NBCRNA and the AANA... WOW!

Specialties CRNA

Updated:   Published

Got this in my email.. since I am not a member of the AANA I do not know where this is coming from.

Is the AANA's panties in a wad over the recertification plan? I think the recert plan is karma for the assenine DNP push. If this works out, CRNA's will have a choice of the certifying bodies they can choose there... Yup.. that will not cause ANY problems..

Quote

Dear CRNA:

We want to draw your attention to an issue that should concern all nurse anesthetists. An amendment to the AANA bylaws has been proposed that would withdraw the explicit recognition of the National Board of Certification and Recertification for Nurse Anesthetists (NBCRNA) as the certifying body for nurse anesthetists and the Council on Accreditation (COA) as the accrediting body for nurse anesthesia education. It instead requires that the AANA "shall recognize" independent entities which serve a certification or accreditation function. The amendment language suggests that this is simply a change in nomenclature, is intended to make the bylaws less restrictive and is in the best interest of the AANA. In actuality, the amendment changes a longstanding relationship and distances the AANA, NBCRNA and COA from one another. Neither the AANA, the NBCRNA, nor the COA had a part in initiating this bylaw change. The AANA, NBCRNA and COA have recognized each other as the sole professional, certification and accreditation organizations and worked as partners for many decades. Each organization has its own mission, but each is led by CRNAs who recognize each other as colleagues and partners in the field of nurse anesthesia. The proposed bylaw change opens the door to fracturing these relationships creating uncertainty about the future of our profession and will force the AANA, NBCRNA and COA to deal with this uncertainty when our time, energy and resources are better spent addressing the many significant challenges facing our profession. We are urging fellow AANA members to oppose the proposed amendment.

Why this amendment is bad for the profession:

  • The mandate in Article XXI of the amendment which requires the AANA to create guidelines for certifying bodies is in direct conflict with organizations that accredit the NBCRNA which require that certifying bodies be separate and autonomous from the membership organization. This directly jeopardizes the CRNA credential.
  • The loss of a direct membership voice in the selection of their accrediting and certifying agencies. This decision will be within the sole purview of the AANA Board of Directors without a requirement for member input.
  • There will likely be pressure placed on the AANA Board of Directors by the sponsors of the amendment to form or find an additional certification agency. The authors indicated they have developed a template for this action and the AANA Board has been contacted by an outside certification organization inquiring about the need for their services.
  • The AANA and NBCRNA boards would be distracted from the important work they perform on behalf of the profession by efforts to establish a second credentialing body. Such an effort will consume time and money better spent on combating external attacks on the profession.
  • Confusion could arise among the public (consumers, boards of nursing, advocacy organizations) if two certifying bodies for nurse anesthetists existed, and this could be used as a weapon by organized medicine groups which seek to restrain nurse anesthetist scope of practice.
  • Employers or state licensing boards may refuse to recognize two tiers of credentials.
  • A less demanding credentialing process may create a concern over less qualified practitioners.
  • Perceived erosion in dedication to the highest standards of practice may undermine the ability of nurse anesthetists to practice independently.
  • Nurse anesthetists could lose the support of regulatory and advocacy groups who have been pushing for greater opportunities for nurse anesthetists.

A certifying body is required to ensure the integrity of the certification process to protect patient safety, and to work with the professional association while maintaining the required autonomy. This is precisely what the NBCRNA does. We are comprised solely of volunteers; most of whom are practicing CRNAs who are members of the AANA. We consistently work with the AANA and take the concerns they express into consideration in our efforts to protect and improve the credentialing practices in nurse anesthesia. We urge you to contact your State Association President and Region Director and let them know you oppose the proposed amendment to the AANA bylaws. And do not forget to cast your vote of opposition at the 2013 AANA Meeting.

Sincerely,

The NBCRNA Board of Directors

On the PLUS side.. This is such an esoteric subject it might be possible only CRNA's will post in a CRNA forum..

ruler of kolob said:
Recertification is something I welcome. It might actually reduce our numbers and help counteract the over production of graduates. If you are afraid of a test... maybe you should not be doing this.

Anyone should be able to sit down, read something like Morgan and Mikhail and pass a test. I doubt the test will be challenging.... even those who do nothing but colonoscopies and eyes will be taking it.

