to protect their turf? If there's one thing I learned in my short thirty three years on this planet it is that interest groups always TEND to seek for ways to maximize THEIR interests (nothing wrong with this of course but politicians should keep this in mind when considering their input on issues). It doesn't matter if you are talking about government workers, teachers, Dr's or CRNA's. One need only to witness some of the caustic things that were put out by the AMA during the debate concerning "opt out" provisions for Medicare of direct physician supervision of CRNA's.
Without regard to whether or not this is actually THE CASE MDA's PERCEIVE CRNA's as something of a threat. My question is what will their LONG TERM strategy be for dealing with this threat. Possibilities that I can think of might include:
I. Working to increase the standards of education for CRNA's. Perhaps, getting CRNA schools to introduce an additional semester or two of courses like gross anatomy, and or pathophysiology. This would be an interesting approach since it would probably garner the support of many CRNA's who would benefit (at least in the short term) by the even greater shortage it would facilitate. The decrease in graduating CRNA's might encourage the common use of CRNA's to "go out of common practice" in many locales.
II. Another route they might follow would be to seek regulation AT THE STATE LEVEL which would make it more difficult for CRNA's to effectively practice. Perhaps mandating A CERTAIN TYPE of liability insurence (not availible from CRNA associations) that would make it less viable for CRNA's to practice.
III. Yet another tactic would be to fight the EXPANSION of existing CRNA educational facilities with a result similar to #I above in the long term.
My question is are CRNA organizations anticipating such action and even more importantly what are they doing to fight back?
