NBCRNA and the AANA... WOW!

Specialties CRNA

Updated:   Published

Got this in my email.. since I am not a member of the AANA I do not know where this is coming from.

Is the AANA's panties in a wad over the recertification plan? I think the recert plan is karma for the assenine DNP push. If this works out, CRNA's will have a choice of the certifying bodies they can choose there... Yup.. that will not cause ANY problems..

Quote

Dear CRNA:

We want to draw your attention to an issue that should concern all nurse anesthetists. An amendment to the AANA bylaws has been proposed that would withdraw the explicit recognition of the National Board of Certification and Recertification for Nurse Anesthetists (NBCRNA) as the certifying body for nurse anesthetists and the Council on Accreditation (COA) as the accrediting body for nurse anesthesia education. It instead requires that the AANA "shall recognize" independent entities which serve a certification or accreditation function. The amendment language suggests that this is simply a change in nomenclature, is intended to make the bylaws less restrictive and is in the best interest of the AANA. In actuality, the amendment changes a longstanding relationship and distances the AANA, NBCRNA and COA from one another. Neither the AANA, the NBCRNA, nor the COA had a part in initiating this bylaw change. The AANA, NBCRNA and COA have recognized each other as the sole professional, certification and accreditation organizations and worked as partners for many decades. Each organization has its own mission, but each is led by CRNAs who recognize each other as colleagues and partners in the field of nurse anesthesia. The proposed bylaw change opens the door to fracturing these relationships creating uncertainty about the future of our profession and will force the AANA, NBCRNA and COA to deal with this uncertainty when our time, energy and resources are better spent addressing the many significant challenges facing our profession. We are urging fellow AANA members to oppose the proposed amendment.

Why this amendment is bad for the profession:

  • The mandate in Article XXI of the amendment which requires the AANA to create guidelines for certifying bodies is in direct conflict with organizations that accredit the NBCRNA which require that certifying bodies be separate and autonomous from the membership organization. This directly jeopardizes the CRNA credential.
  • The loss of a direct membership voice in the selection of their accrediting and certifying agencies. This decision will be within the sole purview of the AANA Board of Directors without a requirement for member input.
  • There will likely be pressure placed on the AANA Board of Directors by the sponsors of the amendment to form or find an additional certification agency. The authors indicated they have developed a template for this action and the AANA Board has been contacted by an outside certification organization inquiring about the need for their services.
  • The AANA and NBCRNA boards would be distracted from the important work they perform on behalf of the profession by efforts to establish a second credentialing body. Such an effort will consume time and money better spent on combating external attacks on the profession.
  • Confusion could arise among the public (consumers, boards of nursing, advocacy organizations) if two certifying bodies for nurse anesthetists existed, and this could be used as a weapon by organized medicine groups which seek to restrain nurse anesthetist scope of practice.
  • Employers or state licensing boards may refuse to recognize two tiers of credentials.
  • A less demanding credentialing process may create a concern over less qualified practitioners.
  • Perceived erosion in dedication to the highest standards of practice may undermine the ability of nurse anesthetists to practice independently.
  • Nurse anesthetists could lose the support of regulatory and advocacy groups who have been pushing for greater opportunities for nurse anesthetists.

A certifying body is required to ensure the integrity of the certification process to protect patient safety, and to work with the professional association while maintaining the required autonomy. This is precisely what the NBCRNA does. We are comprised solely of volunteers; most of whom are practicing CRNAs who are members of the AANA. We consistently work with the AANA and take the concerns they express into consideration in our efforts to protect and improve the credentialing practices in nurse anesthesia. We urge you to contact your State Association President and Region Director and let them know you oppose the proposed amendment to the AANA bylaws. And do not forget to cast your vote of opposition at the 2013 AANA Meeting.

Sincerely,

The NBCRNA Board of Directors

On the PLUS side.. This is such an esoteric subject it might be possible only CRNA's will post in a CRNA forum..

This is an interesting occurrence. The AANA, IMO, is doing this in response to all of the "hate" mail regarding the changes the NBCRNA did without consulting CRNAs. The NBCRNA has received the same type of messages, but have failed in adequately including CRNAs in on their decisions. I think having a second certification option will be beneficial. The NBCRNA will not be able to force things on us without considering if it will cost them their jobs. I am not happy with the changes, I don't think they are as evidence based as the NBCRNA likes to say.

