Talk:Anesthesiologist

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine Mid‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Mid This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. inactive .OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles

The boxes on the top and bottom off the page no longer apply. How can you get rid of them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.142.86 (talk) 21:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the globalize tag, but the article only references one source (which is hardly adequate). So the other tag stays for now unless anyone disagrees. Aaron mcd (talk) 02:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The statement "According to the Society of Anesthesiologists, Anesthesiologists provide or participate in more than 90 percent of the 40 million anesthetics delivered in the USA annually." is referenced with a marketing type web page that only provides this same statement without documented research. Was this a poll, research study, ASA member survey? This leaves a lot of room for questions and bias.

The number today is closer to 50 million anesthetics. There is limited availability to the public about the number of cases that anesthesiologists perform soley. The majority participate along side a Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNA) who provide the vast majority of anesthesia in the United States. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.180.28.13 (talk) 03:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"In certain areas of the country there has been a shortage of anesthesiologists for several years. ... In many of these underserved areas, physicians supervise ACTs...." Interesting statement, in that there are CRNAs in practically every city in the nation. For example Philadelphia, Houston, Dallas, etc. has CRNAs in every major hospital - are these major cities underserved??? Also, there has been a shortage of anesthesiologist for the last 100 years, that's why there are CRNAs and AAs. Eclipse Anesthesia 21:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, just like nurse practitioners and PAs. Most MD/DOs supervise 2-4 rooms, and only begin and end, but not sit, their own cases. They also have significant roles outside the OR, but you are right, the focus on rural I think probably refers to the other mid level providers more so than CRNAs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.176.151.10 (talk) 03:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in Role in Healthcare Delivery: JAQUILA MATTHEWS WANTS TO BE AN ANESTHESIOLOGIST. Is this factual? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.66.105.102 (talk) 19:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Australia/NZ Anaethetists are required to first sit a standard medical degree... and the training is about 7 years also... it's over 12 years all up before you enter a most junior position. 4-6 years med school, 2 years internship, 5 years minimum training in anaesthesia.

Most NZ anaethetists sit the exam in Australia under their medical board, however the "doctorate" is recognised in NZ as equivilency.

• This is not true. It is a combined Australian_and_New_Zealand_College_of_Anaesthetists. The qualification is not a doctorate it is a fellowship (FANZCA) [1]

== Definition == I don't know

I think that the definition of an anaesthesiology needs some work. The scope is far too narrow and lacking in depth. Discussion needs to include the role of anaesthetists in managing pain and medical emergencies in addition to intraoperative sedation and traditional anaesthesia. Further, anaesthesiologists have roles in intensive care settings in some countries (like Australia). They do not simply put people to sleep, keep them asleep and wake them up, like the current defition implies. They are experts in physiology (particularly cardiorespiratory) and pharmacology, as well as being proficient saviours in the art of IV cannulation - a skill that many junior medical staff often have to fall back on for difficult veins. Finally, they act as patient representatives in the operation theatre and are great exponents of highly controlled and coordinated practice.

Perhaps some review should be taken of the definition as provided by a number of Anaesthetics Training College websites?

Since about 1988, the American Board of Anesthesiology has required 4 years of training after achieving a doctorate in order to be "Board Certified".

Is that an acceptible citation?

Citation needed.

JasonBourne2007 03:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why has this piece of information been given a headline in the discussion page and a citation in the main page? -- Copperman 15:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about anesthesiologists, and does not require this reference or resource. This resource should be added to an article about Nurse Anesthetist if such a page exists, or you should create the article. --Copperman 06:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the title of the article should be Anesthetist. Anesthesiologist is only used in north america (I think Canada uses both for doctor practioners). The rest of the world uses Anesthetist. It is a little US-centric and possibly racist. In the interests of clarity, NPOV, understanding and global harmony, perhaps it might be changed.

