Implications of State Scope-of-Practice Regulations for Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Nurse Practitioner Roles.

Abstract

Nurse practitioner (NP) advocacy efforts often focus on attaining full practice authority. While the effects of full practice authority in primary care are well described, implications for hospital-based NPs are less clear and may differ because of hospitals' team-based care and administrative structure. This study examines associations between state scope-of-practice (SSOP) and clinical roles of hospital-based pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) NPs. We conducted a national survey to assess clinical roles of PICU NPs including daily patient care, procedural, and consultation responsibilities as well as hospital-level administrative oversight practices. We classified SSOP as full or limited (reduced or restricted SSOP) practice. We present descriptive statistics and evaluate differences in clinical roles and hospital-level administrative oversight based on SSOP. The final sample included 55 medical directors and 58 lead (senior or supervisory) NPs from 93 of the 140 (66.4%) PICUs with NPs. There were no significant differences in daily patient care, procedural, or consultation responsibilities based on SSOP (p > .05). However, NPs in full practice authority states were more likely to bill for care than those in limited practice states (66.7% vs. 31.8%, p = .003), while those in limited practice states were more likely to report to advanced practice managers (36.7% vs. 13%, p = .03). For PICU NPs, SSOP was not associated with variation in clinical responsibilities; conversely, there were differences in billing and reporting practices. Future work is needed to understand implications of variation in hospital-level administrative oversight.