AANA urges Medicare to consider hospital anesthesiology efficiency measures

Specialties CRNA

Published

AANA Urges Medicare to Consider Hospital Anesthesiology Efficiency Measures

The AANA has recommended that Medicare consider the costs of various anesthesia delivery models and of hospital anesthesia subsidies per anesthetizing location as part of quality measures intended to capture the efficiency of hospital anesthesia services.

The June 21 letter, signed by President Janice Izlar, CRNA, DNAP, stated, "The Agency may want to consider the costs of meeting the seven medical direction steps as part of the anesthesiology spending and cost-efficiency measure. Under the medical direction practice model, the medical directing anesthesiologist must complete seven steps in order to bill for this modality. The Agency has clearly stated that medical direction is a condition for payment for anesthesiologist services and not a quality standard."

The AANA discussed the ways that the requirements associated with anesthesiologist medical direction claims contribute to healthcare cost growth, noting specifically the requirement that the anesthesiologist be "present at induction." "For every minute spent waiting for an anesthesiologist to arrive and be present at induction, some of the costliest resources in the hospital are wasted. The clock is running on the surgeon, circulating nurse, scrub tech, and nurse anesthetist waiting in the operating room. Waiting costs cascade throughout the day, postponing the surgery schedule to require overtime and on-call staff, delaying the surgeon's rounds to affect patient care and discharge of the patient from the healthcare facility. Waiting costs also add opportunity costs, diverting needed resources from other patient care," continued the letter.

The letter also recommends including the cost per anesthetizing location as part of the proposed anesthesiology measure since hospitals pay an average of $160,096 per anesthetizing location to anesthesiology groups, and increasing the weight placed on clinical process of care measures, such as the Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP) measures, under the hospital value based purchasing program.

Specializes in critcal care, CRNA.

Personally only so much is learned/taught in the classroom. The bulk of our education, IMO, comes from clinical. In clinical I would spend 10 mins with the MDA per case for the entire shift and the rest of the time with the CRNA. I don't dislike the MDAs and choose to work in an ACT where I am not micromanaged. I do dislike when some MDAs want to ensure that people believe that CRNAs are not capable of treating PTs on our own. In my facility the MDAs supervise induction and then leave us alone unless I call them.

Specializes in Anesthesia.

MSN10 you are not a CRNA and you have no earthly idea what demeaning intolerable crap CRNAs put up with from some MDAs on a daily basis. CRNAs often have to defend their practices on a daily basis, but if an MDA makes a mistake it's "well those things just happen sometimes". What you see posted on here is the spill over of those frustrations of dealing with that on a daily basis.

Most of us, including myself, use these forums as means to vent those frustrations. I like working with every MDA I work with currently. They are all great, intelligent, and well educated colleagues, but the simple fact is we work just fine as an anesthesia department when our MDAs are not there either. CRNAs often deploy as the only anesthesia provider in the military. CRNAs have proven time and again that we are at the very least just as safe as our MDA counterparts. CRNAs will never be as malignant as MDAs or the ASA in their demeaning rhetoric about CRNAs.

Anesthesiologists and CRNAs make a great team, but in no way should an anesthesiologist ever be allowed to supervise/direct a CRNAs practice. CRNAs should always be independent providers no matter what the mix anesthesia providers.

I know that had little to do with your post, but you really do not have the context to understand where CRNAs "disdain" comes from.

CRNAs will never be as malignant as MDAs or the ASA in their demeaning rhetoric about CRNAs.

HAHAHAHA, that's funny right there - really!!!!!!!

First - the AANA and CRNA's such as yourself could teach a graduate-level "demeaning rhetoric" class. As an AA, I hear it each and every day, and have put up with it for more than 30 years. Why are AA's not in every state? Because in every state we try and establish legislation, there are a gaggle of CRNA's, the AANA, and the state nurse anesthetist association lined up to testify against us in legislative committees. I can't begin to count the number of anti-AA threads and posts just on this section of allnurses.com. Please don't attempt to portray yourself as a silent innocent bystander just trying to make a living the best you can.

And clearly you're forgetting the recent pathetic letter from your current president actually threatening the ASA because she was "offended". Absolutely pitiful.

Specializes in cardiac, ICU, education.
MSN10 you are not a CRNA and you have no earthly idea what demeaning intolerable crap CRNAs put up with from some MDAs on a daily basis.

No, I am not a CRNA, but we are all RN's and you have no idea what my experiences have been with physicians. Harassment, abuse, and degradation are not specific to the CRNA/MD relationship. I have seen nurses spit on, screamed at, items thrown at them, sworn at, and I even saw a nurse get permanent nerve damage in her foot when an MD got so irate and pushed a patient bed over her foot. I have been thrown under the bus by a few physicians and colleagues in my day and I have also seen some CRNA's throw other nurses under the bus.

