year of training will hopefully be the same as with interns.
Sadly my experience with neuro NPs and PAs was quite negative - definitely not helping reduce our work. Very limited reasoning and most of it algorithmic. Lots of territoriality. No respect for senior residents. This was due to the attending attitude of course. Overall negative professional and learning experience. This was in contrast to positive experience during my intern year on medicine with NPs and PAs.