catstks

Good choice in leaving that position. If one reads the BON practice guidelines RNs can only administer it if the patient is mechanically ventilated. surg techs monitoring the airway? Yikes! Does no one care about losing a license they worked so hard to earn. The Dr. Needs to hire a CRNA. Their poor patients and team members. Look for a position in IR/ procedural (cath lab if you have ICU experience) if you want to try out moderate sedation in an OR type environment. Versed and fentanyl. If you desire no med administration just go to OR positions.

It is very common for patients to be doing better and then all of the sudden they decompensate and need intubation. As an ICU nurse, doctors have used the term "let their lungs rest" for years for other conditions. Considering Covid causes severe ARDS, it is not strange for them to say that and is not necessarily a lie. It is not a conspiracy.

We do not test everyone that comes into the hospital for Covid. If a respiratory disease is suspected, then yes, they test for all upper respiratory disease. I work in procedures, everyone is Covid tested so that everyone, including other patients and staff members are protected from infectious patients. We perform very few elective procedures on positive patients... Otherwise, they have to wait out a quarantine time frame. Not everything is a conspiracy to make money despite what certain political leaning sources tell you.

We need to be creating work environments to keep nurses at the bedside. Many states have a surplus of nurses choosing to work in other jobs. Although there are many reasons people run from the bedside, safe staffing is the most fundamental structural issue to address. It affects nurses with contributing to other stress factors such as incivility, workplace violence, the satisfaction of work environment and other factors. This is why I advocate for safe patient limits and why my research focus is on staffing for my Ph.D. Is it the only answer no, it is a major factor... absolutely. Ironically in my policy class, I just read an article that discusses the future of nurses. For a few years now, I have had the feeling that our professional nursing organizations do not want nurses at the bedside. I honestly believe that is one reason they haphazardly support poor staffing legislation. They want to appear as though they support bedside nurses with "staffing committee" legislation because they still have to. Though that legislation has no real accountability. Of the 7 states that have had the legislation since 2002, not one piece of research shows an improvement with staffing or patient outcomes, but it is all that they purpose as a solution. Heck, Washington State allowed their safe staffing legislation to be amended to take away the voice of the bedside nurses in staffing decisions overall. Our professional nursing organizations staunchly oppose safe patient limit legislation, despite it having research that supports it. Probably because if nurses had work environments that they were not running/avoiding then their enrollment into advance practice areas would decrease. Because that is where they want all of their nurses. Activating Nursing to Address Unmet Needs in the 21st Century I will continue to advocate for safe patient limits because the research shows how registered nurses need to still be bedside, despite our professional organization's desire to not have nurses that take orders from doctors. I respect and see the value of having advanced practicing nurses in the community as our professional organization desire. That said, I also see the need through research and can admit selfish desire to have the safest environment for me and the nursing staff at hospitals when I finally become a patient. www.nursestakedc.com for #SafePatientLimits for #PatientSafetyFirst

Yet heads would roll if we did not identify that we were not a doctor... smh.

Not exactly cost related to what you have posted, but there are studies that show the cost-benefit of having nurses with fewer patients. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3207188/pdf/hesr0046-1473.pdf a link to one of many that indeed exist. "Higher RN nonovertime staffing decreased odds of readmission (OR 5 0.56); higher RN overtime staffing increased odds of ED visit (OR 5 1.70). RN nonovertime staffing reduced ED visits indirectly, via a sequential path through discharge teaching quality and discharge readiness. Cost analysis projected total savings from 1SD increase in RN nonovertime staffing and decrease in RN overtime of U.S.$11.64 million and U.S.$544,000 annually for the 16 study units." Many more safe staffing articles at https://www.nursestakedc.com/research

Amen, the HCA facility that I worked in had the worst reputation for staffing in the area (Florida) and the nurse manager consistently stated: "We pride ourselves for staffing on the guidelines of the American Nurses Association". Out of the other side of their mouth, they were also telling us ICU nurses that 1 nurse for 3 patients (yes sick patients) was the new normal across the US. That is where I started researching staffing and falling "out of like" of the professional nursing organizations. A few years later I became an organizer of a grassroots movement NursesTakeDC comprised of bedside nurses advocating for mandated NTP ratios. #SafePatientLimits www.nursestakedc.com

Hospitals are doing this in states without mandated ratios. It will happen with our without safe staffing.

Hospitals are getting rid of these services with our without safe ratios. It should not be an excuse to say no to safe staffing ratios.

Doctors complaining about this is absolutely absurd. I didn't see anything that trash-talked them. Most medical TVs are about doctors, not nurses, the complaining doctor should be more opposed to those shows for presenting negative attributes of physicians. Sound like jealousy that nurses are actually being seen, instead of us just being part of the background.

Their legislation looks great on paper. Problem is... many states who have acuity based legislation are still struggling with unsafe ratios and working on getting ratios because of it. For example... Ohio, they have the ANA state legislation, ICU nurses are reporting getting 3/4 critical (multiple critical drips, ventilated, and unstable patients. I have seen the same testimonies in Illinois (who also has ANA legislation). The legislation has no real teeth to hold hospitals accountable. It is legislation that caters to hospital administration with an attempt to make nurses feel involved in the process. The verbiage appears as though the bedside nurses will ACTUALLY have a voice which in reality is often over ridden by management. We need a set limit to the amount of patients a nurse is forced to take. Ratio legislation is great because we can have the set limit and still adjust down in patient assignment for acuity.

The ANA legislation is worthless in a lot of hospitals as management staffs from a budget and census. Not necessarily acuity. The benefit of having ratios is that it "sets a limit" to the number of patients a nurse must take. It includes acuity so the "acuity" argument against the bills HR 2392 and S 1063 is invalid. Ever vacation out of state? Don't get sick because you never know what crap shoot you will get. Especially in desirable destination states like FL. It is tiring seeing acuity be used as an excuse not to support the ratio bill. Nurses can ALWAYS be given less patients.

I don't know how much more clear it can be made with the post that the bill for mandated ratios actually includes acuity. Read the part about acuity. SMH... Anyone who works in facilities that actually follow their staffing committees recommendations should feel very lucky and understand thats not the case for many nurses across the US.

Rally information page on FB, look up SMYS For Change South Carolina Chapter We have partnered with SMYS and that organization has formed state groups. I am not sure if SC has any planned trips but you can go to the FB page and find out more state information in regard to the rally.