This also means the first line in misleading. It gives the impression that Anesthetist is used only in Britain, but it is used in India (lots of doctors there), Australia, Singapore, Hong Kong, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, Botswana and so on.... 58.107.87.183 04:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The style of spelling the article is first written in is the one it should stay with, according to Wikipedia policy. Don't worry - I'm sure "global harmony" isn't jeopardized because some people don't spell "Color" with a 'u'. - 68.33.120.32 00:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with User:68.33.120.32; if only north america uses the term "-ologist" then I would support moving the name of the article to Anaesthetist. If the wiki policy on this matter described above is regarding spelling then this may not apply - this is a different word, not a different spelling of the same word. Does anyone disagree before I proceed with a name change? k1-UK-Global 14:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Kayvan, the field is Anaesthesia, therefore Anesthesiologist is clearly incorrect, further, I have only seen Anesthesiologist in North Americal spelling, so I support the move --Varnis (talk) 11:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

However, in north america (yes, including canada), anaesthsist means something entirely different (i.e. CRNA). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.176.151.10 (talk) 03:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

THERE IS NO ARGUMENT. An anesthesiologist is a physician that has specialty training in the field of anesthesia and either supervises or personally delivers an anesthetic. the term anesthetist refers to a person that delivers an anesthetic. The reason for confusion is that in a lot of areas throughout the world anesthetics are administered by physicians and therefore the distinction between anesthetist and anesthesiologist is not necessary or does not exist. However in some areas of the world anesthetics are delivered by anesthetists that are not necessarily anesthesiologists (physicians) and therefore the distinction between the two is necessary.

Please feel free to see the Merriam-Webster definition of the word Anesthesiologist. Still American-centric; For definitive definitions in the english language reference Oxford English Dictionary, you will find no entry for anesthesiologist

This portion of the article needs to be re-written in order to accurately reflect the subject or the title should be changed to that of anesthetist which is the broader more inclusive term. It is not only important for this to be accurate for the article, but to maintain the validity of the overall site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nnedeff (talk • contribs) 14:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the various subspecialties deserve more elucidation / own pages. In particular, there is precious little Wiki information on Pediatric Anesthesia. I am interested in different anesthesia approaches to neonates vs. older children, and pretty much struck out here. —The preceding

Not sure why the sweeping edits were made describing an Anesthesiologists work, but not only were they inappropriate, they were replaced with inaccurate data regarding the malpractice and salary issues facing Anesthesiologists. Returning to previous version. 72.185.204.89 13:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anesthesiologists are "board certified" as peri-operative physicians, and the removal thereof is unnecessary. If one is not board certified, then they do not fall under the category of "board certified anesthesiologist". Furthermore, nothing was implied that AA/CRNA care was new or limited, and this article is talking about Anesthesiologists, not mid-level occupations within the medical field. The shortage of Anesthesiologists in rural areas is the primary argument for augmentation of mid-level providers, up to and including the Medicare opt-out. As such, edits will be reversed, unless said edits are reasonably discussed in this talk page. Thank you. ICUDocMD 16:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note to 71.233.29.56: I appreciate your enthusiasm to adding to this article, but please keep in mind wiki rules regarding edits. ICUDocMD 23:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see the value in bringing up 6 year medical education programs, I believe there are only 1-2 in the US out of over one hundred medical schools, the vast majority of Anesthesiologist have completed 12 years of post high school education and bringing up 10-12 seems to be superfluous. I have not edited the main page, but wonder if this has been discussed before

Its part of the CRNA attempt to cover up that they are nurses with 2 years extra training, compared to docs with 12-16 years of training.129.176.151.10 (talk) 03:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

There's been quite a bit of vandalism on this page in the past 2 days, is that an indication for locking this page down? Also, I'm not sure how to tag the users/IPs as vandals, and I can't find the help page on that. Anyone knows how to? Squiggle 15:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be straightforward, someone who is editing this page is an idiot. The section under training that describes a shortage of Anesthesiologists is under the heading- "Anesthesiologists are the best". What does that even mean? And the assertion that "jeremy stock is awsome!!" under the references convinces me that someone intentionally ruined this page.

