Ditch the "physician anesthesiologist" expression

[ElmerFudd]

I've been seeing this more and more over the last few years, and if it were to have effect at all, it would hurt us.

You don't see neurosurgeons advertising the fact that they're physicians by prefacing their specialty with the word "physician". Nor have I ever heard anyone (much less cardiologists) use the phrase "physician cardiologists".

Using the word "physician" in our specialty title - delegitimizes the term "anesthesiologist." Anesthesiologists are physicians. Is there another kind?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BLADEMDA]

I've been seeing this more and more over the last few years, and if it were to have effect at all, it would hurt us.

You don't see neurosurgeons advertising the fact that they're physicians by prefacing their specialty with the word "physician". Nor have I ever heard anyone (much less cardiologists) use the phrase "physician cardiologists".

Using the word "physician" in our specialty title - delegitimizes the term "anesthesiologist." Anesthesiologists are physicians. Is there another kind?

Yes. Unfortunately, the profession is under "full assault" by the AANA and its newly minted DNPs who describe themselves as Doctors of Anesthesia more often than you may realize.

They have corrupted the process and now use "Nurse Anesthesiology" and "Residency" as part of their terminology on a daily basis. So, I will continue to use the term "Physician Anesthesiologist" for the remainder of my career.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Doctor of Nursing Practice Program-Nurse Anesthesia

 

[linkin06]

I will disagree because, frankly, I think the overall population does not know that anesthesia can be delivered by a nurse vs doctor. Saying anesthesiologist does not clarify to the lay person that it is a doctor either. I've heard an SRNA introducing herself as a student nurse anesthetist RESIDENT (not sure which residency/internship she was in though!).

So I'll agree with blade that clarifying the physician component does not denigrate our title but actually enhances and makes clear we are physicians.

 

[BLADEMDA]

What do you think "full scope of practice" means to a "Doctor of Nurse Anesthesia"?

Nurse Anesthesia
Our Doctor of Nursing Practice - Nurse Anesthesia (DNP-NA) program is designed to prepare you for the full scope of nurse anesthesia practice in diverse clinical settings, from hospitals to outpatient surgery centers to physicians’ offices.

Nurse Anesthesia

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

Barry University’s College of Nursing and Health Sciences appointed Rebecca Lee, DNP, CRNA, ARNP as the new Director of the Anesthesiology programs.

 

[Noyac]

Sick bastards

 

[BLADEMDA]

Fake vs Real: They both tell the time

 

[anbuitachi]

I've been seeing this more and more over the last few years, and if it were to have effect at all, it would hurt us.

You don't see neurosurgeons advertising the fact that they're physicians by prefacing their specialty with the word "physician". Nor have I ever heard anyone (much less cardiologists) use the phrase "physician cardiologists".

Using the word "physician" in our specialty title - delegitimizes the term "anesthesiologist." Anesthesiologists are physicians. Is there another kind?

Completely disagree. you are comparing apples to grapes here. Is neurosurgery getting destroyed by CRNNs? No, cause there are none. Are cardiologists getting destroyed by CRNCs? no. But anesthesiology is getting killed by CRNAs. Therefore we are fighting a different battle. They dont need to say physician neurosurgeons b/c there are no nurse neurosurgeons.

I think we try to be way too 'ethical' in this fight. We need to go on a full front attack instead of just defending against their BS atks.

 

[chocomorsel]

This term does not bother me nearly enough as the term "providers".
I was on the phone with a doc only group for an initial interview and the doc was saying "we have 22 providers", and I was thinking, wait a minute, I thought, this was a doc only group? Are there CRNAs too? Otherwise why refer to yourself and partners as "provider"? I am a doctor darn it!!! Don't try to muddy it up!!! Clarify it if needed.

I will take "physician anesthesiologist" any day over "provider"!!

 

[ElmerFudd]

I will disagree because, frankly, I think the overall population does not know that anesthesia can be delivered by a nurse vs doctor. Saying anesthesiologist does not clarify to the lay person that it is a doctor either. I've heard an SRNA introducing herself as a student nurse anesthetist RESIDENT (not sure which residency/internship she was in though!).

