Is the AA profession gaining ground?

midwestsrna1 · Apr 10, 2006

How would AAs feel if anesthesia techs started calling themselves AAs or anesthesia assistants or anesthesiologist assistants? All three names could describe their "role" if you will, sort of like a certified nursing assistant. I'm not putting actual AAs in this category, just pointing out the dangers of trying to selectively rename a profession or role.

Nitecap · Apr 10, 2006

The anesthesiaassistant.com website is a commercial website with no affiliatin with AA's or the AAAA. COMMERCIAL is the key word. Every one of those links to manufacturer and employment agency websites generates a commission every time someone clicks on one of those links. Is there some useful info about AA's on the site? Yes. Is there inaccurate info about AA's (and CRNA's) on the site? Yes. There is no attempt to mislead on our part (the same can't be said for the occasional CRNA who floats to that site), but we can't control what is said on a private, commercial website. Much the same as this website - some people take every post as fact - others realize much of what is here is opinion. Is allnurses.com the official website and source of knowledge for all things related to CRNA's? I don't think so.

Quick question. According to the AAAA which is your Prof. Org. exactly how many practice AA's are out there at this day in age? Just curious. I see people throwing around the 2,000 and 4,000 mark but just wasnt sure of any official numbers stated by the AAAA or someone that would truely have an idea of an accurate number.

jwk · Apr 10, 2006

Quick question. According to the AAAA which is your Prof. Org. exactly how many practice AA's are out there at this day in age? Just curious. I see people throwing around the 2,000 and 4,000 mark but just wasnt sure of any official numbers stated by the AAAA or someone that would truely have an idea of an accurate number.

I think about 1000 or so, but entering a rapid growth stage...

jwk · Apr 10, 2006

Why would you want to shut it down...it is closer to the name of your actual profession than www.anesthetist.org, which is biting off part of another professions hard earned name. It should be www.anesthesiologyassisstants.org.

Every dictionary I've looked in defines "anesthetist" as one who administers anesthetics. In Great Britain and Canada (and of course within the Harvard system) anesthesiologists are referred to as "anaesthetists" Since CRNA's include RN in their title, it implies that there are also non-RN anesthetists, otherwise the title could simply be Certified Anesthetist.

jwk · Apr 10, 2006

How would AAs feel if anesthesia techs started calling themselves AAs or anesthesia assistants or anesthesiologist assistants? All three names could describe their "role" if you will, sort of like a certified nursing assistant. I'm not putting actual AAs in this category,

sure you are.

just pointing out the dangers of trying to selectively rename a profession or role.

And of course student nurse anesthetists referring to themselves as "Residents" is perfectly acceptable. I make very sure my patients understand exactly who I am - but nurse anesthesia students referring to themselves as residents borders on fraud.

Nitecap · Apr 11, 2006

sure you are.
And of course student nurse anesthetists referring to themselves as "Residents" is perfectly acceptable. I make very sure my patients understand exactly who I am - but nurse anesthesia students referring to themselves as residents borders on fraud.

Yeah I here you on that. I can maybe see if the SRNA/RRNA was training at a hospital that had no residents than ok. But at academic facilities where there are MD residents all over the place this could be confusing to patients that are already usually confused over roles. My program is sticking with SRNA.

As a nurse in the Unit pts called me Doc all the time despite me reminding them a million times and clarifying my role in their care.

A title is just that though.

rayman · Apr 11, 2006

Yeah I here you on that. I can maybe see if the SRNA/RRNA was training at a hospital that had no residents than ok. But at academic facilities where there are MD residents all over the place this could be confusing to patients that are already usually confused over roles. My program is sticking with SRNA.
As a nurse in the Unit pts called me Doc all the time despite me reminding them a million times and clarifying my role in their care.
A title is just that though.

All good points. Hey nitecap, on the "doc" thing that is just an affectionate term ya gotta role with. Have had the same experiences. A lot of people just call any man in scrubs doc...no offense ladies just a fact. When I was in the military the corpsman were always and always have been called doc.

GasDr · Feb 11, 2007

I would never wish to cause someone to be unable to provide for his family. I do willfully however, help to impose the standards for anesthesia training designed by CRNA's. Why are we supposed to welcome AA's? Yes, I would like to see the abolition of all AA programs. Does the UAW welcome foreign workers? No other profession says, "Here's your competion, now play nicely together.". If you want to become an anesthetist, go to nursing school. Spend your time in the ICU. Go to CRNA school. Viola! You now have 50 state recognized credentials and are free from your legislative worries of the AA. Plus you now have the backing of 30, 000 brothers and sisters.

