newjerseynewsroom.com

Share this Twitter Myspace Digg Del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot Furl Yahoo Technorati Newsvine Facebook Export PDF Print E-mail

As an independently practicing CRNA I can assure everyone here I am as competent as any anesthesiologist and I work entirely without them. Our group actually took the contract away from an ALL MD practice within a major city center. Since then the efficiency in the OR has increased by 40%, anesthesia complication decreased by 10% and the admin, surgeons, OR nurses and PACU nurses are happier than they have ever been (and say so all the time). The patients have nothing but good things to say (the satisfaction scores have increased with anesthesia) oh, and the hospital saved 4 million dollars a year in stipends to help pay for the MDs salaries. I could masquerade as an OR RN and tell a bunch of defamatory stories about things Ive seen Anesthesiologist do as well but I am not as unprofessional as my detractors obviously are. Sufficed to say I challenge them all to prove ANYTHING they are saying here. The fact is their comments here only serve to evidence what Mr Knowlton has said about the REAL reasons ($$$$) they attack us so vehemently. He echos what recent California Supreme court Judge Busch said when the MDs attempted to sue the government to stop CRNAs from practicing independently in this comment "In the final order, Judge Busch said that while the CSA and CMA seemed to suggest that the opt-out creates safety risks for patients, they “did not present any evidence on that point nor did they substantively rebut the evidence presented by [CANA] demonstrating that the opt-out does not present safety risks.” Evidence presented by CANA included two national anesthesia studies published in 2010 that confirmed the safety and cost-effectiveness of nurse anesthetists." Obviously he saw through the smoke and mirrors as well.