So I'll agree with blade that clarifying the physician component does not denigrate our title but actually enhances and makes clear we are physicians.

Again, I couldn't disagree more. The clarification of "physician" in front of the term lends credence to the misconception that anesthesiologist's are not physicians (or that nurse-anesthetists are "anesthesiologists". Anesthesiology is a specialty of medicine, just as neurosurgery, cardiology, radiology, and any other is. We shouldn't cede ground on this point by changing its name.

If you want people to know you're a physician, wear a supplemental ID badge that says "PHYSICIAN" on it. That's the one thing no one else can wear but you and other physicians.

 

[partydoc]

This term does not bother me nearly enough as the term "providers".
I was on the phone with a doc only group for an initial interview and the doc was saying "we have 22 providers", and I was thinking, wait a minute, I thought, this was a doc only group? Are there CRNAs too? Otherwise why refer to yourself and partners as "provider"? I am a doctor darn it!!! Don't try to muddy it up!!! Clarify it if needed.

I will take "physician anesthesiologist" any day over "provider"!!

I hate the word provider, I find it to be an insulting term

 

[deleted171991]

This term does not bother me nearly enough as the term "providers".
I was on the phone with a doc only group for an initial interview and the doc was saying "we have 22 providers", and I was thinking, wait a minute, I thought, this was a doc only group? Are there CRNAs too? Otherwise why refer to yourself and partners as "provider"? I am a doctor darn it!!! Don't try to muddy it up!!! Clarify it if needed.

I will take "physician anesthesiologist" any day over "provider"!!

Now you know that they think of their docs as bodies (typical for most anesthesia practices). Provider is just a euphemism for that.

 

[deleted171991]

Again, I couldn't disagree more. The clarification of "physician" in front of the term lends credence to the misconception that anesthesiologist's are not physicians (or that nurse-anesthetists are "anesthesiologists". Anesthesiology is a specialty of medicine, just as neurosurgery, cardiology, radiology, and any other is. We shouldn't cede ground on this point by changing its name.

If you want people to know you're a physician, wear a supplemental ID badge that says "PHYSICIAN" on it. That's the one thing no one else can wear but you and other physicians.

I wear a PHYSICIAN badge, and I am asked all the time, by patients, when will "the doctor" stop by. People are stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid, STUPID, as in they should wear a badge with the word. Capisci? That's why the AANA brainwash sticks.

I introduce myself both as Dr. FFP and physician anesthesiologist, and still get this crap. Many people think anesthesia is something easy, like "going to sleep", and any ***** can do it. That's what they see on TV.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Again, I couldn't disagree more. The clarification of "physician" in front of the term lends credence to the misconception that anesthesiologist's are not physicians (or that nurse-anesthetists are "anesthesiologists". Anesthesiology is a specialty of medicine, just as neurosurgery, cardiology, radiology, and any other is. We shouldn't cede ground on this point by changing its name.

If you want people to know you're a physician, wear a supplemental ID badge that says "PHYSICIAN" on it. That's the one thing no one else can wear but you and other physicians.

We have already "ceded a lot of ground" my friend. In a few years I fully expect these "Doctors of Nurse Anesthesia" to muddy the water even further; The AANA believes "Anesthesiology" is the study of anesthesia and as such, nurses are the most qualified group of providers in the USA to engage in this endeavor. This is now the era of "Nurse Anesthesiology" as I have attempted to prove.

 

[nimbus]

I hate the word provider, I find it to be an insulting term

From Urban Dictionary....

"provider
a euphemism for prostitute, one who performs sexual acts in exchange for monetary compensation.
a lot of the providers at that escort service do anal."

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

From Urban Dictionary....

"provider
a euphemism for prostitute, one who performs sexual acts in exchange for monetary compensation.
a lot of the providers at that escort service do anal."

Well, now that we have established that fact the only thing to discuss is my hourly rate.

 

[deleted171991]

I think we try to be way too 'ethical' in this fight. We need to go on a full front attack instead of just defending against their BS atks.