I see were CRNAs are coming from on this issue. But I turn it right back around on you. The CRNA position, delivering anesthesia in an OR under the supervision of a physician is great. Its well compensated, hours tend to be much better then MDs, ect, ect...

From an MD perspective AAs are great. They have limits built in to their roles that CRNAs are always trying to overstep. If you want to be a physician, great! Be near the top in your undergrad class, do well on the MCAT, spend $250k and 4 years on med school, pass step 1-3 of the boards, and do 4 years of residency at ~80hrs/wk, pass the written and oral boards, and there you go. If you dont want to do that then quite fighting for the role of the MD and be happy as a nurse.

platon20 · Feb 13, 2007

Cmon guys, I'm as pro-CRNA as they come, but there is some MAJOR hypocrisy coming from the nurses here.

The bottom line is this: its a FACT that outcomes are the same for anesthesia, regardless of whether its a CRNA, MDA, or AA doing the case. Thats a flat out FACT WHICH CANNOT BE DENIED. ITS BEEN PROVEN OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

Therefore, we need to level the playing field. MDAs, CRNAs, and AAs should all be allowed independence to do their cases. Their outcomes are all equivalent.

For the CRNAs to argue that they are just as good as MDAs with less training, and then say to the AAs that they arent as good because they dont have as much training, is ABSOLUTE HYPOCRISY. You cant have it both ways guys. Either training period matters, and MDAs are better than CRNAs, or training length does not matter (as the evidence shows) and CRNAs = MDAs = AAs.

The evidence is clear. There should be no artificial barriers to the professions of anesthesia. Until you have data proving that outcomes with CRNAs are better than those with AAs, then you dont have a leg to stand on trying to put up artificial hurdles to protect your $$$. Thats what the MDAs tried to do and it failed and showed them to be frauds, liars, and greedy hypocrits. I cant believe you CRNAs advocate that same platform.

jwk · Feb 14, 2007

Cmon guys, I'm as pro-CRNA as they come, but there is some MAJOR hypocrisy coming from the nurses here.
The bottom line is this: its a FACT that outcomes are the same for anesthesia, regardless of whether its a CRNA, MDA, or AA doing the case. Thats a flat out FACT WHICH CANNOT BE DENIED. ITS BEEN PROVEN OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
Therefore, we need to level the playing field. MDAs, CRNAs, and AAs should all be allowed independence to do their cases. Their outcomes are all equivalent.
For the CRNAs to argue that they are just as good as MDAs with less training, and then say to the AAs that they arent as good because they dont have as much training, is ABSOLUTE HYPOCRISY. You cant have it both ways guys. Either training period matters, and MDAs are better than CRNAs, or training length does not matter (as the evidence shows) and CRNAs = MDAs = AAs.
The evidence is clear. There should be no artificial barriers to the professions of anesthesia. Until you have data proving that outcomes with CRNAs are better than those with AAs, then you dont have a leg to stand on trying to put up artificial hurdles to protect your $$$. Thats what the MDAs tried to do and it failed and showed them to be frauds, liars, and greedy hypocrits. I cant believe you CRNAs advocate that same platform.

Wow - a rare voice of reason - I'm speechless!

airrn · Feb 14, 2007

Yup, they both might be very similar 10 yrs down the road since most occupations do most of their learning on the job but this is precisely the difference between the professions. CRNA's are REQUIRED to have critical care experience before starting school and this is simply not the case for AA's. What is so hard to comprehend about that?

Alpha13 · Feb 14, 2007

It's only hypocrisy if we try to attack the AA professon based on their standard of care. Get past that and acknowledge that this is is a political/monetary battle and suddenly it is obvious again why we dislike AAs. THEY ARE OUR COMPETITION. The field of prospective AA students (anyone with a BS degree) is much larger than the base than the base of BSN nurses that can become CRNAs, so the only obstacles preventing this profession from taking off are the lack of schools, and inability for them to practice in all states. More states allowing AAs will create a demand for more AA programs which can open much faster because they know there are hordes of people stuck with useless sociology degress dying to have a decent job.

I'll be brutally honest here for a second: Artificial boundaries are not necessarily a bad thing. especially for those that position themselves in the right way to take advantage of them. AA's are a very real threat to the anesthesia shortage because they can bring down the supply/demand ratio of anesthesia providers and possibly even saturate the field. You can call me greedy if you want, I don't really care. I do like the fact that CRNAs make a lot of money given the relatively short educational period. (I'm comparing to other professionl degrees) But that's not what I'm afraid of. What I am afraid of is not being able to find a job in 10 years because the AANA decided to hold hands with the ASA and allow the AAs to merrily skip into all states and take over.

No handholding from me. We must fight them like spartans! (Sorry I can't wait to see 300)