CRNAs often have to defend their practices on a daily basis

So do bedside nurses - it might be for different reasons, but those nurses are still defending their practice as well.

Part of one of my classes is a session on conflict. It is by far my most popular class as nurses are desperate to understand how to handle such situations, and these are not undergraduate students, these are nurses who have been in practice for a number of years and are still grappling with how to deal with these tense situations. As a CRNA, you actually have more power over physicians than most nurses do. Being powerless is the worst feeling for many RN's and it is the number one reason they leave nursing.

The reason I use the word 'disdain' is that the relationships between these 2 groups just seems to be getting worse. When in the OR, it is not uncommon to hear both sides talking about each other poorly.

Just because someone is not a CRNA that does not mean that they don't have the 'context' when it comes to physician abuse, it takes empathy and you don't have to hold a certain title to understand abuse when you see it. I think I have said all I would like to on the subject.

When you posted the original article, I was hoping it was going to be about the upcoming changes in Obamacare and I wanted to get a better understanding of the CRNA view and how they feel their practice will be altered if at all. Maybe that is a subject for another thread.

Specializes in Anesthesia.
No, I am not a CRNA, but we are all RN's and you have no idea what my experiences have been with physicians. Harassment, abuse, and degradation are not specific to the CRNA/MD relationship. I have seen nurses spit on, screamed at, items thrown at them, sworn at, and I even saw a nurse get permanent nerve damage in her foot when an MD got so irate and pushed a patient bed over her foot. I have been thrown under the bus by a few physicians and colleagues in my day and I have also seen some CRNA's throw other nurses under the bus.

So do bedside nurses - it might be for different reasons, but those nurses are still defending their practice as well.

Part of one of my classes is a session on conflict. It is by far my most popular class as nurses are desperate to understand how to handle such situations, and these are not undergraduate students, these are nurses who have been in practice for a number of years and are still grappling with how to deal with these tense situations. As a CRNA, you actually have more power over physicians than most nurses do. Being powerless is the worst feeling for many RN's and it is the number one reason they leave nursing.

The reason I use the word 'disdain' is that the relationships between these 2 groups just seems to be getting worse. When in the OR, it is not uncommon to hear both sides talking about each other poorly.

Just because someone is not a CRNA that does not mean that they don't have the 'context' when it comes to physician abuse, it takes empathy and you don't have to hold a certain title to understand abuse when you see it. I think I have said all I would like to on the subject.

When you posted the original article, I was hoping it was going to be about the upcoming changes in Obamacare and I wanted to get a better understanding of the CRNA view and how they feel their practice will be altered if at all. Maybe that is a subject for another thread.

I understand that nurses are disrespected by physicians and abused. All CRNAs come from nursing backgrounds, but that does not mean that nurses who are not CRNAs have a clue of the working relationships between CRNAs and MDAs.

MDAs will always be part of the "good ole boys club". CRNAs will always have to be better than MDAs in their practice just to seem acceptable by surgeons and anesthesiologists. That is entirely different than being a staff RN and working with abusive physicians.

I am curious how some programs help pay for DNP projects. My DNP project, and the projects of all of my classmates, were completely self funded. There is not a single aspect of the projects that required university funding. My point is that for DNP's the costs are almost completely covered by the CRNA. If it is an evidence based practice in a clinical setting then some costs might be held by the organization, but those costs would (most likely) have been held by the organization regardless of the DNP project. And many of the evidence base projects are saving money.

Also, so far the DNP has not resulted in higher pay. CRNAs get paid the same regardless of educational level. I work with certificate CRNAs who make more than me.

Also, getting rid of the supervising MD does not reduce the workforce 20%. It is the CRNA in the room doing the cases in many hospitals, and the MD who says hello to the patient and sits in the break room. I know there are many hospitals where MDs do much more, but not where I work. It would be a better argument to say you can increase the workforce +1 for every four CRNAs if you made the MD take a room also. So the workforce increases 25% by making MDs sit in a room instead of simply signing a chart.

