SRNAVic

You're gonna have a great time at Rush...I'm in the class ahead of you, starting residency this June. Let me know if you need any help with anything and I'll do the best I can to assist. I took a lot of classes with a couple of your classmates...come to think of it, a lot of you were in the neuroanatomy/neurophysiology course with me last quarter. Anyway, good luck and I'll see you at school... Vic

I personally think that a younger applicant has an advantage over the older applicant. Firstly, a younger applicant will be in the workforce longer thus that practitioner will not have to be replaced in a short amount of time. This allays the need to train more practitioners, which we already know are in short supply. Secondly, since that younger practitioner will be in the workforce longer, they'll probably have more of a vested interest in protecting their profession and become more involved with their state and national organizing body. We know that this second point is extremely important in protecting our profession. Thirdly, a younger person is more apt to not let the powers that be ("the MAN") interfere with their best interests. I've seen this numerous times in my practice as an ICU nurse. There was a situation where our boss (the MAN) attempted to make me take more patients than I safely could handle. I saw many other nurses, most of them much older than I, succumb to these strong-arm activities of our boss and take on too many patients for one RN too handle--and put his/her license in jeopardy. When I told my boss I would not take the unsafe assignment, nobody seemed to back me up in front of her. Later in the night, though, I had 20- and 30-year veteran nurses telling me "thank you, it's about time someone stuck up for us". Why didn't they stick up for themselves? Maybe I'd think the same if I was about to retire, I'm not really sure. I just personally think that a younger person is more apt to not be afraid of the powers that be and fight for their rights. Lastly, younger people seemingly have a higher energy level and are without many family commitments (i.e. children) making it easier for them to complete and excel in the classroom and clinical environment. They also are more recent graduates making their study skills less rusty and more contemporary. On the other hand, older applicants have many advantages over younger applicants as well. For example, the wisdom that comes not only with extended clinical experience but also with life in general is a huge advantage and younger applicants do not have a vast amount of wisdom by definition. Further, older applicants tend to have the resources ($$$) available to complete school without much financial burden. Other factors, of course, exist but I think these are some of the main points. Overall, I think that it is to the school's (and the profession's) advantage to admit younger applicants for the above reasons. In no way am I trying to offend my older classmates and colleagues--I'm just trying to put my 2-cents in...thanks for hearing me out!!! Vic

I think it is to your benefit since it shows responsibility and prioritization/organization skills. I paid for my undergraduate work myself and I went to a private 4 year institution--believe me I worked my rear off!!! That definitely spoke to my work ethic. I drove cars that didn't always work and worked a ton of hours in a hospital and, believe it or not, I refereed tons of ice hockey. I think the refereeing part helps me with when I get pimped--it's like I'm pretty calm because I was used to coaches yelling at me all the time and performing under pressure in front of a lot of people. Vic

KLT, I had a 2.99 GPA when I applied at Rush U. I'm now in my very last two classes of didactic study as an SRNA and I have a 4.0 GPA. My program is a hybrid setup so I've been in the OR (this quarther 3 days a week) since last fall, the quarter after we start the program. The thing is, many schools use 3.0 as a cutoff point to weed out some marginal candidates. You have to realize that they look at many other characteristics that you have such as your GRE score, your admission application and essay, whether or not you worked while you were in undergrad (and how much you worked), personal issues you may have had, and, probably most importantly, your interview. Check out my post about admission essays I gave to Bigwalldave. Talk to a representative face to face and ask them to give you a course outline of required classes you can take before you apply for school. Also, shadow a CRNA for a day and let the people who admit you to school know that you did that, especially if the CRNA you shadow is a graduate of their school. The admissions board at essentially every school are looking for a whole package, not just a package of grades, and that is from one of the horses mouths, so to speak. Vic

I'm going to attend as well as a bunch of my classmates (I'm from Rush U.). I did not go last year but I hear it is a very informative and interesting time. I think the Mariners are in town that week so I'll try to check out one of those games as well. Vic

Roland, Check out that old mega-memory program put out by nightingale-conant. It's comprised of a ton of exercises in order to help you think in pictures to help you remember lists, names, really just about anything better. It has REALLY helped me with recall regarding doses, mechanisms of action, doctors names, patients names, my wife's shopping lists, just about anything. Vic

Hey, Check out the bridgeport neighborhood when you move. I know that some of the people from Chicago on this message board would scoff at that idea and tell you that bridgeport is a rough side of town, but it really isn't. It's generally gotten a bad rap over the years. Take a ride through there and check out the very nice houses and tight neighborhood feel. The area is very close to all the major highways and hospitals, you'll be able to find somewhere to park (unlike in wrigleyville or essentially anywhere in Lincoln park), drunk Cubs fans won't urinate on your front lawn, and your neighbors will look out for you. Plus, this area of the city is generally responsible for producing most of the Mayors of the city over the years (the Daley's--dad and son most notably). I hope this helps... Vic

I don't think many programs use animal training. I asked one of my instructors and he could not think of any programs that did. Besides, I like the real deal!!! Vic

We've got one at Rush University here in Chicago...it definitely helps with the transition into actually doing something to a patient. We used ours exclusively for about 5 months before we even touched a patient, and I think it really helped. They're pretty realistic too (except to intubate--they are too stiff!) and have all of the vital sign and physiologic changes (like the eyes stop blinking and the patient stops breathing after you give your imaginary bar-code syringe of paralytic) that you would expect. Vic

Jebain, Congrats on your acceptance...Take nilepoc's advice and just chill for a while (that's what I did). If you really want to look over something check out www.nurse-anesthesia.com, like TraumaNurse suggested. That site was written by some of my classmates who graduated in 2003 (I attend Rush University here in Chicago) and provides much of the basic information that you'll need when you are in school. Don't get too overzealous about studying now...you'll be doing plenty of that when you are full-time in school. One thing that you can do if you really want is take some of the information from that website regarding the drugs (most importantly the paralytics, opioids, volatiles, benzos, barbs, anticholinesterases/anticholinergics, etc) and make notes for yourself in your PDA (doses, pharmacokinetics/dynamics, contra's, etc). Yes, there are programs out there that have all of those drugs within the program, but sometimes the info that you need is buried behind a truckload of menus and the like. Further, you'll learn a lot about these drugs by just looking them up and putting them in you palm. good luck with school... Vic