Posted by Misha on March 26, 2009, 1:22 pm
168.184.220.4
Since I'm on the road to becoming an AA, of course I'm trying to keep up with the developments of the profession. Having said that, I understand that some CRNAs are predicting the abolishment of anesthesiologists, and subsequently AAs because of the healthcare reform that seems to be coming our way. They use the fact that CRNAs have been around before anesthesiologists, therefore there is no real need to have them.
My questions are:
1. Getting rid of anesthesiologists all together would be a major ordeal to carry out. Does this seem feasible to anyone else?
2. If there was no need for the MDA, why create the position in the first place?
3. Also, I know the "I can practice independently" claim is nice, but for the professions who can't... is it that big of a deal?
I just want to make sure I am understanding clearly what it is I am getting myself into... from ALL facets. I considered going the CRNA route (and I still do occasionally) because of the security that is already established. I chose the AA route because I love the medical approach as opposed to the nursing approach in healthcare (I mean healthcare in general as this may be irrelevent when it comes to anesthesia). I'm a "why" person. However, it's hard to jump on the bandwagon of something new especially when a significant amount of time and financial sacrifice is a huge part of the investment.
I predict that the AA/CRNA relationship will mimic the evolution of the PA/NP relationship. Both professions will be recognized and respected as mid-level providers with a national scope of practice. Any thoughts?