How about this for a response to CRNA nonsense publications?

[Stillwater45]

---

Members do not see this ad.

As a new CA-1 I just had a thought about the CRNA equivalence publication nonsense. They claim equality of "Anesthesia Training" and they always tought that there Nursing Degree and year of experience taking and following orders in the ICU are equivalent to MD training. So lets allow them to test this.

I Propose... Take 100 (n=?) CA 0's after a year of internship, having just taken their Step 3 and 100 (n=?) recently maltriculated SRNA students just out of a year of following orders in the ICU and have them take the same test.

Next. Take 100 (n=?) newly minted Attendings or graduating CA-3s having just taken boards and have them sit for the same test as 100 (n=?) newly graduated SRNAs or newly minted CRNA's.

This could be an official test given by Medical Board or a test made specifically for the purposes of the study. I would expect that it would be to the standard of MD knowledge base as CRNA's often claim equivilance to this. n = to whatever number of participants to guarantee a meaningful power to the study.

I would sign up for this as a new CA-1. I would love to see some of our current CA-2 or CA-3's score against practicing CRNA's much less newly Board certified Attendings vs. Newly minted CRNA's.

What do you think?

 

[GasEmDee]

They'd never subject themselves to this.

As a new CA-1 I just had a thought about the CRNA equivalence publication nonsense. They claim equality of "Anesthesia Training" and they always tought that there Nursing Degree and year of experience taking and following orders in the ICU are equivalent to MD training. So lets allow them to test this.

I Propose... Take 100 (n=?) CA 0's after a year of internship, having just taken their Step 3 and 100 (n=?) recently maltriculated SRNA students just out of a year of following orders in the ICU and have them take the same test.

Next. Take 100 (n=?) newly minted Attendings or graduating CA-3s having just taken boards and have them sit for the same test as 100 (n=?) newly graduated SRNAs or newly minted CRNA's.

This could be an official test given by Medical Board or a test made specifically for the purposes of the study. I would expect that it would be to the standard of MD knowledge base as CRNA's often claim equivilance to this. n = to whatever number of participants to guarantee a meaningful power to the study.

I would sign up for this as a new CA-1. I would love to see some of our current CA-2 or CA-3's score against practicing CRNA's much less newly Board certified Attendings vs. Newly minted CRNA's.

What do you think?

 

[Southpaw]

What do you think?

Sounds great! Just one small problem, they won't show up!

Look, all the nonsense they talk about 'we read the same books, take the same classes, we've got ICU spirit, yes we do, we've got ICU how about how?' is just a bunch of farts in the wind. It's all talk, and when it's time to put up or shutup, it means nothing. 'Yeah we take the same classes! shhhh don't mention that we take different tests....and us nurses have 2 classes while the med students have 6-7 and are studying for Step 1....'.

The solo nurse anesthesia practitioner rests their hopes and dreams on two things. 1) AANA legislation and 2) that anesthesia is not as hard as MDs make it out to be. If they run into trouble, or cause a problem, it's just passed on to a physician in that hospital to deal with, or that patient gets shipped out to the big house.

 

[Stillwater45]

I agree that they wouldn't show up... so how about we play hard ball and have the ASA make a public proposal for such an objective study?

Given the current climate im not sure what other options we have to supply objective data. M and M data would be hard to come by and not ethically possible to arrange.

How about if the ASA makes a public proposal of this "equivalency" test and see how the AANA responds. I really feel like it is a fair shot at getting legitimate objective data to give to the public. I feel like the AANA's response to this proposal would be telling in and of itself.

Again I am not making this "challenge" out of arrogance. I am far from the smartest CA-1in my class much less across the country, but I would gladly sit beside a newly matriculated SRNA (an ICU nurse whom I was just giving order too 3 months ago) and take a test to assess and compare our current knowledge base. Normally this proposal would be unfounded and ludicrous but given the AANA's most recent claims I think we owe it to our profession to take some significant steps to provide objective data to refute equivalence between MD and CRNA.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Yes. You are on the right track. Despite theAANA propaganda that tests don't matter they are proof/evidence of knowledge. Lawyers take the BAR exam. Does it really matter?

Nurses always claim testing doesn't matter because they are nurses. They work in a "see one do one" world where standardized education like a Medical School curriculum doesn't come into play. We must be relentless in the pursuit of evidence that SRNAs/newly minted CRNAs have an inferior knowledge base. We won't win on just technical aspects as they can intubate and turn a dial equally as well.

Academic Chairpersons could require an AKT for all anesthesia providers. They want "equivalence" so why not give them a taste of it? Then, publish the results!

 

[BLADEMDA]

Yes. You are on the right track. Despite theAANA propaganda that tests don't matter they are proof/evidence of knowledge. Lawyers take the BAR exam. Does it really matter?

Nurses always claim testing doesn't matter because they are nurses. They work in a "see one do one" world where standardized education like a Medical School curriculum doesn't come into play. We must be relentless in the pursuit of evidence that SRNAs/newly minted CRNAs have an inferior knowledge base. We won't win on just technical aspects as they can intubate and turn a dial equally as well.

Academic Chairpersons could require an AKT for all anesthesia providers. They want "equivalence" so why not give them a taste of it? Then, publish the results!

I am so looking forward to that study in our Anesthesiology Journal. I expect the AANA response will be pitiful claiming AKTs don't matter in the real world.
Let them sell their garbage logic/propaganda to hosptial administrators and state legislators once we "prove" anesthesia nurses are INFERIOR in their knowledge base. Then, who will let then run amock at our major hospitals?
Give the malpractice lawyers the evidence they need to sue the hospital and surgeon for allowing an inferior provider to work without the "Lifeline to Modern Medicine" available.

 

[BBalldoc]

They would NEVER go for that. A better test would be to take some of their newly licensed graduates and have them take our written boards. Again, they would NEVER go for it because they know what the results would show.