CRNAs and Pain

[lax]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

You encourage physicians to work in these areas on at least a part time basis with incentives, reasonable locums contracts with insurance coverage, and provide them with more reasons to want to go to rural areas. At this time, what will motivate a physician to leave a good position to practice in a largely non-paying, medicare/medicaid area?

Not much. Get creative. Work there for a tax break. Work there for some type of government credit for other endeavors. Free college education for your kids if you devote at least a few weeks of your time each year practicing in an underserved area. ANYTHING to provide rural communities with appropriate PHYSICIAN care.

Don't ask them to accept a midlevel's salary or less, WITHOUT INSURANCE COVERAGE provided by the facility (unlike that which is afforded to midlevels), and sacrifice an income potential that the average physician spends 12 years earning the right to be in position to earn. Yes we need more physicians in rural practice, but it shouldn't be at the cost of the physician that already has sacrificed time and money giving themselves the skills and knowledge to provide that level of care.

This is exactly why physicians are losing their grip. The physicians go where the money is. How dare them spend all these years in medical school and only make 100,000. Physicians that care about patients and go into this field to help people will go to the rural area- for the very reason to help people in need.

 

[lax]

Yes they're screwed, but it has nothing to do with the ASA. That's absurd.

People who live in rural America make a choice to be there. That might be unfortunate for those who require specialty or sub-specialty medical care, but that's their choice.

So if you have an acute subdural, or a traumatic amputation, or a ruptured AAA, or any number of conditions, the fact that you live an hour or two or three from any significant level of medical care means that your chance of survival is less than someone with quick access to high quality care in the big city. That's not the fault of the ASA or any branch of organized medicine. It's just a simple fact.

Not necessarily. Some people in the rural areas aren't able to afford to move themselves and their families to areas that are more expensive. Even the act of moving can sometimes be too expensive. People shouldn't have to leave their areas to find physicians that want to make more money. It should be the opposite. All the incentives mentioned were monetary. This is sickening.

 

[lax]

I don't post much . . . but . . .

What is going on with nurses and others? It feels like there is a push to increase what nurses and other assistant providers can do. Optometrists want to perform LASIX, actually perform eye surgery. CRNAs want to be anesthesiologists and want to practice pain medicine, actually diagnose and treat medical conditions with medicine and procedures. PA's and NP's want to take over all of family practice and internal medicine, and even some emergency departments. The nurses in the ICU pretty much do what they want, write the orders, and then expect the MD attending to sign off on what they did to the patient several hours ago. Patients show up in the OB department with a nurse midwife and demand that the individual with less formal training deliver their baby.

Why don't we get rid of the MD's and require that nurses go through undergrad, nursing-MCAT, nursing medical school, nursing residency, nursing fellowship and then call them "Doctor Nurse." Oh . . . wait, or we could just give people the current gold standard of training, have them work hard to get into and through a real medical school and call them doctors. If a nurse wants to become a "Doctor Nurse" then they should go get a PhD or complete medical school and nursing school.

It is like a 14-year-old demanding that they be able to drive a car without getting an actual license, sure give them a little training and they will probably be able to drive to the store and back most of the time without incident. There is a reason we don't do this.

Is "most of the time" what we are shooting for in medicine?

