Dataset Information

Physician associate/assistant contributions to cancer diagnosis in primary care: a rapid systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Symptom recognition and timely referral in primary care are crucial for the early diagnosis of cancer. Physician assistants or associates (PAs) have been introduced in 18 healthcare systems across the world, with numbers increasing in some cases to address primary care physician shortages. Little is known about their impact on suspected cancer recognition and referral. This review sought to summarise findings from observational studies conducted in high income countries on PAs' competence and performance on processes concerned with the quality of recognition and referral of suspected cancer in primary care.

Method

A rapid systematic review of international peer-reviewed literature was performed. Searches were undertaken on OVID, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases (2009-2019). Studies were eligible if they reported on PA skills, processes and outcomes relevant to suspected cancer recognition and referral. Title and abstract screening was followed by full paper review and data extraction. Synthesis of qualitative and quantitative findings was undertaken on three themes: deployment, competence, and performance. Preliminary findings were discussed with an expert advisory group to inform interpretation.

Results

From 883 references, 15 eligible papers were identified, of which 13 were from the USA. Seven studies reported on general clinical processes in primary care that would support cancer diagnosis, most commonly ordering of diagnostic tests (n = 6) and referrals to specialists (n = 4). Fewer papers reported on consultation processes, such as examinations or history taking (n = 3) Six papers considered PAs' competence and performance on cancer screening. PAs performed similarly to primary care physicians on rates of diagnostic tests ordered, referrals and patient outcomes (satisfaction, malpractice, emergency visits). No studies reported on the timeliness of cancer diagnosis.

Conclusion

This review of peer-reviewed literature combined with advisory group interpretation suggests the introduction of PAs into primary care may maintain the quality of referrals and diagnostic tests needed to support cancer diagnosis. It also highlights the lack of research on several aspects of PAs' roles, including outcomes of the diagnostic process.

SUBMITTER: Sheringham J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8254243 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The escalating amount of kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) represents a significant dilemma for primary care providers. As the number of physician assistants (PAs) has been steadily increasing in primary care in the United States, the utilization of these healthcare professionals presents a solution for the care of post-kidney transplant recipients. A physician assistant (PA) is a state licensed healthcare professional who practices medicine under physician supervision and can alleviate some of the increasing demands for primary patient care. Here we provide an outline of the crucial components and considerations for PAs caring for kidney transplant recipients. These include renal function and routine screenings, drug monitoring (both immunosuppressive and therapeutic), pre-existing and co-existing conditions, immunizations, nutrition, physical activity, infection, cancer, and the patient's emotional well-being. PAs should routinely monitor renal function and blood chemistry of KTRs. Drug monitoring of KTRs is a crucial responsibility of the PA because of the possible side-effects and potential drug-drug interactions. Therefore, PAs should obtain a careful and detailed patient history from KTRs. PAs should be aware of pre- and co-existing conditions of KTRs as this impacts treatment decisions. Regarding immunization, PAs should avoid administering vaccines containing live or attenuated viruses to KTRs. Because obesity following kidney transplantation is associated with decreased allograft survival, PAs should encourage KTRs to maintain a balanced diet with limited sugar. In addition, KTRs should be urged to gradually increase their levels of physical activity over subsequent years following surgery. PAs should be aware that immunosuppressive medications diminish immune defenses and make KTRs more susceptible to bacterial, viral, and fungal infections. Moreover, KTRs should be screened routinely for cancer due to the higher risk of development from immunosuppressive therapy. PAs must remain cognizant of the emotional well-being of the KTR, as many transplant patients struggle with fear, frustration, and acceptance.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care provision is important in the delivery of health care but many countries face primary care workforce challenges. Increasing demand, enlarged workloads, and current and anticipated physician shortages in many countries have led to the introduction of mid-level professionals, such as Physician Assistants (PAs).ObjectiveThis systematic review aimed to appraise the evidence of the contribution of PAs within primary care, defined for this study as general practice, relevant to the UK or similar systems.MethodsMedline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, BNI, SSCI and SCOPUS databases were searched from 1950 to 2010.Eligibility criteriaPAs with a recognised PA qualification, general practice/family medicine included and the findings relevant to it presented separately and an English language journal publication. Two reviewers independently identified relevant publications, assessed quality using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tools and extracted findings. Findings were classified and synthesised narratively as factors related to structure, process or outcome of care.Results2167 publications were identified, of which 49 met our inclusion criteria, with 46 from the United States of America (USA). Structure: approximately half of PAs are reported to work in primary care in the USA with good support and a willingness to employ amongst doctors.Processthe majority of PAs' workload is the management of patients with acute presentations. PAs tend to see younger patients and a different caseload to doctors, and require supervision. Studies of costs provide mixed results.Outcomesacceptability to patients and potential patients is consistently found to be high, and studies of appropriateness report positively. Overall the evidence was appraised as of weak to moderate quality, with little comparative data presented and little change in research questions over time.Limitationsidentification of a broad range of studies examining 'contribution' made meta analysis or meta synthesis untenable.ConclusionsThe research evidence of the contribution of PAs to primary care was mixed and limited. However, the continued growth in employment of PAs in American primary care suggests that this professional group is judged to be of value by increasing numbers of employers. Further specific studies are needed to fill in the gaps in our knowledge about the effectiveness of PAs' contribution to the international primary care workforce.

