Thought this might add some controversey

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Interesting website, but unfortunately, it is spouting a lot of polictical, chest-thumping BS that our junior physicians here are spouting.

You would think someone with 40 years of real world experience would learn not to strut around like that Banty Rooster in the barnyard like the residents and students here.
 
if there are 41,000 anesthesiologists, and 33,000 nurse anesthetists, then how can crna's purport to be providing 2/3's of the anesthetics administered in the U.S. on an annual basis?

and, if we are to believe, as wayne states on his site's homepage, that the AANA was founded in 1931 as the "first national group organized for anesthesia professionals", and forget the fact that the ASA was actually founded in 1905, is this somehow supposed to mean that the AANA is more important than the ASA?

😕

hmmm.... something is rotten in denmark. either that, or maybe it should be becoming apparent that many crna's - even older, especially cranky ones who host their own web domain - seem to have a problem with reality.
 
I know this is off topic but who controlls the amount of CRNA programs around? I know residencies have to jump through hoops just to add a resident or 2 to their exitsting program. We had 2 new CRNA programs open in Texas recently. It is a bit concerning since it will effect the job market for us all.
 
i think crna's get too much training, personally. it's excessive. i think we should allow regular CC nurses into the OR to help run anesthesia cases. we could have 2-3 critical care nurses chart vitals, teach them the basics about what to watch out for, and to call us if there's a problem. hell, most of them know how to titrate a sedative infusion in the ICU. it's basically the same thing. if they have a problem, they call us.

this is well within a regular nurse's skill set. giving an anesthetic is not practicing anesthesiology. i think we could make this work. i propose we take the initiative upon ourselves as a profession. we don't have to "supervise" everything a nurse does in the ICU. if we give parameters to a nurse to follow, and to chart vitals, i think we could make this happen. we really don't need crna's for the bulk of what we do in the OR either, do we? we'll stick the tube in, we'll set-up the lines, we'll do all the big procedures, they'll be there to help, then we can leave the room to start another case once the anesthetic is running. and they'll have specific parameters to follow, and will simply call us if there's a problem. we just need to be available and to circulate through the room. we do the inductions, with their help, and the wake-ups, with their help, and then in between we can work different teams.

what do you think? who really needs crna's with that level of training if we're there for the critical procedure-parts of a case? when you come to think of it, we just need to back the movement of regular critical care nurses into the OR. after a few months of orientation, they'd get the hang of it. and this would fall under the scope of nursing practice, without a doubt.

i would gladly be all for sponsoring a pilot program of this. i just need willing participants.
 
GazPazzer said:
Here all

Check this out

http://www.gaspasser.com/animal farm.html
Click to expand...

From the home page of the same web site.

So ... what's the difference
between a CRNA and an anesthesiologist?

In a convergence unique in all of Medicine, both doctors and nurses practice anesthesia, providing the same service side by side -- with, of course, differences. Such as cost -- eleven CRNAs can be trained for the price of one anesthesiologist. (Average cost: $635,000 for a doc [largely tax-subsidized], versus $59,000 for a CRNA [mostly self-pay]) CRNAs earn one quarter to one third the income of their physician counterparts. Yet, in anesthesia training, both groups receive education that is essentially equivalent, often attending class and clinical side by side. Both types bring their respective backgrounds to the specialty and both end up full-fledged independent anesthesia providers. They may work together, or they may choose to work solo. In the operating room environment, CRNAs and anesthesiologists are functional equivalents.

CRNAs give 2/3 of all anesthetics

Americans receive some 26 million anesthetics each year, with two thirds (over 17 million) administered by CRNAs. In rural hospitals, CRNAs alone staff three quarters of the anesthesia departments, serving 70 million rural Americans -- 24 / 7 / 365 days a year -- and half of all hospitals nationwide (1,500 institutions) rely solely on nurse anesthetists. No scientific study has ever distinguished a significant difference between the anesthesia care delivered by CRNAs and that given by doctors. How can that be? Because Anesthesia is unique, the only medical modality that does not diagnose and cure; rather, our unique role is supportive care. Hands-on care. So it's natural that nurse practitioners would excel. American anesthesia offers two classes of providers, and both meet one high standard of care.


😱 Fair and balanced, no one sided agenda on that website.🙄
 
Actually

There are 38000 board certified MDAs per the ABA and there are 36000 Board certified CRNAs per the AANA.

Oh, and it was the long island journal club that started in 1905 not the ASA.