It becomes painful when you realize that nurses are smart enough and able to work as Nurse practitioners and Nurse Anesthetists. The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school. To talk about a little history of nursing and medicine, before there weas a male medical profession in this country, and well into the nineteenth century, there was a long tradition of female lay healing. In North America, the female lay healer was the prime health care giver for ordinary people until well into the nineteenth century. Typically, she was not formally educated person but learned her skills from other female healers, skills such as midwifery, the use of herbal remedies, even bone setting. The emergence of the almost entirely male medical profession in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth centry crushed this. In addition to gender, the big difference between the male medical profession and the female lay healers, at that time, was not that doctors were more skilled or more scientific. There was, however, a very profound economic difference between the lay healers and the emerging medical profession. The doctors saw healing as a commodity, something to be bought and sold, while the lay healers had tended to see it as a service intertwined with one's general obligations to the community. It was nurses, or rather some of the founders of nursing, who can take credit for introducing the first bar of soap to Bellevue Hospital. Strangely, the doctors, who had not yet accepted the germ theory of disease, had never noticed the absense of soap. The nursing profession, in its beginnings, was entirely female. And as we all know, women were not seen "as good" as men. This kept nursing from exceling in its earlier years. The medical profession would not allow nurses to obtain education, only training. There are many research studies that show that nurse practitioners treatment results are comparable to MDs- and in some instances better. Nurses are trusted by the public and are #1 in that list for several years in a row. Nurses are not idiots. These are people that wanted to provide a different model of care than MDs. Most of these people could have attended and graduated from medical school. The sad fact is that MDs are only concerned that nurses are going to take some of their monetary gain. When, in fact, nurses are trying to provide a health care system that is more available to the public and even to assist MDs in their profession (because many of them have such a large caseload). These posts remind me of little brats that receive christmas gifts and never say thank you. Those who never appreciate anything. Also, for you nurses anesthetist bashers, nurses were the first to provide anesthesia services in the United States. It was established in the late 1800s. The discipline of nurse anesthsia developed in response to surgeon requests for a solution of high morbidity and mortality attributed to anesthesia at that time. Surgeons saw nurses as a cadre of professionals who could give their undivided attendtion to patient care during surgical procedures. You can read about the nurse anesthesia care provided by Sister Mary Bernard at St. Vincent's Hospital in Erie, Pennsylvania, in 1887. Also, Dr. Charles Mayo conferred on Alice Magaw the title of "mother of anesthesia" for her many acheivements in the field of anesthesiology, particularly her mastery of the open-drop inhalation technique of anesthesia using ether and chloroform and her subsequent publications of her findings. Alice Magaw documented the anesthesia practice outcomes at St. Mary's Hospital and reported them in various medical journals between 1899 and 1906. In 1906, one article documented more than 14000 anesthestics being administered without a single complication. You guys should not forget that the CRNAs practicing today were taught by Anesthesiologist at their school. So when you bash them- you bash your profession.

 

[The_Sensei]

The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school.

Sure they would..... 🙄

It was nurses, or rather some of the founders of nursing, who can take credit for introducing the first bar of soap to Bellevue Hospital.

Maybe. It was Ignaz Semmelweis, male physician, who first made the connection between washing ones hands and the transmission of disease.

The sad fact is that MDs are only concerned that nurses are going to take some of their monetary gain.

Not really; the sad fact is that MDs ARE concerned that midlevel providers with a fraction of physician's training and education are making such ridiculous statements as this:

There are many research studies that show that nurse practitioners treatment results are comparable to MDs- and in some instances better.

Please, please provide me with JUST ONE........

 

[mocdoc]

