Physician Assistant Training, Collaboration, and Practice Act Legislation: Perspectives From Practicing Physician Assistants.

Betty Hulse, William E Schweinle, Katie Kassin, Nancy D Trimble
{"title":"Physician Assistant Training, Collaboration, and Practice Act Legislation: Perspectives From Practicing Physician Assistants.","authors":"Betty Hulse, William E Schweinle, Katie Kassin, Nancy D Trimble","doi":"10.1097/JPA.0000000000000628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study examines training, experience, and collaborative practices of physician assistants (PAs) with employment experience and their perspectives on practice act legislation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Mixed method study with quantitative and qualitative data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred eighty participants completed the survey. During clinical employment, 81.05% of respondents reported physicians participated in training. However, supervising physicians trained only 43.46%; 56.54% reported being trained by nurse practitioners (NPs), PAs, and/or other physicians. Onsite collaboration with physicians was reported by 87.2%. Supervising physician involvement was reported by 67.3%, and of these, 59% collaborated with PAs, NPs, and/or other physicians as well. One-third collaborated only with NPs, PAs, and/or other physicians. Daily/weekly collaboration with a supervising physician was reported by 78.89% in their first position and 54.87% in their current/most recent position; 77.22% collaborated with NPs, PAs, and/or other physicians in their first position and 71.68% in their current/most recent position. Most (64.44%) felt PAs should not be legally required to have physician supervision. Most (76.12%) felt care quality would not decrease if supervision were lifted. Most (74.44%) agreed that PAs are hired less frequently than NPs in states where physician supervision is required for PA but not NPs.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Findings suggest that team-based practice is already the current structure of PA clinical training and collaboration with PAs receiving significant support from physicians who are not supervising physicians and other nonphysician practitioners. Establishing oversight at the practice level is supported by this practice structure. Determining effects of practice act legislation on employment training, collaboration, and hiring practices warrants further research.</p>","PeriodicalId":39231,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000628","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study examines training, experience, and collaborative practices of physician assistants (PAs) with employment experience and their perspectives on practice act legislation.

Methods: Mixed method study with quantitative and qualitative data.

Results: One hundred eighty participants completed the survey. During clinical employment, 81.05% of respondents reported physicians participated in training. However, supervising physicians trained only 43.46%; 56.54% reported being trained by nurse practitioners (NPs), PAs, and/or other physicians. Onsite collaboration with physicians was reported by 87.2%. Supervising physician involvement was reported by 67.3%, and of these, 59% collaborated with PAs, NPs, and/or other physicians as well. One-third collaborated only with NPs, PAs, and/or other physicians. Daily/weekly collaboration with a supervising physician was reported by 78.89% in their first position and 54.87% in their current/most recent position; 77.22% collaborated with NPs, PAs, and/or other physicians in their first position and 71.68% in their current/most recent position. Most (64.44%) felt PAs should not be legally required to have physician supervision. Most (76.12%) felt care quality would not decrease if supervision were lifted. Most (74.44%) agreed that PAs are hired less frequently than NPs in states where physician supervision is required for PA but not NPs.

Discussion: Findings suggest that team-based practice is already the current structure of PA clinical training and collaboration with PAs receiving significant support from physicians who are not supervising physicians and other nonphysician practitioners. Establishing oversight at the practice level is supported by this practice structure. Determining effects of practice act legislation on employment training, collaboration, and hiring practices warrants further research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医生助理培训、合作和执业法案立法:执业助理医师的观点。
导言:本研究探讨了有工作经验的医生助理(PA)的培训、经验和合作实践,以及他们对执业法案立法的看法:方法: 采用定量和定性数据的混合方法研究:结果:180 名参与者完成了调查。在临床工作期间,81.05% 的受访者称医生参与了培训。然而,主管医生仅培训了 43.46%;56.54% 的受访者表示接受过执业护士 (NP)、助理医师和/或其他医生的培训。87.2%的受访者表示与医生进行了现场合作。据报告,67.3%的人有主管医生的参与,其中 59% 的人还与 PA、NP 和/或其他医生合作。三分之一的人仅与 NP、PA 和/或其他医生合作。据报告,78.89%的人在其第一份工作中每天/每周与主管医生合作,54.87%的人在其目前/最近的工作中每天/每周与主管医生合作;77.22%的人在其第一份工作中与 NP、PA 和/或其他医生合作,71.68%的人在其目前/最近的工作中与 NP、PA 和/或其他医生合作。大多数人(64.44%)认为法律不应要求助理医师接受医生的监督。大多数人(76.12%)认为,如果取消监督,护理质量不会下降。大多数人(74.44%)同意,在要求 PA 接受医生监督而不要求 NP 接受医生监督的州,聘用 PA 的频率低于聘用 NP 的频率:讨论:研究结果表明,以团队为基础的实践已经成为当前助理医师临床培训和合作的结构,助理医师从非主管医师和其他非医师从业者那里获得了大量支持。这种实践结构支持在实践层面建立监督。要确定执业法案立法对就业培训、合作和雇佣实践的影响,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
期刊最新文献
Using Four-Component Instructional Design to Create an Interactive Point-of-Care Ultrasound Curriculum for Physician Associate Students. Strengthening the Multiple-Choice Assessment: Improving Item-Writing Skills of Physician Assistant Educators. Physician Assistant Training, Collaboration, and Practice Act Legislation: Perspectives From Practicing Physician Assistants. Compliance With Accreditation Standards on Diversity: Is Institutional Support the Missing Link? Viewing Medical Education Through the Lens of Second Language Acquisition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1