Skip to main content

Perfusionist (What’s That?) Licensing: Making Heart Surgery More Dangerous


Do you know what a perfusionist is? I didn’t, either, but it’s one of the many occupations that are licensed in the State of Oklahoma. However, we at the 1889 Institute are gradually looking into each licensed occupation to learn if there is justification for forcing people to ask the government’s permission to earn money doing it. So, we got curious about these perfusionists, about which we knew nothing, and why they are licensed (our report).

It came as no surprise that perfusionists use their skills in medicine. Nearly every occupation involved in medicine, other than custodians, especially in Oklahoma, is licensed. Yet, the majority of states do not license perfusionists. Perfusionists do perform an important service. They monitor and operate the machines that regulate blood and air flow of patients having heart surgery.

And perfusionists have accidentally killed people, sometimes due to something as simple as failing to notice a kinked hose.

We have previously reviewed 11 other occupations licensed in Oklahoma, asking two simple questions. First, is it likely people will be significantly harmed if the occupation is not practiced properly? Second, is there some reason markets and civil law fail to protect people? We have answered “No” to both of these questions 11 times. And, only if the answer to both questions is “Yes” would we determine that licensing is justified.

But this time, the answer to the first question is clearly “Yes.” Patients lying on an operating room table, under anesthesia, with a heart stopped and undergoing dissection, are clearly vulnerable if the person charged with keeping the blood flowing and oxygenated neglects that important work.

Nevertheless, the answer to the second question is clearly “No.” If there were some kind of inherent market and/or legal failure, surely all fifty states, rather than a minority, would require individuals to ask permission to be a perfusionist through licensing. Why isn’t this the case?

The answer is that people are already essentially asking permission to act as perfusionists. Surgeons select the perfusionists with whom they work, and surgeons are the ultimate authorities facing potential liability should something go wrong in the operating room. That liability is a much stronger motive for selecting skilled, attentive perfusionists than any motive a licensing board will ever have, since the board faces no consequences at all.

Two facts expose the lie that licensing perfusionists in Oklahoma was ever about public safety. First, the licensing law included a grandfather provision, which made it easy for any bad actor already working as a perfusionist at the time to continue doing so. Second, there are so few perfusionists in Oklahoma and nationwide that they are often in the operating room exhausted and lacking sleep after attending too many surgeries. At least one expert believes the vast majority of perfusionist errors are due to fatigue and stress.

Licensing only makes perfusionists scarcer, especially since the nearest training program to Oklahoma is in Houston, Texas. That artificially limited supply helps to explain why perfusionists, who average more than $120k per year, are worth the money they earn. That scarcity, partly caused by licensing, also explains why patients are at risk from groggy, over-worked perfusionists.

Byron Schlomach is Director of the 1889 Institute and can be reached at bschlomach@1889institute.org.


Popular posts from this blog

About Those Roads in Texas

A s Sooner fans head south for the OU-Texas game next week, they will encounter a phenomenon most of us are familiar with: as you cruise across the Red River suddenly the road gets noticeably smoother. The painted lane stripes get a little brighter and the roadside “Welcome to Texas” visitors’ center gleams in the sunlight, a modern and well-maintained reminder of how much more money the Lonestar State spends on public infrastructure than little old Oklahoma. Or does it? Why are the roads so much, well… better in Texas? Turns out, it isn’t the amount of money spent, at least not when compared to the overall size of the state’s economy and personal income of its inhabitants. Research conducted by 1889 Institute’s Byron Schlomach reveals that Oklahoma actually spends significantly more on roads than Texas as a percentage of both state GDP and personal income . And that was data from 2016, before Oklahoma’s tax and spending increases of recent years. The gap is likely gr...

School Choice: I Have Erred

I should point out, before the reader gets into this piece, that these are my personal thoughts. Right around last Labor Day, I suddenly had a thought. I quickly made a calculation and realized that, as of the day after Labor Day, I’ve worked full-time in public policy for 25 years – a quarter of a century. While there really is nothing fundamentally more special about a 25 th anniversary than a 24 th or 26 th one, it is a widely-recognized demarcation point. Therefore, it seems worthwhile to take time and write down reflections on my career. My work has touched on several policy areas, but I’ve been thinking a lot about public education lately. That’s the area I practically swam in when I started my career, so here are my thoughts. On the day after Labor Day in 1994 I started work for a member of the Texas House of Representatives. He was the member who always carried a voucher bill, an issue for which I was thrilled to work. By that time, my wife had homeschooled our dau...

The Problem of Diffuse Costs and Concentrated Benefits

Do you ever find yourself observing a seemingly illogical government program , spending decision, or other strange practice and ask “how is it that no one has fixed that?” If you are like me, you encounter this phenomenon regularly. This often takes the form of a curious headline (Save Federal Funding for the Cowboy Poets!) that most people see and can’t believe is real. I would like to suggest that this phenomenon often results from the problem of diffuse costs and concentrated benefits. To understand this concept, consider a hypothetical law that assessed a $1 tax on everyone in the United States with the proceeds to be given to one individual for unrestricted use as he sees fit. The people harmed by such a law—the individual taxpayers—will not be very motivated to spend the time and effort to convince Congress to change the law. They might resent the dollar taken from them for a silly cause they don’t support, but the lost dollar isn’t worth the trouble of doing something about i...