It becomes painful when you realize that nurses are smart enough and able to work as Nurse practitioners and Nurse Anesthetists. The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school. To talk about a little history of nursing and medicine, before there weas a male medical profession in this country, and well into the nineteenth century, there was a long tradition of female lay healing. In North America, the female lay healer was the prime health care giver for ordinary people until well into the nineteenth century. Typically, she was not formally educated person but learned her skills from other female healers, skills such as midwifery, the use of herbal remedies, even bone setting. The emergence of the almost entirely male medical profession in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth centry crushed this. In addition to gender, the big difference between the male medical profession and the female lay healers, at that time, was not that doctors were more skilled or more scientific. There was, however, a very profound economic difference between the lay healers and the emerging medical profession. The doctors saw healing as a commodity, something to be bought and sold, while the lay healers had tended to see it as a service intertwined with one's general obligations to the community. It was nurses, or rather some of the founders of nursing, who can take credit for introducing the first bar of soap to Bellevue Hospital. Strangely, the doctors, who had not yet accepted the germ theory of disease, had never noticed the absense of soap. The nursing profession, in its beginnings, was entirely female. And as we all know, women were not seen "as good" as men. This kept nursing from exceling in its earlier years. The medical profession would not allow nurses to obtain education, only training. There are many research studies that show that nurse practitioners treatment results are comparable to MDs- and in some instances better. Nurses are trusted by the public and are #1 in that list for several years in a row. Nurses are not idiots. These are people that wanted to provide a different model of care than MDs. Most of these people could have attended and graduated from medical school. The sad fact is that MDs are only concerned that nurses are going to take some of their monetary gain. When, in fact, nurses are trying to provide a health care system that is more available to the public and even to assist MDs in their profession (because many of them have such a large caseload). These posts remind me of little brats that receive christmas gifts and never say thank you. Those who never appreciate anything. Also, for you nurses anesthetist bashers, nurses were the first to provide anesthesia services in the United States. It was established in the late 1800s. The discipline of nurse anesthsia developed in response to surgeon requests for a solution of high morbidity and mortality attributed to anesthesia at that time. Surgeons saw nurses as a cadre of professionals who could give their undivided attendtion to patient care during surgical procedures. You can read about the nurse anesthesia care provided by Sister Mary Bernard at St. Vincent's Hospital in Erie, Pennsylvania, in 1887. Also, Dr. Charles Mayo conferred on Alice Magaw the title of "mother of anesthesia" for her many acheivements in the field of anesthesiology, particularly her mastery of the open-drop inhalation technique of anesthesia using ether and chloroform and her subsequent publications of her findings. Alice Magaw documented the anesthesia practice outcomes at St. Mary's Hospital and reported them in various medical journals between 1899 and 1906. In 1906, one article documented more than 14000 anesthestics being administered without a single complication. You guys should not forget that the CRNAs practicing today were taught by Anesthesiologist at their school. So when you bash them- you bash your profession.

So going with what is stated above we should go back to the days when you would go to the barber to get your teeth pulled. I'm sure many of the barbers cutting hair are smart enough to get into dental school, but just like nurses not going to medical school, they did not attain the proper education.

There is a tremendous difference between someone who could have done something and someone who actually did. I could have . . won the state championships . . . won the beauty pagent . . . gone to medical school . . .

The talk about nurses and CRNA's not wanting $$ is absolute garbage, they along with other non-MD/DO providers are going to court and spending millions on lobbying efforts to increase their scope of practice with the end goal of increasing their earning potential.

Please don't confuse my dissatisfaction with the "little man syndrome" displayed by so many nurses as bashing anesthesiology or other MD's. It has nothing to do with CRNA's practicing within their scope of practice.

It has everything to do with a 3-year-old throwing a temper tantrum and making a sceene because he can't sit at the big boy table during dinner.

 

[cloud9]

. . . won the beauty pagent . . .

References/pics. (joking) 😉

 

[aredoubleyou]

