Content That BigPappaCRNA Likes

BigPappaCRNA 1,654 Views

Joined Jan 13, '13. Posts: 59 (61% Liked) Likes: 98

Sorted By Last Like Given (Max 500)
  • Mar 14

    Quote from AAC.271
    I don't mean to be rude or naive, but why is this a bad thing? AA's are essentially PA's. Shouldn't we be supporting them and their aims for independent practice as well? Why are you saying they are under trained and dangerous? Anesthesia is so safe now it's really hard to kill a patient. the length of CRNA training is only a bit longer than AA training.

    I don't think it is fair for our profession to be doing to the AA's what the MD's do to us.
    What do you mean "our profession"? You aren't a CRNA which is abundantly evident from a cursory check of some of the other absurd posts that you have made and threads you've started.
    That said, I believe that it IS your intent to be " rude or naive".

  • Mar 14

    It's an interesting argument that since anesthesia is so safe, that we (CRNAs) should promote the independance of AAs. Anesthesia is safe, but people are hurt by poor practice (Joan Rivers). AAs are not PAs, just ask a PA and see what kind of answer you get. But that's beside the point. The point is that All CRNA Schools is using the interest in nurse anesthesia to promote Anesthesiologist Assistants. Obviously the individuals behind the site are very poorly informed about the nurse anesthesia profession. Since they are so poorly informed about the profession, I would not give any validity to the site. If you want to find the most accurate information about CRNA programs for free, go to: CRNA School Search

  • Mar 14

    Quote from AAC.271
    You guys do realize how ridiculous you all sound. AA's are essentially PA's and I consider my PA colleagues extremely competent colleagues. You are being hypocrites by saying that aa are inadequate. And in terms of untested outcomes? I mean lets be serious we all know the outcomes will be the same or superior depending on how the authors spin the papers. Pushing propofol aint no gods work.

    i say we support our aas and advocate for independent practice for them as well. They are highly trained providers with masters degree. And equal length of training as us which frankly doesnt matter because the outcomes are mos tlikely the same.
    When AAs are interchangeable with anesthesiologists in the deployed setting as CRNAs are then you can rant and rave about AAs excellent training.
    AAs are not trained to work independently as CRNAs are. AAs will never be independent because they are a subgroup of the the ASA. CRNAs have always had independent practice for over 150 years.
    AAs main purpose for the ASA is to limit CRNAs scope of practice expansion and keep CRNA salaries down while keeping revenues up for anesthesiologists.
    PAs came about as a transition tool for military medics to address the shortage of civilian primary care physicians. AAs have always had a more nebulous history. They were never trained to be independent. They can only work under medical direction of anesthesiologists. AAs are a part of the ASA making it basically impossible to ever gain independence. They are not trained to be independent and their sole purpose right now is to try and limit CRNA practice.

    As far as your quip about research being whatever the author makes means you don't understand how to evaluate peer reviewed research and/or you don't belong in the medical community. Do you go around deciding what intervention is best for patients by just picking it out of grab bag?. Peer-reviewed scientific evidence is difficult to make up. Replicated peer-reviewed scientific research with multiple researchers/research groups done over the last hundred years is basically impossible to make up as you are suggesting. Assuming that research was so easy to make up then why hasn't the ASA, the most well funded medical PAC, been able to come up with any peer-reviewed research to support the superiority of medical direction, medical supervision, and/or independent anesthesiologists having better outcomes then independent CRNAs.

  • Mar 14

    Quote from Wolf at the Door
    An OR RN Clinical Nurse 3 at Norcal hospital in 2 years averaged 423k. Base Salary was 167k. The rest in call, call back pay, & OT. I would never do that much overtime and call. She's been an RN for 20 years. CRNA at that same facility were making average 220k 5 years exp. Hardly none did OT. Makes it hard to do all that studying, student loans, stress, relationship stress, lacking full respect by others, more responsibility etc.

    The biggest positive I see in being a CRNA is ability to make good money on the east coast as opposed to being locked inside CA.
    I used to work at Stanford in the Bay Area, dated another ICU RN who worked at a competing hospital down the road. Her pay was around $125K a year base and mine was around $130K. Astronomically high I thought until I looked at the real estate market there. A crappy 3 bedroom house that needed renovations was starting at 1 Million.

    I had a friend that worked in the cardiac cath lab, pulled tons of OT, always on call, pretty much lived to work and he managed to pull about $160K a year as an RN. Of course, he got raped in taxes, uncle Sam loves when RNs work a lot of OT.

    The CRNAs I knew of made 250K or more a year there, working 36-40 hours a week with tons of perks and benefits. Not to mention they're actually doing a career that's awesome and requires little to no physical strain.

    I've worked in many different states as an RN and the pay in Cali (especially NorCal) is outrageous for RNs. Move away from that area and your pay drops by about 60K a year. Although as a CRNA you can move to plenty of places and still make 200K or more.

  • Mar 14

    Quote from Wolf at the Door
    How is it "way off"?provide an example to back up such a claim.
    I already have. You need to go to the AANA website and view the annual compensation and benefits summary. That source is probably the most up to date and inclusive database for CRNA salaries and benefits.

  • Mar 14

    Quote from Wolf at the Door
    ^Yep that is the salary in Texas. I found this to be an excellent source of info and right on par with the CrnaTx.