The only attack that would work would be to fire all their asses from ACT practices nationwide, like the Michigan group did. Don't hold your breath that it will ever happen. Too many people are making millions from employing CRNAs, and those are the majority of the leader**** in the ASA and state societies. When even academic practices are afraid to piss off their CRNAs, you know that the battle is already lost.

In the end, it's all about money. An easily replaceable physician, who doesn't bring patients, is worth almost zero to bean counters, exactly as much as a CRNA. Actually, the latter is probably worth more.

 

[nimbus]

Fake vs Real: They both tell the time

Damn that's a good fake.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Damn that's a good fake.

I'm sure the same thing can be said about him:

 

[BLADEMDA]

ANESTHESIOLOGY STUDENT PUBLISHES MANUSCRIPT

The department of Anesthesiology would like to congratulate Barry University DNP with a Specialization in Anesthesiology student, Sergio V. Hernandez. His manuscript titled, Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Plastic Surgery: A Literature Review, was accepted for publication by the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists Journal.

The purpose of his literature review article was to determine existing venous thromboembolism VTE risk using assessment models available to aid in the implementation of protocols for VTE prevention, specifically for high-risk cosmetic surgery patients in office-based settings.

 

[aneftp]

My question is

What is the "full practice scope" of nursing?

Vs "full practice scope" of medicine?

No one has defined the full practice scope of medicine. Yet nurses and other mid levels want "full scope of practice"

It seems like a back handed way to say they want to practice like doctors. Without using the word doctor. So as of to scare the public a non doctor is gaining the practice of medicine rights.

 

[zizzer]

What's wrong with just introducing yourself with something like, "My name is Dr. Smith, your anesthesiologist. I'm in charge of directing your anesthesia plan, administering your medications, and closely monitoring you making sure things go as safely and smoothly today. You might have already met Dan, the nurse anesthesist, assisting me today. I've done many cases with him before and he always does a great job with whatever is asked of him."

This does a couple of things. First, it makes the roles clear: you are the doctor directing the assistant nurse anesthesist. Gesture to your name badge which probably says MD on it while introducing your name (last name with Dr address). Don't say CRNA as people don't know what it stands for and that's part of the confusion. Use words patients understand. Everybody knows doctors order nurses. Use his first name. Reinforce these roles throughout the interview (example: allude to how you're reviewed the patient's PMH and decided on the plan, etc).

Second, you throw in the optional compliment at the end if you want. This keeps everybody happy but also reinforces your roles, as it's implied he has less training if you're making a judgment on his abilities like that. It's also reassuring to the patient.

 

[AdmiralChz]

What's wrong with just introducing yourself with something like, "My name is Dr. Smith, your anesthesiologist. I'm in charge of directing your anesthesia plan, administering your medications, and closely monitoring you making sure things go as safely and smoothly today. You might have already met Dan, the nurse anesthesist, assisting me today. I've done many cases with him before and he always does a great job with whatever is asked of him."

This is almost universally what I've seen throughout residency. Nothing wrong with this at all, and I plan to introduce myself similarly when I'm in practice.

Even our "DNP" CRNAs introduce themselves by their first names and identify themselves as anesthetists.

 

[deleted171991]

What's wrong with just introducing yourself with something like, "My name is Dr. Smith, your anesthesiologist. I'm in charge of directing your anesthesia plan, administering your medications, and closely monitoring you making sure things go as safely and smoothly today. You might have already met Dan, the nurse anesthesist, assisting me today. I've done many cases with him before and he always does a great job with whatever is asked of him."

This does a couple of things. First, it makes the roles clear: you are the doctor directing the assistant nurse anesthesist. Gesture to your name badge which probably says MD on it while introducing your name (last name with Dr address). Don't say CRNA as people don't know what it stands for and that's part of the confusion. Use words patients understand. Everybody knows doctors order nurses. Use his first name. Reinforce these roles throughout the interview (example: allude to how you're reviewed the patient's PMH and decided on the plan, etc).

Second, you throw in the optional compliment at the end if you want. This keeps everybody happy but also reinforces your roles, as it's implied he has less training if you're making a judgment on his abilities like that. It's also reassuring to the patient.

