Published
Jonathan Slonin, an anesthesiologist and past president of the Florida Society of Anesthesiologists, believes that lawmakers should not allow the administration of anesthesia without a physician in the room. Although he works with and respects Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs), they are not physicians.
QuoteThey have years of training, but they are not trained in medical diagnosis and treatment, and while they are highly skilled and a vital part of the medical care team, they should never be the lead of that team.
While the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists are advocating for a proposed bill that would allow CRNA’s to practice without the supervision of a physician, some see this as a dangerous and costly move.
Quote...safety should be the primary goal and that is why physician-led care must remain the standard. If CRNAs were given complete independence to practice complex medicine, costly mistakes will happen. And when they do, we all pay for those mistakes through increased healthcare costs.
For more on this story, see Anesthesia without a physician in the room? Lawmakers should not all that / Opinion
Some of current increased wages is advocacy. Some is other factors of course.
If AAs were allowed to proliferate unrestricted, an increased supply of providers would likely decrease wages. I don't see any other major group opposing AAs besides the AANA. Plenty of other issues with AAs, but that's one example of benefit of advocacy.
Increasing CRNA scope of practice in many facilities, prompted by both increasing scope of practice legislation in many states, also increases wages. Case and point is Arizona; their advocacy completely changed the anesthesia landscape over the last 5 years. High paying GETA in dental office gigs used to be completely off limits to crnas; now we can do them.
subee, MSN, CRNA
1 Article; 6,113 Posts
I agree. There are plenty if non partnership job available for young MDA's who can't afford a mommy job. But they are scary when they are new!