The separation of pañcupādānakkhandhā into nāma-rūpa (and the corresponding categorisation of viññāṇa as nāma) is a commentarial development, and does not find support in EBTs. It is derived from the ‘ghost in the machine’ interpretation found in the later Abhidhamma.
I consider pañcupādānakkhandhā, saḷāyatana, and nāma-rūpa saha viññāṇa complimentary analyses of experience that can each stand on its own, and each a mode of contemplation that can give rise to liberating insight.