Very nice, except it's far from being completely true (and very simplistic in general). Especially in many for-profit ACT settings, where your employer does not budget time for truly monitoring the CRNAs, for two reasons: CRNAs hate being micromanaged, and many anesthesiologists would just use that time to sit on their butt. So there isn't much medical direction between induction and emergence. Plus many CRNAs like to administer all the meds themselves; it's not worth picking a fight over that for most patients (it's like taking over some protocoled infusion from an ICU nurse). If it's a really sick patient, I just take over the meds, no discussion, but that's not the rule in PP.

The TEFRA legislation should have been made MUCH tighter 20 years ago. The medically directed CRNA's role should have been more of an anesthesia nurse (pure manual help) than of an autonomous nurse anesthetist. That ship has sailed. Good luck undoing decades of physician castration and midlevel empowerment.

 

[deleted171991]

This is almost universally what I've seen throughout residency. Nothing wrong with this at all, and I plan to introduce myself similarly when I'm in practice.

Even our "DNP" CRNAs introduce themselves by their first names and identify themselves as anesthetists.

Just keep listening (when they don't know you are there) and you will also hear variations of "I am John, your anesthetist", "I am John from anesthesia", "I am John, and I will provide your anesthesia in the OR" etc. Very rarely will you hear something that implies medical direction from the anesthesiologist.

A longer chat with most CRNAs tends to unearth their true beliefs regarding physician oversight. I would argue that ~75% consider themselves our equal or better, at least deep inside. Since they only appreciate one's firefighting skills, if one is the kind of physician that tries to prevent most bad stuff from happening (while many of them like to be cowboys on one's license), one won't get much respect from them.

 

[zizzer]

Very nice, except it's far from being completely true. Especially in many for-profit ACT settings, where your employer does not budget time for truly monitoring the CRNAs, for two reasons: CRNAs hate being micromanaged, and many anesthesiologists would just use that time to sit on their arse. So there isn't much medical direction between induction and emergence. Plus many CRNAs like to administer all the meds themselves; it's not worth picking a fight over that, since Very nice, except it's far from being completely true. Especially in many for-profit ACT settings, where your employer does not budget time for truly monitoring the CRNAs, for two reasons: CRNAs hate being micromanaged, and many anesthesiologists would just use that time to sit on their arse. So there isn't much medical direction between induction and emergence. Plus many CRNAs like to administer all the meds themselves; it's not worth picking a fight over that, since they do most of everything else anyway.

The TEFRA legislation should have been made MUCH tighter 20 years ago. The medically directed CRNA's role should have been more of an anesthesia nurse (pure manual help) than of an autonomous nurse anesthetist. That ship has sailed. Good luck undoing decades of physician castration and midlevel empowerment.

Regardless of the lazy anesthesiologists, this is still how it should be done. The doctor is also responsible for administering meds even though the nurse does as well. Even if you're not in the room between emergence and induction you can still be directing care (example, tell the nurse to keep the MAP in a certain range, avoid this medication, and so on.) You should treat them with respect, but you shouldn't care if they feel micromanaged. It's your job to manage them. Part of the problem is that anesthesiologists have become too afraid to "micromanage" nurses that they don't manage them at all.

 

[deleted171991]

Regardless of the lazy anesthesiologists, this is still how it should be done. The doctor is also responsible for administering meds even though the nurse does as well. Even if you're not in the room between emergence and induction you can still be directing care (example, tell the nurse to keep the MAP in a certain range, avoid this medication, and so on.) You should treat them with respect, but you shouldn't care if they feel micromanaged. It's your job to manage them. Part of the problem is that anesthesiologists have become too afraid to "micromanage" nurses that they don't manage them at all.

This is all very nice in a market where one can just hire another CRNA tomorrow. Actually, in most parts of the country, one has a higher chance of hiring a good anesthesiologist than a good CRNA. A per diem CRNA can make more than a salaried anesthesiologist, so many good ones don't take more than a part-time W-2 position, if any, and work per diem in multiple places (so they can leave any single group if needed). Both employed and per diem CRNAs know this, so they feel free to ignore your "suggestions", if they disagree with them. Good luck making a fuss, especially if you are not a partner, and they have been there forever. It's easy to talk as a CA-0.