With new CRNA schools opening over the next 2 years and residency slots decreasing since the failed attempt by the ASA to pass HR 5246, HR 5348 or S 2990 and an estimated 1800 CRNAs to graduate this year alone, CRNAs will most likely surpass MDAs within 3 years.


VolatileAgent said:
if there are 41,000 anesthesiologists, and 33,000 nurse anesthetists, then how can crna's purport to be providing 2/3's of the anesthetics administered in the U.S. on an annual basis?

and, if we are to believe, as wayne states on his site's homepage, that the AANA was founded in 1931 as the "first national group organized for anesthesia professionals", and forget the fact that the ASA was actually founded in 1905, is this somehow supposed to mean that the AANA is more important than the ASA?

😕

hmmm.... something is rotten in denmark. either that, or maybe it should be becoming apparent that many crna's - even older, especially cranky ones who host their own web domain - seem to have a problem with reality.
Click to expand...
 
GazPazzer said:
Actually

There are 38000 board certified MDAs per the ABA and there are 36000 Board certified CRNAs per the AANA.

Oh, and it was the long island journal club that started in 1905 not the ASA.
Click to expand...

first off, i don't know what an "MDA" is, other than some meaningless made-up acronym coined by the AANA and recruiters. the ASA purports to currently have 41,000 members. still, the numbers don't add up, do they? and, does it really matter what the ASA was originally called?

The Society was founded in 1905 when nine medical colleagues from Long Island, New York organized the first professional anesthesia society. The Society expanded to 23 members in 1911 and named itself the New York Society of Anesthetists.

As its purpose and scope of involvement in anesthesia-related issues grew and attracted other interested physicians nationwide, the Society changed its name to the American Society of Anesthetists in 1935 and then to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) in 1945. ASA moved its offices from New York to Chicago in 1947 and then to the Chicago suburb of Park Ridge, Illinois, in 1960, where today it serves a membership of more than 39,000.
Click to expand...

http://www.asahq.org/aboutAsa/history.htm

Members of ASA must be Doctors of Medicine or Osteopathy who are licensed practitioners and have successfully completed a training program in anesthesiology approved by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) or the American Osteopathic Association (AOA). Members must maintain the high standards required by the Society throughout their careers. There are 41,000 ASA members.
Click to expand...

http://www.asahq.org/aboutAsa/membership.htm

notwithstanding, let's get critical care nurses (ie, ICU, PACU, etc.) in the OR to help do the nursing parts of our profession. what do you say?!?? i think this is the best idea i've had in a long time.
 
GazPazzer said:
With new CRNA schools opening over the next 2 years and residency slots decreasing since the failed attempt by the ASA to pass HR 5246, HR 5348 or S 2990 and an estimated 1800 CRNAs to graduate this year alone, CRNAs will most likely surpass MDAs within 3 years.
Click to expand...

huh? residency slots decreasing? spots have increased every year since 1998. our program alone is getting approval for 2 more CA-1 positions next year. this year already we've had over 750 applications for 14 spots. furthermore, there will be 1,327 new board eligible anesthesiologists in practice in 2007, 1,398 in 2008, 1,525 in 2009 alone. right now, there are 5,337 resident anesthesiologists in training, more than there's ever been in the last 12 years... and the numbers continue to grow.

more problems with reality...
 
GazPazzer said:
Actually

There are 38000 board certified MDAs per the ABA and there are 36000 Board certified CRNAs per the AANA.

Oh, and it was the long island journal club that started in 1905 not the ASA.

With new CRNA schools opening over the next 2 years and residency slots decreasing since the failed attempt by the ASA to pass HR 5246, HR 5348 or S 2990 and an estimated 1800 CRNAs to graduate this year alone, CRNAs will most likely surpass MDAs within 3 years.
Click to expand...

GazPazzer said:
Here all

Check this out

http://www.gaspasser.com/animal farm.html
Click to expand...

As seen on the www.gaspasser.com site;

Half the anesthesiologists in America are NOT board certified. Anesthesiologists are sued for negligence at SEVEN times the frequency of CRNAs. That figure would suggest the doctors are in fact LESS safe. Nevertheless, monopolistic control of anesthesia departments is often handed to the doctors. They are given their perch from which to crow and crow and crow.

All CRNAs are board certified -- every single one -- that's the 'C' in CRNA. In 1931 the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA) became the first national group organized for anesthesia professionals. The AANA was also the first national group to adopt the Harvard Standards on anesthesia monitoring and safety. (Note: GasPasser.com has no affiliation with, nor endorsement by the AANA.)

