Thank you so much for watching and your comment. I really appreciate it!

Thanks for watching!

Thanks for watching!

Thanks for watching and following along! If you decide to become a physician, your RN background will be *so* valuable. Either way, you’ll have a gratifying career - the long road is absolutely worth the hard work. Good luck to you and feel free to reach out with questions along the way!

@@AmandaSXiMD thank you. Unfortunately I screwed up my GPA big time but I only have my associates degree so there is some hope I can still fix it. Though I am considering getting my np before I apply to either crna or med school.

Become a CRNA, you will thank me later

@@hellochildren69 why ?

Make sure that when you're a rising MS4 that you sign up! The link to sign up are on my blog: blog.amandaxi.com - I've had MS2s sign up, but it's really designed for a higher level student, so I suggest waiting a couple years before participating. Looking forward to seeing you on a future call!

Thanks for watching!

Thanks for watching and commenting! I think that bioengineering really lends itself well to the field of anesthesiology (I am certainly not alone in my engineering background within the specialty!)

Thank you for your comment! There are certainly a number of engineers that find anesthesiology to be a rewarding specialty and as I said in my video, there are plenty of ways that physician practice of anesthesiology will remain relevant for many more years to come [as long as you keep an open mind]!

I have the final authority. Not anyone else. Not an MD or DO or anyone else.

@@edwardherrera846 CRNA cringe!

Thanks for watching! Dexamethasone is utilized for a variety of purposes, most commonly as an antiemetic, but it also has been utilized for airway edema, for intracranial swelling (mass effect), and other purposes. Dexamethasone has been demonstrated to be a great antiemetic, but it's peak effect can be 2 hours later so patients with longer procedures benefit more from it. Hope this helps.

This is an excellent question! I wish I could share all of my thoughts on the matter in this little text box, but it all boils down to a couple of things: 1. Power in numbers [there are not a lot of us], 2. Money, 3. Culture [doctors in GENERAL are horrible at advocacy; it's not part of our medical school curriculum and honestly, who has the energy to advocate during the 10 years of training to become an attending?]. This all being said, no specialty is protected from changes in how we practice, so make sure you have this attitude going into your career and you'll have a gratifying career!

I think the formation of usable AI requires collaboration between teams that have expertise in clinical medicine AND the technology. But I agree, having a broad background will definitely be valuable! Thanks for watching and commenting!

Thanks for watching and commenting!

I use the term "physician anesthesiologist" because despite the fact that it is redundant, many patients/laypeople have never heard the term "anesthetist" (and even if they have heard it, may just go ahead and say "anesthesiologist" anyway, because "anesthetist" is kind of hard to say and no one explicitly explained the distinction) and may take "anesthesiologist" to be a synonym for "anesthetist" or "anaesthesia provider" (terms which do also apply to anesthesiologists). You could continue to use the term "anesthesiologist" with no qualifiers and be potentially confusing to patients/laypeople, and when it becomes clear that you've confused them use it as a teaching opportunity to explain that "anesthesiologists are specifically physicians who have completed an MD or DO program and passed the COMLEX or USMLE (assuming US based)" - something that is true by convention only, because etymologically an anesthesiologist is one who studies anaesthesia while an anesthetist is one who anesthetizes (i.e., administers anesthesia) - and thus both are accurate descriptions of MD, DO, CRNA, and CAA anesthetists - and then go on to explain how it's like "all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares". Or, you could get out ahead of it and use the extra 3 syllables to say "physician anesthesiologist" because, while technically redundant, it imparts clarity to the uninitiated, preventing you from having to carry on an entire conversation with a person laboring under the misconception that you were using "anesthesiologist" to mean any provider of anesthesia when you meant specifically a physician, then having to go back and explain at length. Put in a different perspective, an NP or a PA could totally stake claim to the term "intensivist" or "hospitalist", provided that is their role. It becomes necessary to specify - intensivist/CC PA, intensivist/CC NP, intensivist/CC doc; hospitalist NP/PA/DOC; physician/midlevel intensivist. Given the context of the conversation (different providers of anesthesia), and the number of "ists" that can be applied to midlevels, it feels completely appropriate to specify "physician anesthesiologist" even though technically redundant. Again, because it is more by convention than by any real, well defined factor that it feels appropriate to call a midlevel an intensivist, hospitalist, internist or nocturnist - terms which also apply to physicians - but inappropriate to call them cardiologists, nephrologists, urologists, radiologists, or pulmonologists - terms which we reserve for physicians, and instead call them by nephrology/cardiology/pulmonology/urology/radiology PA/NP. You could hardly blame someone for not knowing that "anesthesiologist" belongs to the latter group of "ist" labels rather than the former. Might as well make the conversation - one which might include uninitiated laypeople - easy on everyone and use the most clear term, even if it is technically redundant.

