Re: Does independent practice make you better than supervised practice? Archived Message
Posted by graham on January 6, 2008, 3:56 pm, in reply to "Re: Does independent practice make you better than supervised practice?"
I didn't say that anesthetist should be confined to charting VS while they sit in stools. I'm sure you know that they do more than that. What I'm saying is that there are differences in the duties of anesthetists under the ACT and the duties of anesthesia doctors. There are certain duties that only doctors are allowed to do, and just because anesthetists are not allowed to do these, it does not mean that they are no good. You brought up a statement that AA's are not allowed, not competent to perform regional anesthesia (which is false, BTW.) So now that we've established that AA's can perform regional anesthesia, do you still think they're incompetent? (I hope not,and you've already stated your position on the competence of AA's. I understand that it is the ASA that gets on your nerves. Thank you for not attacking the AA's just because it is our boss, ASA, that is pissing you off.) So just food for thought: What would it take for you guys to finally accept that AA's are competent anesthetist just like CRNA's in the ACT model??? Do we have to practice independently? Do we have to do what anesthesia MD's do? Sure there are statements asserting that AA's are the same as CRNA's under the ACT model. I did not use the "not my job" argument to support that because it doesn't even relate at all. This "not my job" argument is intended to question you on boundaries---the job differences between anesthesia MD's and anesthetists. What makes a great anesthetist is not so much about the number of tasks that they can do but more on how good they are in performing the duties that are assigned to them. Do we have to perform the same duties of an MD to be considered competent?
|
|