Good Goob! Seriously?! There has to be a better and more direct way of preventing the over-production of CRNAs. I know My school, USC SOM adjusts their class sizes according to demand. Maybe we should figure out a way to keep schools from trying to maximize their profits with total disregard to the market. Allowing the sole credentialing body to apply new credentialing standards that in no way, shape, or form enhance the quality of care that is given by CRNAs with the hopes that the new standards somehow keep CRNA overproduction down is a back-asswards way of hoping a problem gets solved. The new standard in no way reduces the number of new grads flooding the market that will drive salaries down; it will only serve to discourage damn good CRNAs with far more experience and ability than those "ready and able" to pass the test from continuing their careers. This new standard is nothing more than a way to drum up more revenue under the false pretense of higher standards. It is total horsehocky. As far as the AANA not caring about ACT practice CRNAs...what do you expect them to do? I left SC, because practicing in SC meant calling a MDA to come in and slam induction agents, leave you to clean up the mess, and calling them to come in and watch you extubate/emerge the patient. ***** If you really want to change that BS, leave. Refuse to be a part of that whole fraudulent bunch of BS. It is the states nursing policy that dictates how CRNAs can practice, and if we stop going along with and supporting the ACT model by our participation in it, things will change. There isn't a hospital administrator in America who wouldn't want to go with an all CRNA anesthesia model if was an option. Eventually, every state will be an opt-out state, because the feds will eventually see the ACT model for the inefficient sham and waste that it is. Until then, quit looking for the AANA or someone else to fix the problem...quit supporting the ACT practices with your participation in them.

2 Votes
Specializes in Anesthesia.

The recertification exam for CRNAs has nothing to do with trying to control the market for overproduction of CRNAs. There are regional surpluses of CRNAs, but overall there are still plenty of jobs for CRNAs.

ACTs and billing through TEFRA at a 1:4 ratio is a farce. It has been shown through analysis of large ACT practices that 1 MDA cannot keep up with 4 anesthesia cases and meet all the TEFRA requirements. There are ACT practices that have been fined large amounts by CMS for fraud for billing under TEFRA when those requirements were not meet.

3 Votes
Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.

I remember pre-Tefra practice. It was in a world where anesthesiologists "supervised" cases in their street clothes from the office; life was good for us back then (except for the lack pulse oximeters, CO2 monitors and ventilators on every machine). Now, in the times of evidence based care (just what was it we did before..depend on prayer or animal sacrifice?), we can only hope that the concept of "evidence" can be intellectually grasped by the morons in Congress. Evidence proves our point that supervision should be the exception, not the rule.

1 Votes
Specializes in Anesthesia.
subee said:
I remember pre-Tefra practice. It was in a world where anesthesiologists "supervised" cases in their street clothes from the office; life was good for us back then (except for the lack pulse oximeters, CO2 monitors and ventilators on every machine). Now, in the times of evidence based care (just what was it we did before..depend on prayer or animal sacrifice?), we can only hope that the concept of "evidence" can be intellectually grasped by the morons in Congress. Evidence proves our point that supervision should be the exception, not the rule.

IMO there should never be "supervision" just a way to bill for consultation.

3 Votes
ssrhythm said:
Yup, that email was from the NBCRNA and COA not the AANA. I have not seen where the AANA has issued a statement or a response to this e-mail yet. From what I can gather...and I may be way off base here...the AANA felt the heat from its membership to do something in response to the recert changes that the NBCRNA and COA slammed down our throats. The whole "period of discussion" where the vast majority of CRNAs wrote in against having to retake the exam was a sham at best from what I can tell. They had their sweet idea of implementing this new standard, and no amount of well written, logical letters was going to change their minds. Simply put, having to retake the exam does nothing...NOTHING...to strengthen the skills and improve the care that is currently being given by CRNAs throughout this country. All it does is drum up a ton of money for the NBCRNA and the COA and for all the test administration and prep-course entities associated with this certification process. Some argue that it is a way to bring our standards in line or parallel to those of the MDAs, but that is a weak reason for implementing their new set of standards. I work autonomously alongside three anesthesiologists. One is great and takes the time to tweak his anesthetic delivery to meet his goal of providing better service as time advances. One is great, but he is going to do what he's done since the 80's regardless of any evidence that better practices exist. One is terrible and basically gets patients through with total disregard to anything other than keeping them alive till he hands them off to the PACU nurses. Their model of recertification has no effect on their clinical delivery of anesthesia, and I'm sure that the same will hold true for CRNAs. The only valid reasons that exists to add burden and cost to maintaining certification is if that added burden and cost will produce significant improvement of clinical skills and knowledge across the board that significantly enhances the delivery of the care that we provide...or if the added burden and cost will help advance our status as providers within the healthcare system as a whole. The recent changes do neither of these, and the AANA membership is calling BS. The NBCRNA and the COA should make and enforce policy according to the wishes and educated opinion of its constituency, and if they fail to do so and implement self-benefiting policy that ignores the opinion of the majority of the CRNAs that support it's existence, they should be held accountable. Look no further than Washington to see what happens when governing bodies are allowed to do what they choose without the fear of repercussions. Competition and choice is always a good thing. I just hope that whatever evolves from this is founded on accountability, simplicity, and common sense.

