Colorado Physicians Sue to Require Medical Direction of CRNAs
September 30, 2010 — A long-simmering turf war between anesthesiologists and certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) across the country erupted this week into a legal battle in Colorado. As it is with healthcare in general, the conflict centers on matters of quality and quantity — quality of care for patients, quantity of dollars for providers.
The Colorado Medical Society and the Colorado Society of Anesthesiologists yesterday sued Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter Jr. over his decision, announced earlier in the week, to opt out of a Medicare requirement that a CRNA must work under physician supervision for his or her work to be reimbursed. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services gave states this option in 2001, and Colorado is the sixteenth state to exercise it. Most are Western and Great Plains states, where remote rural hospitals may lack an anesthesiologist to supply the supervision.
In their lawsuit, filed in a state circuit court, the Colorado physicians contend that Gov. Ritter’s opt-out decision “will diminish patient safety” and violate the state’s “captain of the ship” doctrine, which puts surgeons in charge of operating room personnel. Seeking a reversal of the governor’s action, the Colorado physicians also contend that the opt-out is contrary to state law, which they say classifies administration of anesthesia by a nurse as a “delegated medical function.”
CRNAs counter that patient care does not suffer when members of their profession work without physician oversight.
“The evidence shows that physician supervision does not have an impact on quality of care,” Paul Santoro, CRNA, and president of the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA), told Medscape Medical News.
Other states than Colorado that have bailed out of the physician supervision requirement for CRNAs are Alaska, California, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, and Wisconsin. Colorado’s opt-out is confined to critical-access hospitals and specified rural hospitals.
Anesthesiology Labor Market Study 2010
Findings:
Work arrangements
- 40% of CRNAs and ANs are employed by a single group
- 40% of CRNAS and ANs are employed by a single facility or hospital
- ANs spend more time performing general anesthesia
- CRNAs spend more of their time performing monitored anesthesia care (MAC)
- CRNAs are more likely to be employed by rural facilities
Reimbursement
- ANs work more hours and make twice as much as CRNAs
- Both ANs and CRNAs make more money in a rural setting
Regional Differences
- Western CRNAs are least likely to be employed by a group
- Western ANs are most likely to be employed by a group
- Northeastern ANs and CRNAs tend to work in larger facilities
Shortage/Surplus
- Greatest evidence for a shortage is in the Northeast and in urban areas
- Nationally, the anesthesia market is thought to be equilibrium, while states see mixed statuses
- 25 states show a shortage of ANs currently
- 19 states show a shortage of CRNAs currently
- In absolute numbers, Florida, Alabama and North Carolina exhibit the most shortage of ANs
- In absolute numbers, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida exhibit the greatest shortage, while Minnesota, North Carolina and California exhibit the most surplus of CRNAs.
- 2020 national projections exhibit a shortage of ANs and a surplus of CRNAs.
Rand Health performed this study in 2010 for Ethicon. For copy right reasons I am providing my impression of the most pertinent findings of the report and not a copy of the reoprt. If you would like a reprint fo the actual report you can request one at http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR688/