- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Defeat the Nurse Practitioner scope of practice expansion - Louisiana SB 187
Posted on 4/9/16 at 6:27 am to LATigerdoc
Posted on 4/9/16 at 6:27 am to LATigerdoc
As a CRNA, you all kinds of stupid. The surgeon has ZERO to do w/the anesthesia. They don't intubate or do anything from an anesthetic standpoint. We do. Not anesthesiologist. I haven't worked under one on 11 yrs & never plan to again. And it's not a general anesthetic for a corneal transplant. The pt gets a retrobulbar block & IV sedation. But I agree to your original post
3
Posted on 4/9/16 at 6:39 am to LATigerdoc
quote:
LATigerdoc
Circle the wagons, boys! Defend and protect!
Posted on 4/9/16 at 7:29 am to Crimson
quote:Absolutely, part time schooling, online classes (in many cases), and less than 1000 clinical hours should not result in independent practice.
If autonomy is granted then training MUST be extended for licensure. There is no substitute for experience and the consequences of ignorance can be catastrophic. Patients deserve nothing less.
Posted on 4/9/16 at 7:46 am to saderade
I guess by eliminating doctors in some practices, it reduces overhead and reduces the amount insurance/out of pocket pay out as well. I think this bill could really make care more affordable especially for smaller clinics.
Posted on 4/9/16 at 7:53 am to LATigerdoc
An ophthalmologist that hasn't attempted to intubation someone since med school can stay away from my airway!!!!
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:02 am to LATigerdoc
What rules will apply to nurse practitioners with respect to malpractice?
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:06 am to Poodlebrain
Yeah, I'm now for whatever tigerdoc is against.
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:20 am to LATigerdoc
We don't have any more family practice doctors because the $$$ is in specialized medicine .
If all I need is a script for some decongestant or pain mess, a NP is fine.
I support this.
If all I need is a script for some decongestant or pain mess, a NP is fine.
I support this.
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:25 am to LATigerdoc
Sarchasm = the vast gulf btw the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient, who just doesn't get it.
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:30 am to saderade
I am a CRNA and also had to endure thousands of hours of training as well as thousands of hours of studying. I also have to pass a national certification exam to be eligible for licensure. One can't really compare CRNAs to other APRNs with respect to the level of training. Just my 2 cents though
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:31 am to Mung
Doc here could have probably made a much better argument on his stance, but his arrogance got the best of him and he squandered that opportunity.
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:35 am to southernelite
While opposed to his OP, I certainly agree that he was detrimental to his own cause with the way he acted
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:38 am to banone74
quote:
They don't intubate or do anything from an anesthetic standpoint. We do. Not anesthesiologist.
What the hell?
So the next time one of my CRNAs call me intraoperatively about a hypotensive patient or a funky rhythm strip or a knicked aorta I'll be like, "Nah banone74 said I don't do anything from an anesthesia standpoint."
Not to turn this into a pissing contest but how many pedi hearts did you do in training? How many CPB cases? How many level 1 traumas in OR? How many craniotomies? Or just how about how many hours overall did you have in clinical training as a SRNA? I'm interested.
FTR I don't really care much about the laws allowing APRNs to practice independently of physicians, but I think it should relegated to (a) primary care practices and (b) critical access hospitals/healthcare in rural areas. But allowing opt-out for anesthesia services is sort of a dying trend, there has only been one state to opt out since 2010.
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:38 am to LATigerdoc
That is ridiculous. An RN is an RN, regardless of the "AP". Any insight on the LSBN's thoughts on this idea? I've never read through the APRN scope of practice, so not familiar. This really shouldn't fly.
What RN, APRN or not, is so bold think they can operate independently? My guess would be the ones that are truly dangerous, the know it alls. If this does pass, they should be required to have the same malpractice insurance doctors have. That might make them re-think the inflated image they have of themselves!
What RN, APRN or not, is so bold think they can operate independently? My guess would be the ones that are truly dangerous, the know it alls. If this does pass, they should be required to have the same malpractice insurance doctors have. That might make them re-think the inflated image they have of themselves!
This post was edited on 4/9/16 at 8:42 am
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:39 am to magicman534
How long is CRNA school? How much of that is classroom and how much is live patient experience?
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:40 am to Isabelle81
Do you even realize the difference between a regular RN and an NP or CRNA?
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:41 am to banone74
You missed the point of his post, if I read it correctly. Basically, why extend autonomy to someone who isn't educationally qualified to the standard that they should be in order to function as a competent physician. For the small stuff, sure the NP can get it right, but what about the potentially difficult or unexpected that arises?
To what extent is the autonomy being granted?
Is this proposal's true purpose to alter staffing requirements in regards to the numbers of MDs and NPs on staff? Would a hospital / medical entity be able to reduce their total compensation with increased numbers of autonomous NPs and a reduced number of overseeing physicians on staff?
To what extent is the autonomy being granted?
Is this proposal's true purpose to alter staffing requirements in regards to the numbers of MDs and NPs on staff? Would a hospital / medical entity be able to reduce their total compensation with increased numbers of autonomous NPs and a reduced number of overseeing physicians on staff?
This post was edited on 4/9/16 at 8:45 am
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:43 am to lsunurse
GMT, end hijack
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:44 am to lsunurse
Nurse will you please take my temperature the old fashioned way 
Posted on 4/9/16 at 8:46 am to WylieTiger
Do yall realize that several other states have already granted this change in scope of practice? This isn't some new, crazy idea.
Like 21 states, AZ is one of them. It mainly benefits rural areas.
LINK
Like 21 states, AZ is one of them. It mainly benefits rural areas.
LINK
Page 4 of 127
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News