Actually, you are wrong regarding the COA being involved. The COA DID NOT send the email...only the NBCRNA. The COA has NOTHING to do with certification only accreditation of educational programs. The problem has been the relationship between the AANA and NBCRNA.

DreamMatrix

2 Votes

The AANA got us into this mess in the first place by stabbing a kni in the backs of CRNAS when they thee us to the wolves, true NBCRNA, s bunch of mafia thugs. The CPC exam is a sham. We can stop them, and it might be easier than you think. My personal email is: [email protected]

James B. Lunsford, CRNA

1 Votes
On 2/12/2020 at 6:42 PM, James Lunsford said:

The AANA got us into this mess in the first place by stabbing a kni in the backs of CRNAS when they thee us to the wolves, true NBCRNA, s bunch of mafia thugs. The CPC exam is a sham. We can stop them, and it might be easier than you think. My personal email is: [email protected]

James B. Lunsford, CRNA

Ya, umm, no thank you. I don't think I want to trust my credential and my career to someone who first, revives a 7 year old thread, and second, does not know enough, or care enough, to proofread their post so it does not read like it was written by a 3rd grader.

I will pass.

1 Votes
Specializes in Anesthesia, Pain, Emergency Medicine.
On 7/30/2013 at 7:47 PM, ruler of kolob said:

Got this in my email.. since I am not a member of the AANA I do not know where this is coming from.

Is the AANA's panties in a wad over the recertification plan? I think the recert plan is karma for the assenine DNP push. If this works out, CRNA's will have a choice of the certifying bodies they can choose there... Yup.. that will not cause ANY problems..

On the PLUS side.. This is such an esoteric subject it might be possible only CRNA's will post in a CRNA forum..

You do realize that NPs have a choice with credentialing bodies? Competition is good.

1 Votes
Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.
On 9/2/2013 at 6:59 PM, wtbcrna said:

IMO there should never be "supervision" just a way to bill for consultation.

Of course you are correct. My bad.

2 Votes

Does anyone know if the AANA finances the NBCRNA? If so, I would like to know. I would not be happy if any of my AANA membership dues were financing the certifying board that is dedicated to destroying our profession.

If anyone knows, please send me an answer at [email protected]

thsnks

Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.
On 3/9/2020 at 2:22 PM, James Lunsford said:

Does anyone know if the AANA finances the NBCRNA? If so, I would like to know. I would not be happy if any of my AANA membership dues were financing the certifying board that is dedicated to destroying our profession.

If anyone knows, please send me an answer at [email protected]

thsnks

About the NBCRNA
 

Quote

 

1975: In 1975, the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA) approved the establishment of Councils to oversee the accreditation and certification processes for nurse anesthetists. In doing so, the profession recognized that credentialing mechanisms, which include examination and certification, function to protect and benefit the public. Nurse anesthetists established a rigorous national certification examination earlier than most nursing, allied health, and medical professions, and became an early adopter of computerized adaptive testing technology.

1978: The profession has required recertification since 1978.

2007: In 2007, the Council on Certification of Nurse Anesthetists (CCNA) and the Council on Recertification of Nurse Anesthetists (COR) became independent of the AANA, and together incorporated as the NBCRNA. While an autonomous organization, the NBCRNA continues to work closely with the AANA on issues of mutual concern. ...

 

...Board of Directors

The NBCRNA is managed by a Board of Directors who are recognized as leaders in nurse anesthesia and related fields. The members of the Board are certified registered nurse anesthetists, as well as a board-certified surgeon and anesthesiologist, both of whom have a current working relationship with nurse anesthetists, and a representative of the public at large. Members of the Board are elected to serve staggered three-year terms. Two of the CRNA Board Directors are elected by currently certified CRNAs through an open election following a call for applications. Learn more on the Election page.

Learn more about the volunteer Board of Directors that governs the NBCRNA credentialing programs.

 

 

1 Votes
Specializes in Anesthesia, Pain, Emergency Medicine.

They are separate now. NBCRNA has hindered and hurt our profession.

 

+ Add a Comment