Also, let's not forget the pack mentality. Many ACT practices cannot afford pissing off their CRNAs as a group. Money, money, money!

The CRNA militancy has gotten to a level where I have had a millennial SRNA talk back to me. That did not go well, but still nothing major happened to the SRNA, since money talks.

 

[deleted171991]

My question is

What is the "full practice scope" of nursing?

Vs "full practice scope" of medicine?

No one has defined the full practice scope of medicine. Yet nurses and other mid levels want "full scope of practice"

It seems like a back handed way to say they want to practice like doctors. Without using the word doctor. So as of to scare the public a non doctor is gaining the practice of medicine rights.

To me nursing is manual caring for the patient, what a mother does to her child. That's what the verb means. Once it crosses over into diagnostic or therapeutic decision making, it's medicine. In the US, these lines have been intentionally blurred. Many nurses, even if just RNs, practice a form of medicine "lite" that would not be allowed in many countries. A nurse is not an independent practitioner, it's a physician helper. Once s/he practices independently, or does certain things without physician approval, s/he practices medicine.

Remember the scandal about the "nurse's stethoscope"? Except in the US, there is no such thing in many countries. A stethoscope is a medical instrument, and is the traditional marker of a physician. Same goes for the white coats, the word "doctor" etc. Again, it's all about money. Most of what people think is about political correctness is just about money.

 

[zizzer]

This is all very nice in a market where one can just hire another CRNA tomorrow. Actually, in most parts of the country, one has a higher chance of hiring a good anesthesiologist than a good CRNA. A per diem CRNA can make more than a salaried anesthesiologist, so many good ones don't take more than a part-time W-2 position, if any, and work per diem in multiple places (so they can leave any single group if needed). Both employed and per diem CRNAs know this, so they feel free to ignore your "suggestions", if they disagree with them. Good luck making a fuss, especially if you are not a partner, and they have been there forever. It's easy to talk as a CA-0.

Also, let's not forget the pack mentality. Many ACT practices cannot afford pissing off their CRNAs as a group. Money, money, money!

The CRNA militancy has gotten to a level where I have had a millennial SRNA talk back to me. That did not go well, but still nothing major happened to the SRNA, since money talks.

That's unfortunate. At least the intro still works well for educating patients. Many anesthesiologists are very bad at this. One attending where I work regularly asks patients, "Who's your doctor?" (meaning surgeon) before placing epidurals for post op analgesia.

 

[Libertas]

The CRNA militancy has gotten to a level where I have had a millennial SRNA talk back to me. That did not go well, but still nothing major happened to the SRNA, since money talks.

.....story, story!

 

[AdmiralChz]

I had to look this one up, the "open journal of anesthesiology" has an impact factor of 0.102 and is ranked 111 out of 116 anesthesiology journals according to this website: Journal Rankings on Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
- For comparison, Anesthesiology has 2.162.
- Other websites had it at 0.00 and indicated it publishes just about anything.

Just keep listening (when they don't know you are there) and you will also hear variations of "I am John, your anesthetist", "I am John from anesthesia", "I am John, and I will provide your anesthesia in the OR" etc. Very rarely will you hear something that implies medical direction from the anesthesiologist.

A longer chat with most CRNAs tends to unearth their true beliefs regarding physician oversight. I would argue that ~75% consider themselves our equal or better, at least deep inside. Since they only appreciate one's firefighting skills, if one is the kind of physician that tries to prevent most bad stuff from happening (while many of them like to be cowboys on one's license), one won't get much respect from them.

Perhaps, but the anesthetists here cannot get consent (same for all other services as well) so a physician always has to discuss with the patient/family prior to the procedure. So there's always an ability to explain to them how things are run here.