The AANA has not been as malignant as the ASA. The ASA constantly uses "fear mongering" and outright lies to "inform" the public of many dangers associated with letting "just a nurse" give their anesthesia. Go the ASA website and read the descriptions of the different members of the anesthesia care team. CRNA's have required a master's degree for almost two decades, but the ASA site still says a bachelor's is required. The website makes it sound like CRNAs have minimal education and a decreased scope of practice. The truth is often mis-represented by them. Our scope of practice is the same as theirs. Their website also talks about how the increase in the number of anesthesiologists caused the massive increase in patient safety (as evidenced by decreased mortality). Correlation does not prove causation, but you can use it to convince an uninformed group to believe a lie. The AANA website lists many studies that prove CRNAs are safe, the ASA website can not. Even if you can argue that the studies might be biased because of CRNA involvement, the ASA has no such similar studies to counteract them.

It is simple job security why CRNAs don't like AAs. MDs have complete control over AAs, given the opportunity to hire me or an AA--they will pick an AA who has no control over their employment terms. They limit AA job prospects and salary to maintain theirs. I personally like AAs, but I worry what the effect an excess of AAs and a shortage of CRNAs would have on my job prospects.

Specializes in Emergency, ICU.
Actually you are incorrect. There are rules and I posted them above.

Professional licenses, certifications should come AFTER the academic degree which in her case is the DNAP.

Here is another reference.

[h=1]Academic Degrees, Licenses, Credentials[/h]

Spelling and Format

Do not use periods in academic degrees, licenses, or other credentials.

MD, PhD, RN, LCSW, FACP

Do not capitalize generic degrees. Note correct use of apostrophes and spelling.

[*]bachelor's degree; bachelor of arts

[*]master's degree; master of science in nursing; master of public health

[*]doctoral degree; doctorate (not doctorate degree)

[*]doctor of medicine

[*]medical degree (a generic term for MD, DO, and all foreign equivalents)

When used after a name, set off the degree with commas.

Nancy Brown, MD, joined the institution in 1990.

Inclusion of Degrees in Text

As an academic institution, we value educational and professional credentials. At the same time, we need to make an effort to maintain readability and accessibility.

In items such as business cards, stationery, and publicity pieces for events, degrees and credentials are at the discretion of the individual in reference.

A more conservative approach is used in running text.

Bachelor's Degrees: Bachelor's degrees are generally not included. Exceptions may be made, upon request, for specialized professional degrees (e.g., BSN, BPharm) when it is the highest degree obtained.

Master's Degrees: If an individual does not hold a doctorate, master's degrees will be considered upon request. If an individual does hold a doctorate, master's degrees will not be included, unless the master's degree represents a specialized field or a field different from that represented by the doctorate (e.g., MPH or MBA for an individual with a medical degree).

Licenses, Certifications, and Professional Designations: Only relevant clinical licenses will be included (e.g., RN, PT, RD), but not certifications or other designations (e.g., FACP, CCRN). List the academic degree first, followed by the license.

On business cards: Sarah Sampson, MS, PhD, RN, CCRN

In text: Sarah Sampson, PhD, RN

Other Points

Do not use MD or PhD as an abbreviation for physicians or scientists, or RN as an abbreviation for nurses. These abbreviations should be reserved for degrees and licenses, not people.

In the first reference, use the academic degree. In subsequent references, use Dr. Never use Dr. when also using the academic degrees in the same reference.

Probably off topic, so apologies, but thank you nomadcrna for this. Pet peeve of mine as well...

Sent from my iPhone using allnurses.com

The AANA has not been as malignant as the ASA. The ASA constantly uses "fear mongering" and outright lies to "inform" the public of many dangers associated with letting "just a nurse" give their anesthesia. Go the ASA website and read the descriptions of the different members of the anesthesia care team. CRNA's have required a master's degree for almost two decades, but the ASA site still says a bachelor's is required. The website makes it sound like CRNAs have minimal education and a decreased scope of practice. The truth is often mis-represented by them. Our scope of practice is the same as theirs. Their website also talks about how the increase in the number of anesthesiologists caused the massive increase in patient safety (as evidenced by decreased mortality). Correlation does not prove causation, but you can use it to convince an uninformed group to believe a lie. The AANA website lists many studies that prove CRNAs are safe, the ASA website can not. Even if you can argue that the studies might be biased because of CRNA involvement, the ASA has no such similar studies to counteract them.

It is simple job security why CRNAs don't like AAs. MDs have complete control over AAs, given the opportunity to hire me or an AA--they will pick an AA who has no control over their employment terms. They limit AA job prospects and salary to maintain theirs. I personally like AAs, but I worry what the effect an excess of AAs and a shortage of CRNAs would have on my job prospects.

I understand that CRNA's might be afraid of competition from AA's. However, "fear mongering" and "outright lies" and misrepresentation are the exact same things done by CRNA's and their "professional" organizations to prevent AA practice from expanding. At least be honest with yourself - you know this has happened countless times. The hypocrisy is pathetic.

+ Add a Comment