All CRNAs complete continuing education requirements and re-certify every two years. [Physician anesthesiologists who are not board certified have no such education requirement.]



Yes this web site is one-sided, but why is The American Board of Anesthesiology out to fail as many Anesthesiologists as they can. Over half of those who sit for the written fail. For the orals they fail more than a third of the people taking the test. The ABA refuses to release old tests probably for fear of showing how poorly written their test questions are and how blatantly unfair their examination process is.

Contrast that with the AANA who has figured out that doling out the title of "board certified" to everybody helps their profession. I doubt more than 5% of the CRNAs who sit for the exam fail the written exam. Other AMA boards have similar passing rates, as the CRNA exam, but not the out of touch ABA.

Isn't it time the ABA got in line with the rest of the medical community. The Academic A$$holes who run the board need to see that running the board like it is still the 1970's when nobody cares about board certification but the Academics is not appropriate in current the current medial environment. Insurance companies would gladly refuse to pay a board eligible anesthesiologist and instead pay a CRNA for their services. I doubt any anesthesiologist would see that as an optimal situation.
 
Information:

The ABA has certified 38,995
physicians in Anesthesiology as
of December 31, 2005.

Source HERE

Members = MD/DOs who get the journal and pay dues, no requirement to be board certified MDAs.

ALSO you can find that the 41000 number includes all of these "memberships" HERE. They count them all not just the board certified MDAs.



VolatileAgent said:
first off, i don't know what an "MDA" is, other than some meaningless made-up acronym coined by the AANA and recruiters. the ASA purports to currently have 41,000 members. still, the numbers don't add up, do they? and, does it really matter what the ASA was originally called?



http://www.asahq.org/aboutAsa/history.htm



http://www.asahq.org/aboutAsa/membership.htm

notwithstanding, let's get critical care nurses (ie, ICU, PACU, etc.) in the OR to help do the nursing parts of our profession. what do you say?!?? i think this is the best idea i've had in a long time.
Click to expand...
 
This is NOT constructive in any way.
 
GazPazzer & Conflicted,

If you are coming here to interact constructively with a group of physician anesthesiologists or anesthesiologists-to-be, you are most welcome. I think that there are many topics of chagrin b/t Docs & CRNAs that really need honest & open dialog to ever improve the situation.

However, if you - or anyone else - are merely here to rattle cages or gets some of the less mature folks around here all fired up, ranting, raving, pissing & moaning - please consider this an "invitation" to move along to some other venue.

I am not leveling accusations at either of you or at anyone else specifically; however, lately I have gotten several reports of $hit-stirring in this thread; so I am just taking this opportunity to clearly express the opinions & strategies of the three amigos who run this junk-heap. And, these same premise go equally to the med students, residents & want-to-bes that hang out or lurk here as well.

Thank you all for your patience, support & understanding.
 
toughlife said:
do your job and ban the nurses already.
Click to expand...


...as for you young grasshopper - when you can grab the haustead needle from my hand - you may feel free to ask or make suggestions, but ordering folks around is not within your scope of authority - period.

Are we clear?
 
OldManDave said:
...as for you young grasshopper - when you can grab the haustead needle from my hand - you may feel free to ask or make suggestions, but ordering folks around is not within your scope of authority - period.

Are we clear?
Click to expand...

CRYSTAL.

man, what a great tom cruise line.......
 
OldManDave said:
However, if you - or anyone else - are merely here to rattle cages or gets some of the less mature folks around here all fired up, ranting, raving, pissing & moaning - please consider this an "invitation" to move along to some other venue.

.
Click to expand...

Man, how eloquent Dave is in his inference.

And I just would've avoided all the political correctness, got right to the point, and told the two dudes to go f u ck themselves.

Thats why Dave is a moderator. And I'm a spectator.
 
okay, you're combining two separate issues: ABA board certification and ASA membership, neither of which is mutually inclusive. but, first let's address your post...

GazPazzer said:
Information:

The ABA has certified 38,995
physicians in Anesthesiology as
of December 31, 2005.