Much more common here is the rise of DNPs in the SICU setting, they (on the surface) appear to be much more militant about their role and their disdain for physician oversight. They much more commonly introduce themselves as Dr. X in charge of their care, which makes me very uncomfortable when I rotate there. Thankfully I never have to do an SICU rotation again.

 

[deleted171991]

I had to look this one up, the "open journal of anesthesiology" has an impact factor of 0.102 and is ranked 111 out of 116 anesthesiology journals according to this website: Journal Rankings on Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
- For comparison, Anesthesiology has 2.162.
- Other websites had it at 0.00 and indicated it publishes just about anything.

I don't remember ever seeing the impact factor of a journal in a publication list. People look at quantity, not quality. Smoke and mirrors.

 

[AdmiralChz]

I don't remember ever seeing the impact factor of a journal in a publication list. People look at quantity, not quality. Smoke and mirrors.

I know several academic departments factor it into their promotion & tenure agreements, but other than that I know no good way to compare journals. Then again I'm not exactly academically-inclined.

 

[deleted171991]

Perhaps, but the anesthetists here cannot get consent (same for all other services as well) so a physician always has to discuss with the patient/family prior to the procedure. So there's always an ability to explain to them how things are run here.

Much more common here is the rise of DNPs in the SICU setting, they (on the surface) appear to be much more militant about their role and their disdain for physician oversight. They much more commonly introduce themselves as Dr. X in charge of their care, which makes me very uncomfortable when I rotate there. Thankfully I never have to do an SICU rotation again.

My experience as a fellow was the opposite, but I didn't have to deal with DNPs, and we had some really sick patients. One still has to treat ICU midlevels with gloves, like CRNAs, but I personally have met less militancy in the ICU than in the OR. But then I mostly worked with them in the MICU.

The SICU APRNs were much closer to CRNAs in attitude, probably because the surgical intensivist is just the surgeon's monkey, as in the OR. That's why I always plead against a job/specialty where the physician is not chosen/followed by his/her patients.

 

[Arch Guillotti]

What's wrong with just introducing yourself with something like, "My name is Dr. Smith, your anesthesiologist. I'm in charge of directing your anesthesia plan, administering your medications, and closely monitoring you making sure things go as safely and smoothly today. You might have already met Dan, the nurse anesthesist, assisting me today. I've done many cases with him before and he always does a great job with whatever is asked of him."

This does a couple of things. First, it makes the roles clear: you are the doctor directing the assistant nurse anesthesist. Gesture to your name badge which probably says MD on it while introducing your name (last name with Dr address). Don't say CRNA as people don't know what it stands for and that's part of the confusion. Use words patients understand. Everybody knows doctors order nurses. Use his first name. Reinforce these roles throughout the interview (example: allude to how you're reviewed the patient's PMH and decided on the plan, etc).

Second, you throw in the optional compliment at the end if you want. This keeps everybody happy but also reinforces your roles, as it's implied he has less training if you're making a judgment on his abilities like that. It's also reassuring to the patient.

Agree.

Tell the patient you are the doctor.
Tell the patient you are in charge of the nurse.
Swallow your pride and throw them a bone if indicated.
The horse has left the barn for most of us and we have to lie in the bad that we have made.

 

[Ronin786]

I'm still a resident, but my go to is: "Hi, I'm X. One of the anesthesia doctors that is going to be taking care of you today". I feel that does a good job of specifying the physician component and just emphasizing that it is another choice of specialty that doctors choose while being relatively simple for your average layman. Just like you have a cardiology doctor and an emergency department doctor.

If I ever have to introduce a CRNA, they'll be "an anesthesia nurse that is helping me out".

 

[deleted171991]

If I ever have to introduce a CRNA, they'll be "an anesthesia nurse that is helping me out".

You can't do that. You have to use "nurse anesthetist", because that's their title. An "anesthesia nurse" can be any simple RN you hire to help you out, for example in cardiac rooms.

You are also misrepresenting yourself, by the way. The more competent you'll feel, the less you'll feel the need to use a euphemism for your role. Don't do what some CRNAs do. You are a (anesthesiology) resident physician; nothing to be ashamed about. That also explains why there is another doc on the team.