The NBCRNA and the COA are immune from the wrath of CRNA's.... CRNA's do not DIRECTLY fund either organization... Well to be exact, non AANA members such as myself do, but I digress. The MBCRNA and the COA can do pretty much exactly as they please... The AANA cannot. Those of us unhappy with that organization.. simply cease paying dues.

Specializes in CRNA.
ssrhythm said:
Yup, that email was from the NBCRNA and COA not the AANA. I have not seen where the AANA has issued a statement or a response to this e-mail yet. From what I can gather...and I may be way off base here...the AANA felt the heat from its membership to do something in response to the recert changes that the NBCRNA and COA slammed down our throats.

The COA had nothing to do with this and should not be lumped in with the NBCRNA. The COA 'separated' futher from the AANA at the same time as NBCRNA, but their financial situation is completely different. The COA is having difficulty with generating enough funding to do their work-their only source of revenue is the approximately 114 programs. Also the COA does routinely seek input from CRNAs, but they can't please everyone. They are often in a no win situation.

Also I understand competition and choice, and that it works for the NPs. But who has enough money to start up another CRNA certifiying body? I'm worried it could be some people who do not have the best interests of CRNA practice as their goal. And then all the ACTs that employ CRNAs could demand that the CRNAs that work for them use the more restrictive certifying body. I have been frustrated with the NBCRNA, but it could be worse.

Specializes in Anesthesia, Pain, Emergency Medicine.

hmm, no.

Not the way it works. The certifying body does not dictate your practice, the states do.

Many states just refer to the AANA scope of practice.

Choice is great. If one certifying body tried to do something "unusual", SRNAs would just use the other.

loveanesthesia said:
The COA had nothing to do with this and should not be lumped in with the NBCRNA. The COA 'separated' futher from the AANA at the same time as NBCRNA, but their financial situation is completely different. The COA is having difficulty with generating enough funding to do their work-their only source of revenue is the approximately 114 programs. Also the COA does routinely seek input from CRNAs, but they can't please everyone. They are often in a no win situation.

Also I understand competition and choice, and that it works for the NPs. But who has enough money to start up another CRNA certifiying body? I'm worried it could be some people who do not have the best interests of CRNA practice as their goal. And then all the ACTs that employ CRNAs could demand that the CRNAs that work for them use the more restrictive certifying body. I have been frustrated with the NBCRNA, but it could be worse.

loveanesthesia said:
The COA had nothing to do with this and should not be lumped in with the NBCRNA. The COA 'separated' futher from the AANA at the same time as NBCRNA, but their financial situation is completely different. The COA is having difficulty with generating enough funding to do their work-their only source of revenue is the approximately 114 programs. Also the COA does routinely seek input from CRNAs, but they can't please everyone. They are often in a no win situation.

Also I understand competition and choice, and that it works for the NPs. But who has enough money to start up another CRNA certifiying body? I'm worried it could be some people who do not have the best interests of CRNA practice as their goal. And then all the ACTs that employ CRNAs could demand that the CRNAs that work for them use the more restrictive certifying body. I have been frustrated with the NBCRNA, but it could be worse.

So, it looks like it could be possible for we bottom dwelling stool monkeys and MDA minions who dare work in an ACT practice might actually get an organization that is resposive to OUR needs. And does not spend a gazillion dollars in legal challenges almost exclusively, for the benefit of the higher life form known as the Independent CRNA. I admire those of you doing liver/kidney/ pancreas transplants, ECMO placements and weans and GABGs in rural community hospital.. But to be honest, The AANA could not care less about ACT CRNA's, and I would like to see an organization interested in me. I would even join such an organization.

Specializes in Anesthesia.
ruler of kolob said:
So, it looks like it could be possible for we bottom dwelling stool monkeys and MDA minions who dare work in an ACT practice might actually get an organization that is resposive to OUR needs. And does not spend a gazillion dollars in legal challenges almost exclusively, for the benefit of the higher life form known as the Independent CRNA. I admire those of you doing liver/kidney/ pancreas transplants, ECMO placements and weans and GABGs in rural community hospital.. But to be honest, The AANA could not care less about ACT CRNA's, and I would like to see an organization interested in me. I would even join such an organization.