Source HERE

Members = MD/DOs who get the journal and pay dues, no requirement to be board certified MDAs.
Click to expand...

again, splitting the two issues (because you're talking about two different things), this becomes a board certification issue, not a total number of practicing anesthesiologists (i.e., board eligible issue). nonetheless, with the addition of those who passed this year, that number will easily be over 40,000.

furthermore, the ASA estimates that they capture about 90% of board certified anesthesiologists as full members (source: http://www.asahq.org/Newsletters/2002/5_02/musumeci.htm). so, even based on the 38,995 number, there would be about 43,300 physicians out there working as anesthesiologists as of the end of 2005.

GazPazzer said:
ALSO you can find that the 41000 number includes all of these "memberships" HERE. They count them all not just the board certified MDAs.
Click to expand...

now, when you say "members", you mean ASA members, right? if so, assumption about membership statement is wrong. first off, nowhere on the link you provide does it say the numbers of each category. so, you've not appropriately supported your supposition. if you count all of those groups, my supposition is that it would be far more than 41,000. they even make a distinction for resident members, who are not full members, in their definitions.

likewise, i'm sure anyone could email the ASA and they'd provide that info, but all full members must meet the criteria from the link i already posted. nonetheless, here it is again (read carefully this time... i'll highlight the relevant points for what they consider to be a full member and who those people are):

Members of ASA must be Doctors of Medicine or Osteopathy who are licensed practitioners and have successfully completed a training program in anesthesiology approved by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) or the American Osteopathic Association (AOA). Members must maintain the high standards required by the Society throughout their careers. There are 41,000 ASA members.
Click to expand...

http://www.asahq.org/aboutAsa/membership.htm

nonetheless, i'm not going to get sidetracked in some pissing contest with you about a membership discrepancy of around 4%. the key, salient point (which you're trying hard to derail) is that there are still MORE practicing anesthesiologists than there are nurse anesthetists. yet, nurse anesthetists still claim to provide anesthesia for 2/3 of all anesthestics in the U.S. each year. those numbers just don't add up.

so, you can continue to try to obfuscate all you want, but someone is telling a tall tale, and it ain't the ASA...

http://appropriations.senate.gov/hearmarkups/record.cfm?id=221154

... and, you can keep spinning your wheels with the same old song-and-dance over and over again... just know the more things change the more they stay the same...

http://www.asahq.org/Newsletters/2002/1_02/swissman.htm
 
i'm going to start calling the otolaryngology guys MDENTs and the derm dudes MDDs and the peds people MDPs.

I have another word for the OBs but this is a family forum.
 
I am board certified.

I am not a member of the ASA. ( Costs too much for my poor self a country military physician 🙂 and they dont fight the AANA they way I want).


So which statistic am I included in or not included in? these are two seperate societies/organizations.

just a thought
 
I've been out in practice for around 3 months in an all M.D. practice in N. CA. Interviewed with several groups and Kaiser. Here is what I learned about the CRNA vs M.D. issues in CA.

1) Kaiser is a large cost conscious HMO. They have the "team model" of anesthesia care. In the N. CA group that I inteviewed for they have 1 M.D. for every 1.8 CRNAs. They have been hiring more M.D.s recently than in the last 4-6 yrs because the financial benefits of a CRNA based practice have not panned out. (per administrator of group) for example with benefits and overtime CRNAs can make 70% much as the M.D.s and still work "regular shifts" and provide less flexibility in scheduling. Also, it seems some recent CRNA grads had gotten over their head with some cases....anecdotal of course. If you go to any Kaiser hospital web site and look under "anesthesia" you will see the exact # of CRNAs and M.D. in each group. In some districs the ratio is almost 1:1. Some Kaisers have given up on CRNAs completely. In a southern CA hospital CRNAs were phased out...Notice that ALL Kaiser anesthesia depts are directed by M.D.s and they have have some freedom to choose who to hire and how many to hire. Kaiser keeps close tract of all the financial aspect of their practice. If CRNAs were truly cost effective, safe and equal to M.Ds, they would stop hiring M.Ds all together and go with all CRNA team. Why have they not done that? Becuase the myth of a cheaper and equal partner to M.D is just a myth. You cant pay a nurse $200K in pay and benefits, have them work 8 hr shifts and dictate their own schedule, ask for lunch breaks, and call them equal to an M.D. who makes about the same, works longer hours, don't complain about missing lunch, can be used in any capacity and is not represented by a Union.


2)All the other practices I interviewed with were large M.D. groups who frown upon letting CRNAs in to their city, let alone their practice. They are soured by the national political behavior of the CRNA lobby and have made a conscious decision to fight CRNAs. I was told by groups that they were ready to take huge pay cuts if it meant keeping their contracts and keeping CRNAs out.