Project description:There is a widespread perception that the increasing proportion of female physicians in most developed countries is contributing to a primary care service shortage because females work less and provide less patient care compared with their male counterparts. There has, however, been no comprehensive investigation of the effects of primary care physician (PCP) workforce feminization on service supply. We undertook a systematic review to examine the current evidence that quantifies the effect of feminization on time spent working, intensity and scope of work, and practice characteristics. We searched Medline, Embase, and Web of Science from 1991 to 2013 using variations of the terms 'primary care', 'women', 'manpower', and 'supply and distribution'; screened the abstracts of all articles; and entered those meeting our inclusion criteria into a data abstraction tool. Original research comparing male to female PCPs on measures of years of practice, time spent working, intensity of work, scope of work, or practice characteristics was included. We screened 1,271 unique abstracts and selected 74 studies for full-text review. Of these, 34 met the inclusion criteria. Years of practice, hours of work, intensity of work, scope of work, and practice characteristics featured in 12%, 53%, 42%, 50%, and 21% of studies respectively. Female PCPs self-report fewer hours of work than male PCPs, have fewer patient encounters, and deliver fewer services, but spend longer with their patients during a contact and deal with more separate presenting problems in one visit. They write fewer prescriptions but refer to diagnostic services and specialist physicians more often. The studies included in this review suggest that the feminization of the workforce is likely to have a small negative impact on the availability of primary health care services, and that the drivers of observed differences between male and female PCPs are complex and nuanced. The true scale of the impact of these findings on future effective physician supply is difficult to determine with currently available evidence, given that few studies looked at trends over time, and results from those that did are inconsistent. Additional research examining gender differences in practice patterns and scope of work is warranted.

Project description:RationaleHospitals are increasingly using critical care outreach teams (CCOTs) to respond to patients deteriorating outside intensive care units (ICUs). CCOT staffing is variable across hospitals and optimal team composition is unknown.ObjectivesTo assess whether adding a critical care medicine trained physician assistant (CCM-PA) to a critical care outreach team (CCOT) impacts clinical and process outcomes.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of two cohorts-one with a CCM-PA added to the CCOT (intervention hospital) and one with no staffing change (control hospital)-at two facilities in the same system. All adults in the emergency department and hospital for whom CCOT consultation was requested from October 1, 2012-March 16, 2013 (pre-intervention) and January 5-March 31, 2014 (post-intervention) were included. We performed difference-in-differences analyses comparing pre- to post-intervention periods in the intervention versus control hospitals to assess the impact of adding the CCM-PA to the CCOT.Measurements and main resultsOur cohort consisted of 3,099 patients (control hospital: 792 pre- and 595 post-intervention; intervention hospital: 1114 pre- and 839 post-intervention). Intervention hospital patients tended to be younger, with fewer comorbidities, but with similar severity of acute illness. Across both periods, hospital mortality (p = 0.26) and hospital length of stay (p = 0.64) for the intervention vs control hospitals were similar, but time-to-transfer to the ICU was longer for the intervention hospital (13.3-17.0 vs 11.5-11.6 hours, p = 0.006). Using the difference-in-differences approach, we found a 19.2% reduction (95 confidence interval: 6.7%-31.6%, p = 0.002) in the time-to-transfer to the ICU associated with adding the CCM-PA to the CCOT; we found no difference in hospital mortality (p = 0.20) or length of stay (p = 0.52).ConclusionsAdding a CCM-PA to the CCOT was associated with a notable reduction in time-to-transfer to the ICU; hospital mortality and length of stay were not impacted.