And when your practice is completely controlled by the ASA and your salary plummets to just a little more than what RN makes then I guess that will be okay too...?

I am in an ACT practice and I can assure you that there is even less control than when I was military. The chief MD would make assignments and anything exciting ( Read A-line ) would go to an MD..In my present setting , the CRNA's do EVERY type of case with exactly ZERO micromanagment....As for salaries, salaries are market driven and the COA , AANA Et al have done much more damage to ACT incomes than the ASA could ever dream of.

Specializes in Anesthesia.
ruler of kolob said:
I am in an ACT practice and I can assure you that there is even less control than when I was military . The chief MD would make assignments and anything exciting ( Read A-line ) would go to an MD..In my present setting , the CRNA's do EVERY type of case with exactly ZERO micromanagment....As for salaries, salaries are market driven and the COA , AANA Et al have done much more damage to ACT incomes than the ASA could ever dream of.

AANA was instrumental in the USAF new scope of practice for CRNAs making us totally independent providers, so you can say what you want but there isn't an ACT anywhere that has better model of practice than the USAF.

The ASA would do everything in their power to reduce CRNA salaries and control CRNAs practice and anyone who thinks differently is deluding themselves. The ASA would effectively control the CRNA market if they ever became competitor to NBCRNA.

Specializes in Anesthesia, Pain, Emergency Medicine.

You must be reading something the rest of us are not. We are NOT talking about a new organization to compete with the AANA. We are discussing a second credentialing organization.

ruler of kolob said:
So, it looks like it could be possible for we bottom dwelling stool monkeys and MDA minions who dare work in an ACT practice might actually get an organization that is resposive to OUR needs. And does not spend a gazillion dollars in legal challenges almost exclusively, for the benefit of the higher life form known as the Independent CRNA. I admire those of you doing liver/kidney/ pancreas transplants, ECMO placements and weans and GABGs in rural community hospital.. But to be honest, The AANA could not care less about ACT CRNA's, and I would like to see an organization interested in me. I would even join such an organization.
Specializes in critcal care, CRNA.

Being a newer CRNA and hearing the different responses from various CRNAs about having to take a test to recertify, I have to wonder if the push is for those who have said "I'll retire before taking that test!"

If there were another certifying body that would not require a test, I am sure many of these CRNAs would switch in a heart beat.

Specializes in Anesthesia.
ruler of kolob said:
So, it looks like it could be possible for we bottom dwelling stool monkeys and MDA minions who dare work in an ACT practice might actually get an organization that is resposive to OUR needs. And does not spend a gazillion dollars in legal challenges almost exclusively, for the benefit of the higher life form known as the Independent CRNA. I admire those of you doing liver/kidney/ pancreas transplants, ECMO placements and weans and GABGs in rural community hospital.. But to be honest, The AANA could not care less about ACT CRNA's, and I would like to see an organization interested in me. I would even join such an organization.

The AANA must set standards for the highest possible practice situations. Whether or not you like it, without the AANA going for direct Medicare reimbursement and settling our right to compete in the marketplace, AANA would have become a subsidiary of the ASA.

You have the right to practice in what ever setting you wish and that right must be upheld. I also have the right to independent practice and know for a fact, that for many reasons some CRNAs do not want to personally practice that way. However, THE RIGHT TO INDEPENDENT PRACTICE must be assured.

morificeko said:
Being a newer CRNA and hearing the different responses from various CRNAs about having to take a test to recertify, I have to wonder if the push is for those who have said "I'll retire before taking that test!"

If there were another certifying body that would not require a test, I am sure many of these CRNAs would switch in a heart beat.

Recertification is something I welcome. It might actually reduce our numbers and help counteract the over production of graduates. If you are afraid of a test... maybe you should not be doing this.

Anyone should be able to sit down, read something like Morgan and Mikhail and pass a test. I doubt the test will be challenging.... even those who do nothing but colonoscopies and eyes will be taking it.

+ Add a Comment