3) I certainly have respect for some CRNA and think they do a fine job. But they are not M.Ds, their training is not as rigorous (contrary to what they will tell you) and they are always dealing with the chip over their shoulder. A CRNA will never be able to stand up to a surgeon and defend his/her position as an M.D. would, and they will always give into the surgeons wishes.


4) My advice to all residents is to become good physicians and anesthesiologist and develop an interest in managment. Possibly, get an M.B.A and transition into hospital administration, who afterall, hold much of the power.
 
Not to be rude or try to start a fight, but I was wondering the other day why, if a CRNA can do the anesthesiologists job, then why can't other nursing specialties do other MD/DO jobs? For example, after many years of working within a specific field, I'm sure that nurses in Neurology, Peds, and whatnot would know more or less what to look for and what to prescribe. I always thought one of the major differences between doctors and nurses was the ability to prescribe drugs, so why are CRNAs allowed to give patients some of the most potent drugs out there? Also, anyone can read medical texts and have a good idea of the drugs and illness descriptions in a medical specialty, but it is our privilege to study medicine and be called MDs/DOs after going through (suffering through) many years of undergrad and medical school...coming out with 6 figure loans. Just thoughts I was having....
 
sevo85288 said:
I've been out in practice for around 3 months in an all M.D. practice in N. CA. Interviewed with several groups and Kaiser. Here is what I learned about the CRNA vs M.D. issues in CA.

1) Kaiser is a large cost conscious HMO. They have the "team model" of anesthesia care. In the N. CA group that I inteviewed for they have 1 M.D. for every 1.8 CRNAs. They have been hiring more M.D.s recently than in the last 4-6 yrs because the financial benefits of a CRNA based practice have not panned out. (per administrator of group) for example with benefits and overtime CRNAs can make 70% much as the M.D.s and still work "regular shifts" and provide less flexibility in scheduling. Also, it seems some recent CRNA grads had gotten over their head with some cases....anecdotal of course. If you go to any Kaiser hospital web site and look under "anesthesia" you will see the exact # of CRNAs and M.D. in each group. In some districs the ratio is almost 1:1. Some Kaisers have given up on CRNAs completely. In a southern CA hospital CRNAs were phased out...Notice that ALL Kaiser anesthesia depts are directed by M.D.s and they have have some freedom to choose who to hire and how many to hire. Kaiser keeps close tract of all the financial aspect of their practice. If CRNAs were truly cost effective, safe and equal to M.Ds, they would stop hiring M.Ds all together and go with all CRNA team. Why have they not done that? Becuase the myth of a cheaper and equal partner to M.D is just a myth. You cant pay a nurse $200K in pay and benefits, have them work 8 hr shifts and dictate their own schedule, ask for lunch breaks, and call them equal to an M.D. who makes about the same, works longer hours, don't complain about missing lunch, can be used in any capacity and is not represented by a Union.


2)All the other practices I interviewed with were large M.D. groups who frown upon letting CRNAs in to their city, let alone their practice. They are soured by the national political behavior of the CRNA lobby and have made a conscious decision to fight CRNAs. I was told by groups that they were ready to take huge pay cuts if it meant keeping their contracts and keeping CRNAs out.

3) I certainly have respect for some CRNA and think they do a fine job. But they are not M.Ds, their training is not as rigorous (contrary to what they will tell you) and they are always dealing with the chip over their shoulder. A CRNA will never be able to stand up to a surgeon and defend his/her position as an M.D. would, and they will always give into the surgeons wishes.


4) My advice to all residents is to become good physicians and anesthesiologist and develop an interest in managment. Possibly, get an M.B.A and transition into hospital administration, who afterall, hold much of the power.
Click to expand...

the cost issue is dependent on 3rd party payers and hospital subsidies and how much you want to pay individual providers...fairly complex....so where it may not effective in N. Ca....it is in other areas of the country.
 
jetproppilot said:
Man, how eloquent Dave is in his inference.

And I just would've avoided all the political correctness, got right to the point, and told the two dudes to go f u ck themselves.

Thats why Dave is a moderator. And I'm a spectator.
Click to expand...


JPP,

As an old-school bouncer from way-back when, it has taken a LOT of effort on my part to learn what pathetically little diplomacy I possess!
 