 

[G-Man82]

I introduce myself as the patient's "Anesthesia doctor" and usually let them know they'll meet an Anesthetist or resident physician who works with me.

I think "anesthesia doctor" is more easily understood by patients, especially here in the South where we get a lot of rural patients referred to the big city hospital. Layman terms.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[vector2]

I'm still a resident, but my go to is: "Hi, I'm X. One of the anesthesia doctors that is going to be taking care of you today". I feel that does a good job of specifying the physician component and just emphasizing that it is another choice of specialty that doctors choose while being relatively simple for your average layman. Just like you have a cardiology doctor and an emergency department doctor.

If I ever have to introduce a CRNA, they'll be "an anesthesia nurse that is helping me out".

Introduce yourself as Dr. X. Leave the first name introductions to the patient's gardener, plumber, and nurse.

 

[anbuitachi]

You can't do that. You have to use "nurse anesthetist", because that's their title. An "anesthesia nurse" can be any simple RN you hire to help you out, for example in cardiac rooms.

You are also misrepresenting yourself, by the way. The more competent you'll feel, the less you'll feel the need to use a euphemism for your role. Don't do what some CRNAs do. You are a (anesthesiology) resident physician; nothing to be ashamed about. That also explains why there is another doc on the team.

Why not just anesthesiologist?

Just be like Im Dr. X, the anesthesiologist.

 

[deleted171991]

Why not just anesthesiologist?

Just be like Im Dr. X, the anesthesiologist.

Because he's a resident. Misrepresenting himself opens the door for a lot of bad things, e.g. questions regarding the validity of the informed consent he took, ethics issues etc.

 

[waterbottle10]

Because he's a resident. Misrepresenting himself opens the door for a lot of bad things, e.g. questions regarding the validity of the informed consent he took, ethics issues etc.

Does it only refer to board certified attendings

 

[deleted171991]

What is wrong with saying anesthesiologist? The term doesn't only refer to attending..

I would disagree, especially if "resident" or "trainee" or similar do not show up anywhere in the introduction. It's simply misleading, similar to when a CRNA says "Hi, I am X from anesthesia, I will provide your anesthetic today".

A resident is not an anesthesiologist, no more than a CRNA is. The surgical resident is not a surgeon, the medicine resident is not an internist, the cardiology fellow is not a cardiologist, the CCM fellow is not an intensivist etc. What they are respectively is a anesthesiology/surgery/medicine/cardiology/critical care resident/fellow/trainee.

Implying that one is something else (more) than one's real position is simply fraudulent, unprofessional, and bordering malpractice. The patient has the right to know who s/he's dealing with. Never lie to/mislead a patient, unless it's clearly in the patient's best interests (even then, it's a very slippery slope).

 

[waterbottle10]

Ohhhhhh

I would disagree, especially if "resident" or "trainee" or similar do not show up anywhere in the introduction. It's simply misleading, similar to when a CRNA says "Hi, I am X from anesthesia, I will provide your anesthetic today".

A resident is not an anesthesiologist, no more than a CRNA is. The surgical resident is not a surgeon, the medicine resident is not an internist, the cardiology fellow is not a cardiologist, the CCM fellow is not an intensivist etc. What they are is a "resident/fellow/trainee in...".

Implying that one is something else (more) than one's real position is simply fraudulent, unprofessional, and bordering malpractice. The patient has the right to know who s/he's dealing with.

 

[Swamp Gas]

Barry University’s College of Nursing and Health Sciences appointed Rebecca Lee, DNP, CRNA, ARNP as the new Director of the Anesthesiology programs.

Seeing this made me cringe, so deceptive.

 

[Carbocation1]

 

[pgg]

Don't make this harder than it is.

The third word out of your mouth, right after "hello" and "I'm" should be "doctor".

Whether you're a July CA-0 or the the dept chair, that's how it should start.

Hello, I'm doctor ____

After that you can clarify that you're a resident, fellow, whatever. But the third word: doctor.

Not your first name, for the love of god.

Feel free to substitute "hi" for "hello" or even a "good morning" if you're feeling unusually verbose.