I would say that tagging an IP won't keep a vandal from vandalizing. Lock it down until the Vandal gets bored.Seiken66 (talk) 02:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the generic globalization tag from this article. If you think the tag is deserved, please feel free to restore it -- but please also add a clear explanation right here on this talk page. Your actual concerns are much more likely to be adequately addressed if you identify them. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Restored the tag. The main body of the article is essentially "Anesthesiologists in the US" - I count eight references to the US in that section and no other countries. It needs to be more generalised, and US specific information should be in a section down the bottom with the other country specific information. Don't have knowledge of the field to fix this myself, but I think the problem is quite blatant!

talk) 12:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Concur, it's very US-centric, especially the first two sections. Touchdown Turnaround (talk) 21:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell this article has clearly been chopped and edited numerous times due to individuals with motives other than clearly defining a term on wikipedia for the uninformed, but seriously...this entry is completely unreadable now. What do the first three sentences even mean? They don't make sense.

"An anesthesiologist (US English) or anaesthetist (British English) is a physician trained in anesthesia and peri-operative medicine. However, in the United Kingdom,[clarification needed] the term anaesthetist has a broader context, to include both[clarification needed] types of practitioners. The source further defines an anesthesiologist as a physician who completes an accredited residency program in anesthesiology, usually four years following medical school."

What are "both types of practitioners"? This makes a reference that hasn't been defined.

What "source" further defines an anesthesiologist?

This whole article should be scrapped, written from scratch to define the term without all the garbage arguments between provider groups, and locked. As is it's rather useless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.8.28.80 (talk) 16:44, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Summary:

There is merit in a complete re-write. There is a lot of ill feeling, esp in the USA I understand about the respective merits of physician and non-physician anaesthetists. In the UK the latter are no longer really developing with a few dozen such colleagues in a modest number of hospitals. This is such a bone of contention, esp in the USA that there is something to be said for an effort to edit this page and lock it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinner doc (talk • contribs) 20:47, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

THERE IS NO ARGUMENT. An anesthesiologist is a physician that has specialty training in the field of anesthesia and either supervises or personally delivers an anesthetic. the term anesthetist refers to a person that delivers an anesthetic. The reason for confusion is that in a lot of areas throughout the world anesthetics are administered by physicians and therefore the distinction between anesthetist and anesthesiologist is not necessary or does not exist. However in some areas of the world anesthetics are delivered by anesthetists that are not necessarily anesthesiologists (physicians) and therefore the distinction between the two is necessary. Please feel free to see the Merriam-Webster definition of the word Anesthesiologist. This portion of the article needs to be re-written in order to accurately reflect the subject or the title should be changed to that of anesthetist which is the broader more inclusive term. It is not only important for this to be accurate for the article, but to maintain the validity of the overall site.Nnedeff (talk) 14:22, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The opening section of this article should be changed. currently it states the following: "An anesthesiologist (US English) or anaesthetist (British English) is a nurse or physician trained in anesthesia and perioperative medicine."

This is a slightly inaccurate and potentially misleading statement.

"An anesthesiologist is a physician that specializes in anesthesiology. An anaesthetist (UK) or anesthetist (US) is a person that administers or provides an anesthetic, this person can be a physician (anesthesiologist) or nurse or other mid-level provider, such as an anesthesia assistant. In many areas of the world anesthetics are administered or provided exclusively by physicians, in these cases referring to a physician or anesthesiologist as an anaesthetist or anesthetist is accurate."

Source: Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of anesthesiologist.

Regarding the confusion and the distinction between the two: The term anaesthetist or anesthetist is a broader term that encompasses anesthesiologists, which are a particular type of anaesthetist or anesthetist. So while anesthesiologists are anesthetists, not all anesthetists are anesthesiologists. This is analogous to the idea that all men are humans, but not all humans are men.