VolatileAgent said:
i think crna's get too much training, personally. it's excessive. i think we should allow regular CC nurses into the OR to help run anesthesia cases. we could have 2-3 critical care nurses chart vitals, teach them the basics about what to watch out for, and to call us if there's a problem. hell, most of them know how to titrate a sedative infusion in the ICU. it's basically the same thing. if they have a problem, they call us.

this is well within a regular nurse's skill set. giving an anesthetic is not practicing anesthesiology. i think we could make this work. i propose we take the initiative upon ourselves as a profession. we don't have to "supervise" everything a nurse does in the ICU. if we give parameters to a nurse to follow, and to chart vitals, i think we could make this happen. we really don't need crna's for the bulk of what we do in the OR either, do we? we'll stick the tube in, we'll set-up the lines, we'll do all the big procedures, they'll be there to help, then we can leave the room to start another case once the anesthetic is running. and they'll have specific parameters to follow, and will simply call us if there's a problem. we just need to be available and to circulate through the room. we do the inductions, with their help, and the wake-ups, with their help, and then in between we can work different teams.

what do you think? who really needs crna's with that level of training if we're there for the critical procedure-parts of a case? when you come to think of it, we just need to back the movement of regular critical care nurses into the OR. after a few months of orientation, they'd get the hang of it. and this would fall under the scope of nursing practice, without a doubt.

i would gladly be all for sponsoring a pilot program of this. i just need willing participants.
Click to expand...

Besides the myriad clinical and patient safety problems with your proposal, there is another slight problem - only MD's, CRNA's, and AA's can be reimbursed by CMS and private insurors for providing anesthesia services. RN's cannot. You can't supervise RN's and get paid for your services.
 
sevo85288 said:
2)All the other practices I interviewed with were large M.D. groups who frown upon letting CRNAs in to their city, let alone their practice. They are soured by the national political behavior of the CRNA lobby and have made a conscious decision to fight CRNAs. I was told by groups that they were ready to take huge pay cuts if it meant keeping their contracts and keeping CRNAs out.

Do you know what this method of attack on CRNAs would do for the CRNAs?

If every anesthesiologist refused to work with a CRNA it would indeed level the playing field.

There would be hospitals with all CRNAs and all Anesthesiologists.

Now, who can kick out anesthesia providers faster?
Click to expand...
 
Now there’s a good point. If push comes to shove doctors need to refuse to work with CRNA’s.
 
crockett said:
As seen on the www.gaspasser.com site;

Half the anesthesiologists in America are NOT board certified. Anesthesiologists are sued for negligence at SEVEN times the frequency of CRNAs. That figure would suggest the doctors are in fact LESS safe. Nevertheless, monopolistic control of anesthesia departments is often handed to the doctors. They are given their perch from which to crow and crow and crow.

All CRNAs are board certified -- every single one -- that's the 'C' in CRNA. In 1931 the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA) became the first national group organized for anesthesia professionals. The AANA was also the first national group to adopt the Harvard Standards on anesthesia monitoring and safety. (Note: GasPasser.com has no affiliation with, nor endorsement by the AANA.)

All CRNAs complete continuing education requirements and re-certify every two years. [Physician anesthesiologists who are not board certified have no such education requirement.]



Yes this web site is one-sided, but why is The American Board of Anesthesiology out to fail as many Anesthesiologists as they can. Over half of those who sit for the written fail. For the orals they fail more than a third of the people taking the test. The ABA refuses to release old tests probably for fear of showing how poorly written their test questions are and how blatantly unfair their examination process is.

Contrast that with the AANA who has figured out that doling out the title of "board certified" to everybody helps their profession. I doubt more than 5% of the CRNAs who sit for the exam fail the written exam. Other AMA boards have similar passing rates, as the CRNA exam, but not the out of touch ABA.

Isn’t it time the ABA got in line with the rest of the medical community. The Academic A$$holes who run the board need to see that running the board like it is still the 1970's when nobody cares about board certification but the Academics is not appropriate in current the current medial environment. Insurance companies would gladly refuse to pay a board eligible anesthesiologist and instead pay a CRNA for their services. I doubt any anesthesiologist would see that as an optimal situation.
Click to expand...



stop!!

I am just as cynical as you in general.. and i agree they make it hard as possible to achieve board certification and I do think the board is kind of out of touch.. but truly and i hate to say this (i agree with military) there is a big difference between board certification in anesthesia and not. at least in the last 10 years. so just buck up. hit the books hard, learn as much as you can and become board certified. I will help you in anyway i can if you want. or just call Michael HO for orals and he will help you or niels jensen for the written. Both gentlemen provide tremendus support. there will never be a perfect system..