It becomes painful when you realize that nurses are smart enough and able to work as Nurse practitioners and Nurse Anesthetists. The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school. To talk about a little history of nursing and medicine, before there weas a male medical profession in this country, and well into the nineteenth century, there was a long tradition of female lay healing. In North America, the female lay healer was the prime health care giver for ordinary people until well into the nineteenth century. Typically, she was not formally educated person but learned her skills from other female healers, skills such as midwifery, the use of herbal remedies, even bone setting. The emergence of the almost entirely male medical profession in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth centry crushed this. In addition to gender, the big difference between the male medical profession and the female lay healers, at that time, was not that doctors were more skilled or more scientific. There was, however, a very profound economic difference between the lay healers and the emerging medical profession. The doctors saw healing as a commodity, something to be bought and sold, while the lay healers had tended to see it as a service intertwined with one's general obligations to the community. It was nurses, or rather some of the founders of nursing, who can take credit for introducing the first bar of soap to Bellevue Hospital. Strangely, the doctors, who had not yet accepted the germ theory of disease, had never noticed the absense of soap. The nursing profession, in its beginnings, was entirely female. And as we all know, women were not seen "as good" as men. This kept nursing from exceling in its earlier years. The medical profession would not allow nurses to obtain education, only training. There are many research studies that show that nurse practitioners treatment results are comparable to MDs- and in some instances better. Nurses are trusted by the public and are #1 in that list for several years in a row. Nurses are not idiots. These are people that wanted to provide a different model of care than MDs. Most of these people could have attended and graduated from medical school. The sad fact is that MDs are only concerned that nurses are going to take some of their monetary gain. When, in fact, nurses are trying to provide a health care system that is more available to the public and even to assist MDs in their profession (because many of them have such a large caseload). These posts remind me of little brats that receive christmas gifts and never say thank you. Those who never appreciate anything. Also, for you nurses anesthetist bashers, nurses were the first to provide anesthesia services in the United States. It was established in the late 1800s. The discipline of nurse anesthsia developed in response to surgeon requests for a solution of high morbidity and mortality attributed to anesthesia at that time. Surgeons saw nurses as a cadre of professionals who could give their undivided attendtion to patient care during surgical procedures. You can read about the nurse anesthesia care provided by Sister Mary Bernard at St. Vincent's Hospital in Erie, Pennsylvania, in 1887. Also, Dr. Charles Mayo conferred on Alice Magaw the title of "mother of anesthesia" for her many acheivements in the field of anesthesiology, particularly her mastery of the open-drop inhalation technique of anesthesia using ether and chloroform and her subsequent publications of her findings. Alice Magaw documented the anesthesia practice outcomes at St. Mary's Hospital and reported them in various medical journals between 1899 and 1906. In 1906, one article documented more than 14000 anesthestics being administered without a single complication. You guys should not forget that the CRNAs practicing today were taught by Anesthesiologist at their school. So when you bash them- you bash your profession.

Lax, you are either confused or just making **** up. The medical system we live with today came from Europe, not North America. Discussing how the clergy became physicians, barbers into surgeons, the incorporation of midwivery into medicine, and the role of the "lay" healers who emphasized patient comfort over diagnosis (exact opposite of the physicians), and how all of these fields have merged into the modern idea of a physician and surgeon should be in the correct historical context. Your references to altruistic lay healers in North America were neither the forbearers of todays medical or nursing professions, they existed because there was a void of reliable health care. With formal medical and nursing training and the proliferation of MDs where none previously existed, the lay healers became less desirable to people (in western society), probably because the doctors were more effective in treating disease!

Also, Nurse anestheitists did indeed exist before anesthesiologists. Surgeons, who found that good anesthesia during their cases could significantly decrease morbidity and mortality hired nurses who would be specially trained to take care of the anesthesia, to replace the lowest ranking surgical trainee who previously held that responsibility. In an attempt to make anesthesia even more safe, doctors decided to train in anesthesia as well, which further improved mortality and morbidity, because anesthesia related M&M was still high.

Maybe you should spend more time reading books and less time on the internet.

 

[TofuBalls]

