Future of Anesthesia

With all the advancements in minimally invasive surgery and non surgical interventions, what do you think the future holds for anesthesia? Say in the next 10 years or so?

Will we see more regional and local anesthesia (perhaps combined with sedation) and less GA? What will this mean for CRNAs? Do CRNAs regularly provide anesthesia/sedation for interventional radiology?

On a similar subject, what are predictions in general for the future of anesthesia (not necessarily related to technique or emplyment, but what about technology, etc)?

bryan

New techniques and treatments alot of the time require surgical interventions. No one has a crystal ball, but as an SRNA I say my future looks great 20 years down the road.

New techniques and treatments alot of the time require surgical interventions. No one has a crystal ball, but as an SRNA I say my future looks great 20 years down the road.

Yup.

I have around fifty grand saying the future of the profession is going to be pretty good.

Will have a buck 20 in the hole for out-of-state tuition and cost of living by the time I'm finished next August. The sky isn't descending and I ain't seen Chicken Little making any local appearances..

So far, there's been several folks post that the future looks good. Maybe I didn't explain myslef well in the OP. I don't doubt that future looks good for CRNAs, I'm not at all suggesting that the job market is going to crumble due to advances in minimally invasive surgery and interventional radiology. But, as someone who would hope to practice as a CRNA but won't be doing so for another 5 years or so (still got to finish undergrad, get experience, all that), I'm wondering what might the job look like in 5 years, 10 years? Will it be the same as now? Different? How so?

I realize that this is allnurses.com and not the Dion Warwick Psychic Friend's Network, but I thought it might be interesting to hear from folks who are out doing this, going to conferences, reading the literature, seeing what is around the bend, and see what you think might be in store. Don't worry, no one will hold you legally liable for your predictions, just a fun excercise in future thinking.

With that said, let the ideas flow.

bryan

Not aware of any new drugs in development, but then the pharm companies don't often take me into their confidence. A few things I would like to see:

Monitoring integrated into OR tables. Rather than the current morass of cables running from above the anesthesia machine, it would be nice to see a single cable from table to monitor. Connections for the actual monitoring end devices (cuff, pulse ox clip, etc) could be integrated into the bed. But that would require mfgs to standardize their connections, which isn't likely.

IV warming that requires no special tubing or attachments, and that does not require prewarming of IV fluid outside of the room.

Provider controlled automated data input for charting (I DON'T want something that acts like big brother, slavishly recording everything. I want to control what data is input for charting purposes.) Whatever it is it must be easy and quick.

Any other ideas?

KM

This is not scientific

some years ago they started using laparoscopic instruments in surgery.

There was talk about it changing surgery and reducing surgical time.

Well, I have seen it reduce patient hospitalization not reduce surgical time, infact the opposite could be argued.

Somehow during any procedure that you are doing to a patient you may need anesthesia to watch over the patient.

I remember years ago, during cardioversion, it was me, the cardiologist, and the patient. Now, i see that anesthesia is all over it. Anesthesia is even pushing resp. therapist from shock (electroconvulsive (sp).)therapy for psych patients.

you need anesthesia in lithotripsy rooms. Even now that new machines are out that you do not need the patient to be prone.

In some hospitals in PA, even when an MDA does spinal on a C-section, you still need a CRNA to be there right up the time mom gets back to her room.

In cath and EP laps, I remember, it used to be the patient, the cardiologist, a tech(respiratory therapist/nuclear med/x-ray) and circulating nurse. Now, I have noticed that it is becoming the norm in some hospitals to have Anesthesia present. I do not see technology drying up the jobs anytime soon

Same day surgery centers are needing more anesthesia people than thought possible

if you are going to get a procedure done in your physician's office better make sure that a board certified anesthesia personnel will be watching over you. I have seen dentist bring in patients for anesthesia for wisdom tooth extraction. they have quoted various reasons, from asthma, cardiovascular, previous MI, patient request,etc. That expection of MR therefore will not comply is not the only indication for them anymore

Most locums i run into, take pains to explain the increase number of new grads would dry up jobs faster than anything else.

QUOTE=bryanboling5]So far, there's been several folks post that the future looks good. Maybe I didn't explain myslef well in the OP. I don't doubt that future looks good for CRNAs, I'm not at all suggesting that the job market is going to crumble due to advances in minimally invasive surgery and interventional radiology. But, as someone who would hope to practice as a CRNA but won't be doing so for another 5 years or so (still got to finish undergrad, get experience, all that), I'm wondering what might the job look like in 5 years, 10 years? Will it be the same as now? Different? How so?

I realize that this is allnurses.com and not the Dion Warwick Psychic Friend's Network, but I thought it might be interesting to hear from folks who are out doing this, going to conferences, reading the literature, seeing what is around the bend, and see what you think might be in store. Don't worry, no one will hold you legally liable for your predictions, just a fun excercise in future thinking.

With that said, let the ideas flow.

bryan

Anesthesia is even pushing resp. therapist from shock (electroconvulsive (sp).)therapy for psych patients.

One correction: Anesthesia providers are always required for ECTs because a muscle relaxant and induction agent are used to prevent injury from tetanic muscle contraction and lower the seizure threshold. It is a general anesthestic, albeit a very short one.

One correction: Anesthesia providers are always required for ECTs because a muscle relaxant and induction agent are used to prevent injury from tetanic muscle contraction and lower the seizure threshold. It is a general anesthestic, albeit a very short one.

Those ECTs are pretty fun to do. Our PhD director said we absolutely "had to be hands off" during the shocking phase. Ain't true. ECT doesn't shock the provider.

IV + mask + pliable mouthpiece with holes for ventilation, propofol and sux.

At least that's the way we did it.