>Things were progressing fairly well until this. It seems that some posters are not yet even in school, but are up to speed in the political arena of anesthesia delivery..hmmm.
I'm flattered that you are insuating that I may not be geniune but rest assured I am. My background is an undergraduate degree in Biology and a professional degree in chiropractic. I have a friend and aquantances from state boards who have discussed this at length with me. I find it really ironic that the situation with nursing is similar to the one with chiropractic-using lobbying to bypass regulation and safety precautions. In chiropractic this is accomplished by making differential diagnosis optional. In CRNA nursing the problem appears to be demanding equal rights for unequal training.
>....simulated patients in early quarters.
Our program uses 3 31K Sim Man patient simulators and vents in a complete mock OR in the first semester and throughout the second semester. Third semester = approx 50-60 hours a week staffing an adult/pediatric level 1 trauma center, including in-house 24 hour call and weekends for anesthesia students, covering all areas of the hospital, not just the OR. This experience kind of precludes use of "simulated patients" at this point.
I'm planning on attending the South Univ program if I get accepted. I believe that their program is equivalent to the one you describe but has more equipment oriented credit hours (18 per quarter).
>The proposed PhD will be similar to a PharmD, that is, a clinical doctorate including (oh my, not a nurse doing) fellowships in up to two subspecialties.
I really don't care what patients call me, but it is an educational opportunity and I am going to take advantage of it.
I'm still waiting for you to answer the motivation and economic issues behind the new program. It really sounds like a clone of MDA without a long rotation and lesser pre-requisites. If these providers are going to be calling themselves Doctors I would like to see them advance the literature by furthering practices and devices not just stealing MDA protocols.
>This poses an interesting problem for some MDA groups. I have heard of some groups absolutely refusing to allow doctorate prepared nurses to work with them. Certainly their choice, but now a dilemma occurs. Do the MDAs stick to their guns, switch to an all MDA group and watch their salaries pulmmet or do they compromise to keep their current lifestyle?
On the other hand, if CRNA programs become doctorates then CRNAs would be expected to raise salaries and not want to work for MDAs anyway. It seems like a temporary problem.
>Yes, there are CRNAs out there without a BSN or Masters. Considering that nurses starting delivering anesthesia in 1861 and that the first school was opened in 1915, just how many structured BSN and Master's schools do you think existed in 1915? Nurse anesthesia has been evolving since that time. AA programs came late in the game (even at 30 years ago) and started with the Masters degree. What is the point here?
The point is that education conveys an ability to understand advanced concepts. My pre-requisites include organic chemistry, calculus, physics and statistics. RN training barely scratches the surface of healthcare topics. While I respect RNs as assistants & technicians, there is no way that this background is adequate for solo practice. Obviously nursing did too because they raised standards.
But looking at a BSN program I see only 3 credits in chemistry, no calculus and no physics.
http://nursing.rutgers.edu/academic-programs/BS-Curic-NB.asp
Now perhaps hospital nurses have no need for these subjects but anesthetists definitely do. And you can't compare a PA-A with a strong background with a BSN who lacks this. The AA will learn more in less time while the CRNA will be scratching their head. And there would be next to no chance of a nurse with this background knowing enough to significantly advance anesthesia practices.
Another similarity between CRNA and chiropractic is that both have a "ends justifies the means" attitude. In chiropractic this means that you smear medicine using any negative article you find. In nursing it means that they lobby against PA-A licensing in states using the argument that AAs are not as well trained because they haven't written nursing plans or inserted catheters prior to attending school! This is the same old tired argument that they used to try to derail general physician assistant programs. It needs to stop. AAs are not trying to limit the right of CRNAs to practice, just demanding equal rights to practice the way that MRAs need. If CRNAs are going to attack AAs they had better expect some vicious opposition by the entire anesthesia care team and blackmailing MDAs by witholding labor will only spur the development of more AA programs.
