In view of the paucity of high-level primary evidence in this area, it is not possible to draw a conclusion regarding differences in patient safety as a function of provider type. There are difficulties in classifying events as "anaesthesia-related", and also in the variable definitions of "supervision" and "anaesthesia care team". We suggest that existing attempts to show differences in outcome might usefully be complemented by studies examining measures of anaesthetic process.

Summary Professional conflict between nurse anaesthetists and anaesthesiologists in the United States of America is well known in the UK but has not been explored and documented in detail. We present an account, based on critical analysis of published literature and other documentary evidence, of the historical, professional and financial factors which have led to this. In the USA, anaesthesia developed as a nursing specialty until physicians began to take on this work after the Second World War. Payment arrangements between the 1960s and the 1990s made anaesthesiology a lucrative career choice for medical graduates and this led both to considerable growth in the number of anaesthesiologists and to a strengthening of the resolve of nurse anaesthetists to retain their scope of work and preserve their professional status. Changes in payment regulations in the 1980s and 1990s threatened anaesthesiologists' income and led to re‐appraisal of evidence over relative cost‐effectiveness and safety of different provider models. More recently, the terms of engagement have shifted from disputes over evidence to political lobbying to promote the professional capabilities and status of each of the anaesthesia providers. Factors of relevance to possible changes in the provision of anaesthesia in the United Kingdom are highlighted.

No abstract

No abstract