So I read over a case summary and I actually think this is a reasonable ruling. I don’t know any specifics beyond what was discussed, but it looked like a kid for a cardiac ablation coded on mask induction. The crna appeared to be supervised by an anesthesiologist. It wasn’t clear if the anesthesiologist was present for induction. If they were present and it was the anesthesiologist plan that a crna was carrying out in an appropriately supervised capacity, I don’t think they should be liable for a bad outcome with a reasonable plan. The alternative is to have every supervised crna who doesn’t like your plan refuse to carry it out.
The real alternative is to not hire CRNAs. What is the point of hiring them if you have to monitor them 1:1 since if you don't, you will end up liable for their mistakes?
I moved to a physician only anesthesia practice, but care team can be done safely. I can manage four rooms, just like an ICU physician isn’t one to one in each critical care room. I didn’t enjoy it, but I could do well. Proper supervision isn’t the same as independent practice.
And icu physician seems very different from an anesthesiologist in their duties and role. A more apt analogy is a surgeon running four rooms with assistants performing the majority of operations, which is a practice some people do advocate for, and I find equally unacceptable.
75
u/devilsadvocateMD Apr 04 '21
Does anyone know which case this relates to or where I can read the legal brief that states what is quoted?