It becomes painful when you realize that nurses are smart enough and able to work as Nurse practitioners and Nurse Anesthetists. The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school. To talk about a little history of nursing and medicine, before there weas a male medical profession in this country, and well into the nineteenth century, there was a long tradition of female lay healing. In North America, the female lay healer was the prime health care giver for ordinary people until well into the nineteenth century. Typically, she was not formally educated person but learned her skills from other female healers, skills such as midwifery, the use of herbal remedies, even bone setting. The emergence of the almost entirely male medical profession in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth centry crushed this. In addition to gender, the big difference between the male medical profession and the female lay healers, at that time, was not that doctors were more skilled or more scientific. There was, however, a very profound economic difference between the lay healers and the emerging medical profession. The doctors saw healing as a commodity, something to be bought and sold, while the lay healers had tended to see it as a service intertwined with one's general obligations to the community. It was nurses, or rather some of the founders of nursing, who can take credit for introducing the first bar of soap to Bellevue Hospital. Strangely, the doctors, who had not yet accepted the germ theory of disease, had never noticed the absense of soap. The nursing profession, in its beginnings, was entirely female. And as we all know, women were not seen "as good" as men. This kept nursing from exceling in its earlier years. The medical profession would not allow nurses to obtain education, only training. There are many research studies that show that nurse practitioners treatment results are comparable to MDs- and in some instances better. Nurses are trusted by the public and are #1 in that list for several years in a row. Nurses are not idiots. These are people that wanted to provide a different model of care than MDs. Most of these people could have attended and graduated from medical school. The sad fact is that MDs are only concerned that nurses are going to take some of their monetary gain. When, in fact, nurses are trying to provide a health care system that is more available to the public and even to assist MDs in their profession (because many of them have such a large caseload). These posts remind me of little brats that receive christmas gifts and never say thank you. Those who never appreciate anything. Also, for you nurses anesthetist bashers, nurses were the first to provide anesthesia services in the United States. It was established in the late 1800s. The discipline of nurse anesthsia developed in response to surgeon requests for a solution of high morbidity and mortality attributed to anesthesia at that time. Surgeons saw nurses as a cadre of professionals who could give their undivided attendtion to patient care during surgical procedures. You can read about the nurse anesthesia care provided by Sister Mary Bernard at St. Vincent's Hospital in Erie, Pennsylvania, in 1887. Also, Dr. Charles Mayo conferred on Alice Magaw the title of "mother of anesthesia" for her many acheivements in the field of anesthesiology, particularly her mastery of the open-drop inhalation technique of anesthesia using ether and chloroform and her subsequent publications of her findings. Alice Magaw documented the anesthesia practice outcomes at St. Mary's Hospital and reported them in various medical journals between 1899 and 1906. In 1906, one article documented more than 14000 anesthestics being administered without a single complication. You guys should not forget that the CRNAs practicing today were taught by Anesthesiologist at their school. So when you bash them- you bash your profession.

Is lax short for Ex-Lax because that was a whole lot of verbal diarrhea... 🙄

 

[PainDr]

Is lax short for Ex-Lax because that was a whole lot of verbal diarrhea...

LOL

Really lax...I'm sure you meant your comments to be enlightening. Unfortunately, you've only shown us how naive and biased you are. Please stop embarrasing yourself.

 

[PainDr]

Post by lax in 2004:

Well I was concerned on my scores too. I have only taken one practice test. I made a 5 physical science, 6 biology, and 6 verbal. I haven't taken Gen chem II, Org Chem I and II. I haven't taken any physics yet. So, I am not too sad about the sciences..but the verbal sucks. I thought it would be much higher.

What happened? Oh well, who needs those stupid MCAT scores anyway...we all know they don't really mean anything!


Recent post by lax:

It becomes painful when you realize that nurses are smart enough and able to work as Nurse practitioners and Nurse Anesthetists. The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school.

Oh really?

 

[cloud9]

Post by lax in 2004:

Bwa ha ha ha ha. 17, oops. Hope it improved (guessing not), but I'm sure medicine was really your second choice right?


Good call. 👍

 

[Voodoo]

... where's your response to all of this?

Were you taught all of that unsubstantiable propaganda in your graduate nursing training (I hope not), or did you just make all of that stuff up to make yourself feel better about your sweet 17?

I have a lot of friends who are CRNA's or are in some form of graduate nursing training. From what they've indicated to me, if you do well on your electronic board exam (which supposedly gets harder if you are doing well), you can pass the test after 80 questions.

So let's assume that you actually got into a med school in Antarctica with your MCAT score - how are you going to pass Steps 1 (350 questions), 2 (approx. 380 questions + clinical skills test), and 3 (2 days, approx. 500 questions). That's just to get in (step 3 is during intern year now I believe). Then you take your written Anesthesiology boards which is another 300 questions, and if you're fortunate/well-prepared enough to pass, you take your oral examination the following year to become a board certified Anesthesiologist.