As for CRNAs ... they can scream as loud as they want... they aren't medical doctors.. Period.. no amount of rhetoric will change that fact..
 
VolatileAgent said:
i think crna's get too much training, personally. it's excessive. i think we should allow regular CC nurses into the OR to help run anesthesia cases. we could have 2-3 critical care nurses chart vitals, teach them the basics about what to watch out for, and to call us if there's a problem. hell, most of them know how to titrate a sedative infusion in the ICU. it's basically the same thing. if they have a problem, they call us.

this is well within a regular nurse's skill set. giving an anesthetic is not practicing anesthesiology. i think we could make this work. i propose we take the initiative upon ourselves as a profession. we don't have to "supervise" everything a nurse does in the ICU. if we give parameters to a nurse to follow, and to chart vitals, i think we could make this happen. we really don't need crna's for the bulk of what we do in the OR either, do we? we'll stick the tube in, we'll set-up the lines, we'll do all the big procedures, they'll be there to help, then we can leave the room to start another case once the anesthetic is running. and they'll have specific parameters to follow, and will simply call us if there's a problem. we just need to be available and to circulate through the room. we do the inductions, with their help, and the wake-ups, with their help, and then in between we can work different teams.

what do you think? who really needs crna's with that level of training if we're there for the critical procedure-parts of a case? when you come to think of it, we just need to back the movement of regular critical care nurses into the OR. after a few months of orientation, they'd get the hang of it. and this would fall under the scope of nursing practice, without a doubt.

i would gladly be all for sponsoring a pilot program of this. i just need willing participants.
Click to expand...

i do my cases with anesthesia techs.. highly motivated and highly trained..
 
matt1234321 said:
sevo85288 said:
2)All the other practices I interviewed with were large M.D. groups who frown upon letting CRNAs in to their city, let alone their practice. They are soured by the national political behavior of the CRNA lobby and have made a conscious decision to fight CRNAs. I was told by groups that they were ready to take huge pay cuts if it meant keeping their contracts and keeping CRNAs out.

Do you know what this method of attack on CRNAs would do for the CRNAs?

If every anesthesiologist refused to work with a CRNA it would indeed level the playing field.

There would be hospitals with all CRNAs and all Anesthesiologists.

Now, who can kick out anesthesia providers faster?
Click to expand...

You are misunderstanding what I am saying. Anesthesiologist are the largest employers and educators of CRNAs. It is not a question of working with them, it is a question of hiring them. Hospitals have bylaws that favor Medical Doctors, i.e. people who practice medicine and not nurses. Kaiser has refused to give into the strong CRNA lobby in CA and has acutally gone back to hiring more M.Ds because of a lack of benefit in having CRNAs and because of the value of having medical doctors work in their OR suites. The realities on the ground are not as rosy as CRNAs would have you believe. The large influx of CRNAs is also predicted to bring down compensation to earth.
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by crockett
As seen on the www.gaspasser.com site;

Half the anesthesiologists in America are NOT board certified. Anesthesiologists are sued for negligence at SEVEN times the frequency of CRNAs. That figure would suggest the doctors are in fact LESS safe. Nevertheless, monopolistic control of anesthesia departments is often handed to the doctors. They are given their perch from which to crow and crow and crow.

All CRNAs are board certified -- every single one -- that's the 'C' in CRNA. In 1931 the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA) became the first national group organized for anesthesia professionals. The AANA was also the first national group to adopt the Harvard Standards on anesthesia monitoring and safety. (Note: GasPasser.com has no affiliation with, nor endorsement by the AANA.)

All CRNAs complete continuing education requirements and re-certify every two years. [Physician anesthesiologists who are not board certified have no such education requirement.]




Ridiculous. Anesthesiologist are sued more (I don't believe this is true but I will trust you on this) because they have deeper pockets. Nurses are not worth the lawyers time (no offense, this is just simple math) Most anesthesiologists have net worths in the several millions. Nurses don't.

Also, you don't mention that more than 90% of cases are resolved in the medical doctors favor in a court of law. Most medical doctors get sued several times during their careers. This may not be true of nurses. In fact, anesthesiologist tend to do pretty well risk managment wise vs. some other physicians. So please stop spreading mis-information.

As far board certification for CRNAs vs. M.Ds...I don't think you have any idea how the two differ, so I won't even respond to that. Nurses are handed their certification on their way out of school....M.D.s are not.
 