Nnedeff (talk) 15:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree with what your saying and have found a few sources to verify this, I'm unsure how to word it other than just deleting 'anaesthetist' and leave the reference to anaesthesiologists. Could you perhaps make the request in 'Change X to Y' format as the template suggests, or indicate how you think the lead sentence should read? Cheers — Deon^talk 07:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is pretty much the definition of trivia. Articles are not made up of indiscriminate facts. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 11:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928014513/http://www.dgai.de/downloads/MuensteranerErklaerung_Parallelnarkose11-04.pdf to http://www.dgai.de/downloads/MuensteranerErklaerung_Parallelnarkose11-04.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —

I am copy editing this article under GOCE Back-log Elimination Drive click here to know Work is still in progress. for any suggestions on CE work tell me here or on my talk page. Red Pen (talk) 22:11, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit by

If you want a page about physicians then what you need to do is make one entitled PHYSICIAN ANESTHESIOLOGISTS. Not attempt to change the entire page to be about ONE of THREE professions who are experts in Anestheisa delivery and none of them are technicians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmackinnon (talk • contribs) 14:09, 3 September 2018 (UTC) Mmackinnon (talk) 16:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This page is about anesthesia doctors - from the time this page was created in 2004 right up until this edit by Mmackinnon in May 2018, the article dealt solely with the medical specialty of anesthesiology and with physicians specialised in it. I note that since 2009, you have only edited the articles

neutral global standpoint, the word "anesthesiologist" clearly denotes a physician! See [3][4][5][6][7]. A Google search for "nurse anesthesiologist" reveals very little evidence that the phrase exists, other than as a mistaken form of "nurse anesthetist" - and apart from the website you authored. --Kwekubo (talk) 20:48, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I see that this edit redefines the content of the article to include non-physician providers of anesthesia in the definition, and uses several documents shared via a Dropbox account which cannot be externally verified. As per the

The edits and the references are direct from the AANA particularly the email with the policy change recognizing Nurse Anesthesiologist. the existence of Veterinary Anesthesiologists and Dentist Anesthesiologist AND the entomology of the root "ologist" makes it clear this is NOT a term owned by physicians. The ASA data shows this to be the case. This is RIGHT from the ASA research data. https://www.dropbox.com/s/d8srsutoi4xdmul/Slide%206%20MDAs%20are%20Physicians%20VOTERS.png?dl=0 Its already in the packet i postged but clearly you did not read it. Your primary issue seems to be that you are a physician and do not want to accept it but that does not change the facts.Mmackinnon (talk) 22:11, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do see that there dental anesthesiologists (particularly in the US) and veterinary anesthesiologists do both exist, and it would be appropriate to include some mention of these in the article - but these are separate specialties of separate professions and would deserve their their own articles at

WP:RSSELF). Can you provide references to external, verifiable, reliable sources showing that the phrase "nurse anesthesiologist" is actually in use? Thanks --Kwekubo (talk) 23:09, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@Mmackinnon: I've asked twice that you please discuss this matter. I'm going to go ahead and make the changes I've described above. If you revert without responding here, then I'm going to have to file a complaint against you at ANI for disruptive editing by reverting without discussing.— Kwekubo (talk) 22:07, 16 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

@kwekubo I have replied, the evidence is clear and i stand by what i said. The only reason you want to change the article is because you have a vested interest in it. However, the etymology of the work "anesthesiologist" has not changed no matter how much YOU want it to. Nurse Anesthesiologist has been accepted as a descriptive term just as dentist and vet anesthesiologists has been. This is nothing new. The article is "anesthesiologist" not PHYSICIANS. And there are 3 types here in the USA.Mmackinnon (talk) 23:36, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mmackinnon: What "evidence" are you talking about? When you "stand by what [you] said" that is a statement of opinion not fact. Fake sources and logical fallacies abound. Unfortunately another example of militant CRNA tactics. Claim to be something you are not, and then accuse others of impropriety when called out for it. So because many patients do not realize their anesthesiologist is a physician, you've decided to latch on to that term? In other words, instead of increasing patient awareness of Anesthesiologists and CRNAs, you try to muddy the waters and spread disinformation. I don't call myself a "physician anesthesiologist", I call myself an anesthesiologist. This is a term that has been used since its inception to denote a PHYSICIAN. I suspect if you had it your way you wouldn't call yourself a "nurse anesthesiologist", you would abbreviate it to just anesthesiologist. Also, it does not take full time 7-8 years to train to be a CRNA with a DNP. Look up the curriculum. Eikenhein (talk) 00:15, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have fully protected this page for a week to allow consensus to be formed on the talk page. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:54, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]