Home >Newsletters >March 2003>Features
 
ASA NEWSLETTER
 
 
March 2003
Volume 67
Number 3

State Regulatory Issues in AA Practice

Arthur M. Boudreaux, M.D.
John M. Zerwas, M.D.


The Alabama Experience
In all states, a medical practice act and similar legislation establish a state medical board with the authority to regulate the practice of medicine. The board is given, among other rights, the authority to promulgate rules and guidelines for the practice of medicine, the responsibility of licensing and credentialing physicians, overseeing and regulating prescriptive authority and disciplining physicians who violate the established rules or state laws. In many jurisdictions, the state’s medical board also has statutory authority over the activity of physician extenders, excluding nursing personnel who are usually regulated by a state nursing board. Anesthesiologist assistants (AAs) fall into this last category.

Physician extenders may function under either delegatory or regulatory rules established by the state medical board. Legislative language determines whether the rules are delegatory or regulatory. Under delegatory rules, a board may allow a physician to utilize the services of a physician extender. The duties of the extender are outlined and determined by the physician and delegated based upon training and experience. The duties (or scope of practice) of the extender must usually be approved by the medical board and also by the operating bylaws or rules of any institution where the physician extender may work. A physician assumes liability for the actions of the physician extender. Under regulatory rules, the medical board defines what minimal training and experience, examination requirements and any other pertinent characteristics the physician extender must possess in order to obtain certification or licensure to function in that state. The scope of practice is determined and detailed by the state medical board. The license of the physician extender is typically linked to a licensed physician in that state. Alabama is an example of a regulatory state.

In 1994, an AA student from Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, became engaged to marry a medical student training in Birmingham, Alabama. He inquired about potential employment opportunities in Alabama. An anesthesiology group in Birmingham was willing to hire him if he could obtain permission from the state medical board to work in Alabama. Several anesthesiologists wrote letters to the board on his behalf, and the board decided to consider the request. The medical board determined that an Alabama statute outlining the classification and function of physician assistants (PAs) allowed the potential new category of anesthesiologist assistant. Under the requirements of the Alabama Administrative Procedures Act, public testimony and comment must be solicited whenever the medical board decides to add, amend or delete a rule. Adding a category of provider, in this instance an AA, required an amendment of an existing rule that established PAs. There was much opposition to the potential new physician extender class. Nurse anesthetists opposed the rule change, citing inadequate training and experience on the part of AAs. General physician assistants opposed the rule change on the grounds that AAs did not take their national PA examination and might try to practice as general PAs. Physical therapists were concerned that an AA might perform physical therapy. Even the cardiovascular perfusionists had concerns that bypass pump operation might be something the AA would want to perform. According to a senior medical board member, the board received more comments and letters on this issue than any other in its history. The board was so intrigued that a special subcommittee was appointed to investigate and make recommendations. They visited practices in Georgia and spoke with faculty from the Emory University training program. Their recommendation was to approve the new class. The board approved AAs as a new class of provider and promulgated rules and a specific scope of practice utilizing the Georgia regulations as a guide. AAs may now obtain a license through the Alabama State Board of Medical Examiners to function in the state. To date, there are approximately a dozen of these providers working in three major cities in Alabama.

The Texas Experience
In 1997, Greater Houston Anesthesiology, P.A. (GHA) recognized the need for additional dependent anesthesia providers. This need arose out of a shortage of qualified anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists that developed in the mid-1990s. Adverse changes in the medicoeconomic environment for anesthesiologists drove most qualified medical graduates into other specialties. To date, there continues to be limited availability of qualified anesthesiologists and anesthetists.

During this personnel shortage, GHA faced a variety of new obligations and opportunities in the Houston area. After an appropriate period of due diligence, a decision was made to augment GHA’s existing anesthesia care team with AAs to optimize the delivery of physician-directed anesthesia care.

Prior to their introduction into Texas, GHA sought out the guidance and approval of the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners (TSBME) to ensure that supervision of AAs would be allowed under the Texas State Medical Practice Act. After a presentation to the TSBME Standing Orders Committee in September 1997, it was deemed appropriate to utilize AAs as defined by the Medical Practice Act, Section 3.06 (d)(1), (2), (3) and (4). In a letter of confirmation from the president of TSBME, he stated: “This Section of this Act pertains not only to anesthesiologist assistants but to any qualified and properly trained person or persons acting under the physician’s supervision conducting any medical act which a reasonable and prudent physician would find is within the scope of sound medical judgment to delegate if, in the opinion of the delegating physician, the act can be properly and safely performed by the person to whom the medical act is delegated and the act is performed in its customary manner, not in violation of any other statute, and the person does not hold himself out to the public as being authorized to practice medicine.”

Subsequent to this opinion, TSBME promulgated “Guidelines for Anesthesiologist Assistants.” Though the guidelines originally recommended a 1:2 supervision ratio, this ratio has recently been changed to 1:4. The guidelines also recommend that the supervising anesthesiologist be board-certified. This document can be accessed at <www.tsbme.state.tx.us/policy/anassist.htm>.

In both the hospital and ambulatory surgical setting, AAs have proven to be valuable, highly qualified members of the anesthesia care team in Texas. In addition to the Houston area, AAs have worked in Dallas, San Antonio and Galveston. All government and commercial insurers recognize payment for anesthesia services involving AAs.





   
Arthur M. Boudreaux, M.D., is Professor and Vice-Chair for Clinical Affairs, Department of Anesthesiology, and Assistant Chief of Staff, University of Alabama-Birmingham.
Arthur M. Boudreaux, M.D.

    John M. Zerwas, M.D., is Past President of Greater Houston Anesthesiology, P.A., Houston, Texas.
John M. Zerwas, M.D.
return to top


 

FEATURES

Anesthesiologist Assistants


ARTICLES

DEPARTMENTS


The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views, policies or actions of the American Society of Anesthesiologists.

NL Archives

Information for Authors