"medically directing," all in the service of an inefficient and outdated
reimbursement scheme that serves no purpose other than preserving
power and control. When someone tells you it's not a turf battle or
about the money, it's most certainly about both.
Removing payment for medical direction would do wonders for on-
time starts. Imagine having an anesthesiologist or CRNA ready to start
cases on time in every room every day without delay. There's no
statute, regulation or law in the United States requiring an anesthesi-
ologist to medically direct or supervise a CRNA. Anesthesia providers
incapable of rendering an anesthetic from induction to emergence
alone should reevaluate their career choices.
Most anesthesiologists
have no idea how claims
are submitted in their
names. If you sub-
mit a claim as
medically directed
and you fail to meet even
1 of the 7 criteria for each
and every anesthetic, that claim is fraudulent. I
hope the new administration, one not beholden
to PACs and lobbyists, can look at how much
eliminating payment for medical direction of
CRNAs would save, and acknowledge all the
evidence that anesthesia care is safe —
regardless of the practice model.
OSM
Mr. Horowitz (unconscious @verizon.net) is a
nurse anesthetist based in Sarasota, Fla. He
serves on the Outpatient Surgery Magazine editorial
board.
"Eliminate payment for medical
direction of CRNAs and acknowl-
edge the evidence that anesthesia
care is safe — regardless of
practice model."
Nurse anesthetist says ...
Reimbursement Scheme
J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 7 • O U T PA T I E N TS U R G E R Y. N E T • 1 1