Thank you for your comment. Agreed, the future is uncertain. I think it's important that we keep an open mind about what our jobs may look like in the future since change is inevitable.

@@AmandaSXiMD With AAs, CRNAs, and MDAs in the anesthesiology field, what do you think job outlook/security is looking like for AAs and CRNAs in the future (2030-2040)?

I believe that anesthesia services will continue to be in-demand, especially with out of OR anesthesia growing. Ultimately, I believe there will be a need for all of us!

You're welcome 😊

I enjoy working with them!

Thank you for your comment! I agree that it's so important to have an understanding of physiology and I'd say, it's even MORE important to have a good rapport with patients in order to participate in shared decision making and provide informed consent. It is absolutely our responsibility to maintain patient care and safety!

Thanks for watching! I don't think it's as simple as taking "too many shortcuts" here in the U.S. - I am proud of the care we provide here and love the support we have from various team members. However, there are administrative and systems issues that are really inefficient and sometimes enacted to optimize the revenue stream rather than to optimize patient care. These inefficiencies make it hard for clinicians at any level to want to stay in medicine.

@@AmandaSXiMD thanks for ur reply. Looking forward for ur new videos!

Thanks for watching!

It is definitely interesting to bring up the ethical dilemmas in AI. We have a long way to go in this realm!

300 years it’s already happening. Go talk to radiologists

From what i’ve seen they are worried because our rates and pay are going up because we are in demand and they don’t like it. They are still paid more than us and yes they should stop worrying about our pay and work on their abilities to collaborate and adjust to the changing healthcare system because most likely it’s not going to get better or change to where crnas and AAs are not needed because everywhere is short staffed.

The fact is that CRNAs are being utilized more due to being paid 150 to 200k plus less than an anesthesiologist and able to practice on their own. It is naive to say can't we all just work together? Because eventually with the current model of profits over patients hospitals will in my opinion kill off anesthesiologists completely 10 years from now. CRNA'S have been coming out saying oh I've done better work or know more than the MD anesthesiologist so it shouldn't matter. It's a sad reality, but when lawsuits start piling up due to malpractice for using CRNAs over MDs it might just be too late at that point.

I disagree. Using the false history to justify your present claim is deceptive. Nurses who held a bag in their hands back in the day is not comparable to what people in the anesthesia field do today. And to say that CRNA and anesthesiologists have the same knowledge. Disrespectful. If CRNAs wanted understand the body and handle the "most difficult cases," they should go to medical school. Remember you are the minority who wants their ego stroked and you're in a echo chamber. If you want the prestige and actual knowledge, GO TO MEDICAL SCHOOL since you're smart enough.

@@anarchistonsunsetdrive7813boohoo you sound very mad. What exactly do you want? Can you even articulate it without screaming “go to medical school“?? If they wanted to they would, and they’d do well there. Try being a doctor without other health care staff and see how that works for you. The need to massage your ego is bigger for you than the care your patients need. Do better

@@j.jellis7770by month 2 of medical school you’ll be learning things that none of my friends who are NPs or PAs were taught. I would imagine that it would be a similar situation when comparing CRNAs and Anesthesiologists. It’s not an ego thing for everyone who thinks it’s laughable CRNAs will be taking more challenging cases. Some of us know and have seen the difference of depth in education.

It's all a team effort!

100%. This comment is important.

In practice, this hasn't happened. Either way, a lot of places that can use anesthesiologists/CRNAs/AAs!

Yes, it's so important for anesthesiologists to remain vigilant at all times!

Where is a source for any of this? Because it is not true.