Then you have the audacity to say:
"nurses are smart enough and able to work as Nurse practitioners and Nurse Anesthetists. The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school"

This statement MAY be true, but it is DEFINITELY not true for you. The fact of the matter is that people who go to school are very different: some are smart and pick up information very quickly by relating it to things they understand; on the other hand, there are others who are not as smart, but just study their a$$es off - harder than you ever have.

Regardless of styles of studying, the common thread among physicians is this: they have put a TON more time into learning about human anatomy/physiology/pathology than nurses. Couple that with the fact that the ONLY way to get into medical school is to be reasonably bright, and you have someone who understands the aforementioned subjects better than a nurse.

I have had plenty of friends and acquaintances who were nurses and wanted more autonomy and a greater role in medical decision making. In order to achieve these goals, they APPLIED, MATRICULATED, and GRADUATED medical school, and carried on different residencies (including Anesthesiology).

I have also had plenty of friends who were nurses who wanted more autonomy and more $$. These friends APPLIED, MATRICULATED, and GRADUATED nurse anesthesia school. These people, unlike you, understand that they are not doctors. They realized that they wanted more, but for some reason (i.e. they did not want to put in the effort or they were not smart enough) they didn't go to medical school.

There are a lot of people who are still in training reading this forum (pre-meds, medical students, residents, and "-ologists" as they were quaintly refered to). People who propagate your misleading (and at times, blatantly fabricated) views only serve to infuriate the future of Anesthesiology.

This isn't the 90's anymore. Anesthesiology has become a very competitive field. "Top-tier" residency programs are boasting average USMLE scores of 235+ now, and I routinely review applications of 240+ (that's excruciatingly high for you non-med students (the mean score is typically 210-215 with SD of ~13-15)). The future of Anesthesiology involves extremely bright, motivated individuals, who are far more vocal than the FMG's that saturated the residency programs of the 90's (no offense to grads from the 90's - I do, however, believe that you are not as politically active if you are too busy worrying about your visa status).

There are a lot of good CRNA's out there (the vast majority, I'm sure) who are non-militant, and understand their role. I'm sure that many would not agree with your ridiculous statements.

Lax, all you are doing is pissing off the future of Anesthesiology, and providing motivation for political change. So, I guess thanks, in a roundabout way.

 

[Voodoo]

This statement:
This statement MAY be true, but it is DEFINITELY not true for you. The fact of the matter is that people who go to school are very different: some are smart and pick up information very quickly by relating it to things they understand; on the other hand, there are others who are not as smart, but just study their a$$es off - harder than you ever have.

Should say this:
This statement MAY be true, but it is DEFINITELY not true for you. The fact of the matter is that people who go to MEDICAL school are very different: some are smart and pick up information very quickly by relating it to things they understand; on the other hand, there are others who are not as smart, but just study their a$$es off - harder than you ever have.

 

[ultm8frisbee]