I cant be bothered to continue the current conversation but i have to respond to this BS.

Nurses are handed their certification on their way out of school....M.D.s are not
Click to expand...

CRNAs graduate atfer taking final exams then have to sit for board certification. As opposed to physicians, graduates cannot work to the full scope of a CRNA until they pass the boards.
 
sevo85288 said:
As far board certification for CRNAs vs. M.Ds...I don't think you have any idea how the two differ, so I won't even respond to that. Nurses are handed their certification on their way out of school....M.D.s are not.
Click to expand...

I do not agree with the comments on the www.gaspasser.com web site but was only quoting it to point out how the CRNAs are using the concept of almost universal "certification" to further their cause. Yet the Anesthesiologist are saddled with The ABA a bunch of Academic A$$holes on an ego trip, unjustly denying certification to thousands of otherwise deserving anesthesiologists. Unlike almost every other certification exam the ABA refuses to release old tests probably for fear of showing how poorly written their test questions are and how blatantly unfair their examination process is. The www.gaspasser.com web site is rightly pointing out the mess the American Board of Anesthesiology is creating with their ridiculous policy of trying to fail as many Anesthesiologists as they can.

CRNA graduate as a GNA (graduate nurse anesthetist) and can and do work before taking the exam. They then take the exam which is offered at least twice per year perhaps as often as quarterly. I have worked with a number of GNA and have yet to see a GNA fail the exam, a few have waited a few months after graduation to "study more" and not taken it the first time they were eligible.

I did not comment of the lawsuits, but assume it is more of a function of lawyers going after the deeper pockets of anesthesiologist verse CRNA's; also the source of the lawsuit numbers is unclear which given the obvious anti Anesthesiologist slant of the entire www.gaspasser.com web site causes one to question the accuracy of the figures.
 
crockett,

the aba does release old exams from 10 years ago.. You can get them from the american society of anesthesiologists and order them. Thats what i got to study for my written. many people become board certified on a yearly basis it is not an unattainable feat. its just harder because they want you to know what you are doing before you are board certified. dont get me wrong every system is flawed.. just study and you will get there my friend. And if you are already board certified congrats.. help someone else become board certified. as for the crnas they are a JOKE. how can you equate the board certification process byt the ABA with the C in CRNA.. thats laughable..
 
Conflicted said:
I cant be bothered to continue the current conversation but i have to respond to this BS.



CRNAs graduate atfer taking final exams then have to sit for board certification. As opposed to physicians, graduates cannot work to the full scope of a CRNA until they pass the boards.
Click to expand...

Which is whay they are handed out their certifications or get them with MINIMAL effort. I have several friends who are CRNAs and they tell me their certification exam was a freakin' joke. 🙄
 
I knoiw a number who have failed.


I have heard the same thing from some friends about the USMLEs buit the majority tell me the last 2 are quite difficult. I think there is always a subset of people who are just well prepared and always find tests easy. In my interaction with GNAs who have written it, they all come out thinking there is a very real chance they failed.
 
You seem to have a problem recognizing the difference between failing and thinking of having a real chance of failing 🙄
 
Im sorry

It appears your inability to read the full post is hampering you from an intelligent reply. I said at the very beggining that i KNOW people who have failed. The afterward mentioned how most people who take the exam are terrified.
 
Conflicted said:
Im sorry

It appears your inability to read the full post is hampering you from an intelligent reply. I said at the very beggining that i KNOW people who have failed. The afterward mentioned how most people who take the exam are terrified.
Click to expand...

go back to allnursing you doctor wanna be
 
Will you please, please leave these forums?
 
Conflicted is the AANA studentdoctor representative. His job is to pretend that he is intelligent, restrained, and mature. He also has to post replies on all threads that the AANA believes is dangerous to their cause. Why else would a middle age loser frequent the site called the ANESTHESIOLOGIST'S Forums.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Hopefully This Passes
Replies
15
Views
2K
deleted1130227
D
S
Is this true at MUSC tidal health?
Replies
17
Views
3K
Aether2000
Aether2000
TheLoneWolf
How much is this job worth?
Replies
38
Views
4K
TheLoneWolf
TheLoneWolf
A
is this normal?
Replies
18
Views
2K
jwk
jwk
Drwine
Was this a resident pretending to be a Starbucks employee? ;)
Replies
1
Views
812
Lab Lover
L
Top