    Nurse Anesthetist Salary by State
    It is way off. I would advise sticking with the AANA annual compensation and benefits survey. IMO it seems to be the most in depth and accurate information about CRNA salaries.

  • Mar 2

    Quote from AAC.271
    Pushing propofol aint no gods work...

    i say we support our aas and advocate for independent practice for them as well.
    This lacks any indicator of insight into the anesthesia world at all.

    Would that it was as simple as "pushing propofol".

    As to the second line, the vast majority of AA's would recoil in horror at the thought, as any broad attempt of AAs and their 'advocates' for independent practice would be the end of their profession as they know it.

    But feel free to give them a hand.

  • Mar 2

    'Format should be like this'


  • Jan 4

    It depends on the circumstances, but anesthesia has a high rate of drug addiction so schools are going to be leary of any kind of drug diversion history.
    You should email the program director at a couple of schools when you are through with disciplinary time.

  • Jan 4

    Quote from wtbcrna
    It depends on the circumstances, but anesthesia has a high rate of drug addiction so schools are going to be leary of any kind of drug diversion history.
    You should email the program director at a couple of schools when you are through with disciplinary time.
    Yeah, I would agree with wtbCRNA. The first week of my CRNA program they hit us with the statistics of 1 out of 10 anesthesia providers end up with problems with substance abuse during their career. That's a very high number. We pretty much were terrified to have a beer after that lecture because we didn't want to open ourselves up to using "substances" for recreation or self-therapy. It's a serious issue and one I think you should think really hard about. Perhaps if you know it has been a temptation before it would be best to pick something else.

  • Jan 4

    There are CRNA programs that offer a post Masters/DNP certification. You will take nearly the same amount of courses with the certification program as the traditional program and spend nearly twice as long getting your CRNA.

  • Dec 30 '16

    Quote from babyNP.
    I thought nurses were the first anesthetists in practice...
    Nurses were probably the first people to give anesthesia full time. Medical students were actually some of the first people to give anesthesia, but they kept killing the patients so the surgeons thought it would be better/safer to have a dedicated nurse give anesthesia.
    Anesthetists is how many AAs refer to themselves, which IMHO is just a way to deceive people into making them think they are equilavent to CRNAs. Anesthetist in the the U.K. are physicians/anesthesiologists.

  • Jul 17 '16

    "You will not be given good training and a broad range of experiences if it is an MDA dominated training program, as they do not like to train their competition."

    That is the crux of the issue. No matter how you slice it, attending a CRNA program with an MDA residency program in the area will NOT benefit you if you plan to be a full service provider working in an independent practice post graduation. That is why I limited my selection of schools to those without a residency program in the area.

  • Jul 17 '16

    Quote from Bluebolt
    So no advice for the original post about practicing at my fullest capacity and learning advanced skill very well? Come on CRNA's, you must have noticed some paths to success in that way.
    Short Answer: Train at a school that has independent CRNA practice rotations and that stresses independence. Then look for an independent practice after graduation.
    Your practice will always be the most restricted when you work and/or train in CRNA supervised or directed environments.

  • Jul 17 '16

    Quote from msn10
    The entire point of a DNP is to be able to advance clinical instruction AND increase interpretation and implementation of research into practice. It is not just about reducing the time it takes for research to get to the bedside. The very act of understanding how research should be utilized (what matters and what doesn't) is the very definition of increased clinical competency. The fundamental objectives of ascertaining whether or not research should be used is to increase patient safety (by proxy of better and safer practice) and to reduce costs. The master's programs before did not address this they way we needed to. Being safer means you are a better clinician. Cannot see how those 2 are mutually exclusive.

    As with any major change, it has to be fiscally reasonable. The authors and the creators of the PSH are almost all hospital administrators and MD's in academia (Alabama, Michigan, Cleveland Clinic, etc.) They are more focused on patient outcomes and reducing costs. The billing aspect is more about ABO models vs. antitrust laws with regards to contracts and stepping on other MD toes. If done appropriately, the training now would offset future costs for both hospitals and medical groups. The PSH is in no way intended to be a money maker. Just the opposite if not done correctly.

    Its fine, I'm out again. I stayed away from Allnurses for awhile because, quite frankly, just too busy to join in the conversations. Like soap operas they don't change much and really don't help my practice or business.
    I never knew why a nonCRNA was posting on this particular forum anyways, especially when they are obviously pro ACT and anti-independent APRN.

    From the AACN (this sounds very familiar to what I already stated):

    • In many institutions, advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), including Nurse Practitioners, Clinical Nurse Specialists, Certified Nurse-Midwives, and Certified Nurse Anesthetists, are prepared in master's-degree programs that often carry a credit load equivalent to doctoral degrees in the other health professions. AACN's position statement calls for educating APRNs and nurses seeking top systems/organizational roles in DNP programs.
    • DNP curricula build on traditional master's programs by providing education in evidence-based practice, quality improvement, and systems leadership, among other key areas.
    • The DNP is designed for nurses seeking a terminal degree in nursing practice and offers an alternative to research-focused doctoral programs. DNP-prepared nurses are well-equipped to fully implement the science developed by nurse researchers prepared in PhD, DNSc, and other research-focused nursing doctorates. American Association of Colleges of Nursing | DNP Fact Sheet