It becomes painful when you realize that nurses are smart enough and able to work as Nurse practitioners and Nurse Anesthetists. The people that choose to go into nursing would, most of the time, be able to attend and graduate medical school. To talk about a little history of nursing and medicine, before there weas a male medical profession in this country, and well into the nineteenth century, there was a long tradition of female lay healing. In North America, the female lay healer was the prime health care giver for ordinary people until well into the nineteenth century. Typically, she was not formally educated person but learned her skills from other female healers, skills such as midwifery, the use of herbal remedies, even bone setting. The emergence of the almost entirely male medical profession in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth centry crushed this. In addition to gender, the big difference between the male medical profession and the female lay healers, at that time, was not that doctors were more skilled or more scientific. There was, however, a very profound economic difference between the lay healers and the emerging medical profession. The doctors saw healing as a commodity, something to be bought and sold, while the lay healers had tended to see it as a service intertwined with one's general obligations to the community. It was nurses, or rather some of the founders of nursing, who can take credit for introducing the first bar of soap to Bellevue Hospital. Strangely, the doctors, who had not yet accepted the germ theory of disease, had never noticed the absense of soap. The nursing profession, in its beginnings, was entirely female. And as we all know, women were not seen "as good" as men. This kept nursing from exceling in its earlier years. The medical profession would not allow nurses to obtain education, only training. There are many research studies that show that nurse practitioners treatment results are comparable to MDs- and in some instances better. Nurses are trusted by the public and are #1 in that list for several years in a row. Nurses are not idiots. These are people that wanted to provide a different model of care than MDs. Most of these people could have attended and graduated from medical school. The sad fact is that MDs are only concerned that nurses are going to take some of their monetary gain. When, in fact, nurses are trying to provide a health care system that is more available to the public and even to assist MDs in their profession (because many of them have such a large caseload). These posts remind me of little brats that receive christmas gifts and never say thank you. Those who never appreciate anything. Also, for you nurses anesthetist bashers, nurses were the first to provide anesthesia services in the United States. It was established in the late 1800s. The discipline of nurse anesthsia developed in response to surgeon requests for a solution of high morbidity and mortality attributed to anesthesia at that time. Surgeons saw nurses as a cadre of professionals who could give their undivided attendtion to patient care during surgical procedures. You can read about the nurse anesthesia care provided by Sister Mary Bernard at St. Vincent's Hospital in Erie, Pennsylvania, in 1887. Also, Dr. Charles Mayo conferred on Alice Magaw the title of "mother of anesthesia" for her many acheivements in the field of anesthesiology, particularly her mastery of the open-drop inhalation technique of anesthesia using ether and chloroform and her subsequent publications of her findings. Alice Magaw documented the anesthesia practice outcomes at St. Mary's Hospital and reported them in various medical journals between 1899 and 1906. In 1906, one article documented more than 14000 anesthestics being administered without a single complication. You guys should not forget that the CRNAs practicing today were taught by Anesthesiologist at their school. So when you bash them- you bash your profession.

Ahh the long winded shi* filled post bring me to this conclusion,
Lax=nitecap

If he isn't, I apologize and I will come to this secondary conclusion,
Lax=militant piece of shi* who makes all of us young docs want to crush any "poser" prifession that will stand in our way of doing whats best for patients while maximizing our earning potential. BOTH can and have been done for the past one hundred years and longer.

 

[SleepIsGood]

..

I have a lot of friends who are CRNA's or are in some form of graduate nursing training. From what they've indicated to me, if you do well on your electronic board exam (which supposedly gets harder if you are doing well), you can pass the test after 80 questions.
..p:

Yes I heard about this too! I have a friend that is taking the nclex, i think thats what it is called and they told me the same thing.

actually i think it's if you get 70 q's right then the exam shuts off. apparently the questions are 'graded' but what if one was just lucky. i think it goes back to biostats. a sample size of 70 is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay to small.

 

[psychbender]

The NCLEX grades as you go, with a minimum cutoff at 76(?) questions. So, if it cuts off at 76, you either got them all right, or got them all wrong. You continue to answer questions until the program running the test has decided that you seem to know whether or not you know what you're doing.

 

[BIS]

Ahh the long winded shi* filled post bring me to this conclusion,
Lax=nitecap

If he isn't, I apologize and I will come to this secondary conclusion,
Lax=militant piece of shi* who makes all of us young docs want to crush any "poser" prifession that will stand in our way of doing whats best for patients while maximizing our earning potential. BOTH can and have been done for the past one hundred years and longer.

Dont think it is nitecap. Not after reviewing past and present posts.

 

[BIS]

Yes I heard about this too! I have a friend that is taking the nclex, i think thats what it is called and they told me the same thing.

actually i think it's if you get 70 q's right then the exam shuts off. apparently the questions are 'graded' but what if one was just lucky. i think it goes back to biostats. a sample size of 70 is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay to small.

The NCLEX is the exam to get a RN liscense not to become a CRNA.

 

[BIS]

This is exactly why physicians are losing their grip. The physicians go where the money is. How dare them spend all these years in medical school and only make 100,000. Physicians that care about patients and go into this field to help people will go to the rural area- for the very reason to help people in need.

Pm'd you, check you box.