Future CRNA income

  1. It seems as if every nurse to whom I speak lately tells of wanting to become a CRNA. Could there be a surplus of anesthetists in the foreseeable future affecting salaries?
  2. Visit alumno profile page

    About alumno

    Joined: Jul '06; Posts: 9; Likes: 1


  3. by   deepz
    People in Hell want ice water too, don't they. As the saying goes, many are called, few are chosen.

    Not in our lifetime will there be a nationwide surplus of CRNAs.
    Last edit by deepz on Dec 20, '06
  4. by   EmeraldNYL
    I don't know about that. With 6 CRNA schools in the Philly area, I see the job market becoming more tight around here very soon!
  5. by   endorphinrush
    That is true but you are talking local. On a national level the shortage will be felt. Here at home, we have 2 schools. The market is inundated with anesthetist and salaries have declined slightly b/c of it. But nationally, the shortage still exists and will for some time.
  6. by   CRNA, DNSc
    The future market for CRNAs overall is very good. There may be local areas where things are not quite so wide open but if you are willing to consider options elsewhere the demand is still very good. Remember the average of practicing CRNAs is 48 years old- that means there will be a large number of practitioners that will be retiring or cutting down their working time over the next 10 years.
  7. by   Sheri257
    Seems to me that Medicare cuts in anesthesia would be the thing to worry about, more than anything else.

    AANA - Advocacy

    Where Medicare goes, so do insurers. If these cuts become a trend then, it could really affect salaries.

    Last edit by Sheri257 on Dec 25, '06
  8. by   zaga21
    I notice that a high percentage of CRNAs are those who were trained through some sort of on the job/ non-masters program. Does this mean that the same percentage has been in practice a longer period of time (as the masters program has been in place quite some time) and may be getting somewhat close to retirement??? How long has it been since you could become a CRNA this way, I would assume that a large percentage of CRNAs has been around since that time.
  9. by   CRNA, DNSc
    Actually the moderators haven't gotten the latest stats as just this past year the annual membership survey noted that just over 50% of all CRNAs have a masters degree. Although the Master was not mandatory until 1998 the majority of programs had gone to the graduate level well before then so thoses CRNAs not educated at the graduate level were probably from the 1980's and earile, Yes many of them are nearing retirement and the percentage of Master Prepared CRNAs will shoot upward as they retire.
  10. by   dfk
    Quote from CRNA, DNSc
    Although the Master was not mandatory until 1998
    hey dnsc, was it really that late that master's was mandatory? i am aware that most, if not all, programs went to a master's program around 1988-1990.
  11. by   CRNA, DNSc
    Yes the mandatory graduate deadline was 1998 although most programs had already made the transition in the late 80's or early 90's. In some areas the transition was complete by 1990, before it became mandatory.
  12. by   bangwa
    As far a the market being over flooded, I don't think that should be a concern for anyone. Medicine has never been over flooded and no MD thinks it will be. I think even if the market if flooded the CRNAs and Nurses in general should advocate for their rightful pay irrespective of how many jobs are availible. Doctas are paid based on how much they generate and so should nurses. I think nurses should always stand up. If a salary cut will include the Medical Doctors then so be it. Most hospitals will prefer 5 CRNAs and 2 anesthesiologists (MDs) than the reverse because of cost. So increased number of CRNAs will affect MDs too if not more as a result salaries will be recalculated across the board.
  13. by   deepz
    Quote from bangwa
    ........Most hospitals will prefer 5 CRNAs and 2 anesthesiologists (MDs) than the reverse because of cost. ........
    Sorry, it's just naive to believe such decisions are based on a rational analysis of cost-effectiveness. Should be perhaps, but rarely happens that way in the real world of anesthesia. Local politics play a much larger role, where MDAs easily convince hospital administrators that they alone are the superior anesthesia providers, based solely on one simplistic unfounded presupposition: nurse good, doctor better.

    Common sense, right? So they say.

    As specifically concerns anesthesia practice however, of course the facts don't back that up. But hospital administrators also can be naive and non-scientific; they ignore basic evidence-based practice and grant monopolies to MDAs while mistakenly believing the high cost of training and employing MDAs to be justified by higher quality patient care.

    As we know, there is no scientific proof of that.