Post stroke pain: Is there under-diagnosis in Black versus White patients?

Stroke incidence is higher and stroke outcomes are poorer in Black patients compared to White patients. Poststroke pain, however, is not a well understood stroke outcome. Using the National Institutes of Health All of Us Research Program database, we hypothesized that the dataset would demonstrate proportionately higher relative risk of poststroke pain in the Black poststroke patient population compared to the White poststroke patient population. However, our analysis showed that Black stroke patients were diagnosed with poststroke pain at a similar rate as White stroke patients. As our results are not consistent with other poststroke outcomes in the literature, this study identifies a potentially underdiagnosed patient population, highlighting the need for further research.

Are Physician Assistants Able to Correctly Identify Prescribing Errors? A Cross-Sectional Study.

PURPOSE: (1) To describe how often physician assistant (PA) students correctly identify prescribing errors and (2) examine between-cohort differences on ability to correctly identify prescribing errors. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 2 cohorts of PA students at one institution. Students were presented with 3 hypothetical prescriptions, 2 of which contained a prescribing error. For each prescription, students were asked to (1) identify whether an error occurred and (2) indicate the type of error. A simple Poisson regression model analyzed the data. RESULTS: We received responses from 130 students (72.6% response rate). Approximately 12% (12.3%, n = 16) correctly identified whether all 3 prescriptions were correct. The median number of correctly identified prescriptions was 1 (interquartile range = 1). There was not a statistically significant between-cohort difference identifying the correct number of prescriptions (ß = 0.27, P = .10). CONCLUSION: Physician assistant students' prescribing error identification was similar to previous research in medical and nursing students. Efforts to improve prescribing training are critical to ensure patient safety.

What Physician Assistants Prefer in a Postprofessional Doctorate Program: A Cross-Sectional Rating and Rankings Study.

PURPOSE: The physician assistant (PA) literature has focused on the implications of creating an entry-level doctoral degree; however, there is scant primary literature on postprofessional doctorates, which are becoming more popular as the number of institutions offering them increases. The purposes of this project were to: (1) describe interest and motivation of currently practicing PAs to enroll in a postprofessional doctorate program and (2) identify the most- and least-preferred attributes of a postprofessional doctorate program. METHODS: This was a quantitative cross-sectional survey of recent alumni from one institution. Measures included interest in obtaining a postprofessional doctorate, a nonrandomized Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) exercise, and motivators for enrolling in a postprofessional doctorate. The main outcome of interest was the BWS standardized score for each attribute. RESULTS: The research team received 172 eligible responses (n = 172, response rate = 25.83%). Results indicate that 47.67% of respondents (n = 82) expressed interest in a postprofessional doctorate. The most preferred doctorate program attribute was a clinically based program, ending with a residency, conferring a Doctor of Medical Science (DMSc) degree, with a hybrid course delivery. DISCUSSION: This sample included various interests, motivations, and preferred program attributes. Understanding these factors may help inform the design and redesign of doctoral programs.

Adaptation and factor structure of three psychometric instruments measuring behavioral aspects of medication prescribing in physician assistants.

OBJECTIVES: (1) Present the factor structure of two psychometric instruments for self-efficacy and one for outcome expectations of medication prescribing; (2) evaluate the reliability of the scales, and (3) present preliminary evidence of validity. METHODS: Physician assistants (PA) and PA students completed a survey evaluating three psychometric instruments: (1) Self-Efficacy in Prescribing (SEP), (2) Self-Efficacy in Prescribing-Geriatric (SEPG), and (3) Outcomes Expectations of Prescribing Errors (OEP). Students also evaluated 3 hypothetical prescriptions, two of which contained a prescribing error. Students were instructed to identify (1) if an error occurred and (2) what type of error. The data were analyzed using parallel analysis with a varimax rotation, Cronbach's α, Pearson and Spearman correlations. RESULTS: One hundred eighty five (n = 185) respondents completed the survey (response rate = 63.8%). The parallel analysis found that the SEP had one 7-item factor with α = 0.94 (M = 5.7 (SD = 1.9) out of 10). The SEPG also had one 7-item factor with α = 0.95 (M = 5.5 (1.9). The OEP had one 6-item factor with α = 0.89 (M = 3.5 (SD = 0.8) out of 5). The SEP and SEPG, were correlated to the OEP each other (both p < 0.01). Actively practicing PAs had the highest composite mean SEP and SEPG scores. First-year PA students had the highest mean scores for the OEP. There was a weak association between the mean SEPG score and the number of correctly identified prescriptions (rs = 0.18, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The SEP, SEPG, and OEP show preliminary evidence of reliability and structural, construct, and known-group validities using simulated prescriptions. These tools may be able to be used by educators and implementation scientists as one method to show the effectiveness of future interventions to reduce incidence of prescribing errors.

Opioid use disorder and motivational interviewing: Training physician assistants for the epidemic.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate the effectiveness of a curriculum on physician assistant (PA) students' knowledge about opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment and management and (2) present student satisfaction with the curriculum. METHODS: Three cohorts of PA students completed pre- and post-intervention questionnaires about their knowledge of motivational interviewing (MI) for OUD. One cohort of students completed the 11-item questionnaire without exposure to the intervention (control group). Students' satisfaction with the curriculum was assessed as was their pre- and post-intervention knowledge about using MI for OUD. Bivariate statistical tests were used to analyze the quantitative data. RESULTS: Three hundred complete and usable responses were obtained from the four cohorts of PA students (n = 300, 87.7 percent response rate). The intervention groups answered a higher number of items correctly (median = 7) than the control group (median = 6, Wilcoxon sign test M = 31, p < 0.0001). Among the intervention group, there was not a statistically significant between cohort difference on: (1) the number of identical pre- and post-intervention questionnaire items answered correctly (Chi-square = 3.77, DF = 2, p = 0.15), and (2) the total number of items answered correctly on the post-intervention questionnaire (Chi-square = 0.32, DF = 2, p = 0.85). Student comments suggest students were supportive of the curriculum, with improvements noted on how to deliver the material. CONCLUSIONS: An educational intervention using MI for PA students was found to be valuable, and students who completed the intervention had greater knowledge about using MI with OUD patients than those who did not complete the training. The size of the effect was small, and more research on the curriculum is necessary prior to widespread adoption.

Preanesthesia concerns in a patient with a thyroid mass.

Preoperative evaluation helps identify patient comorbidities and surgical characteristics that increase perioperative risk, and also can help identify patients with potentially difficult airways. Identifying patients with difficult airways before surgery lets clinicians plan appropriate perioperative management and prepare for potential complications. This article focuses on management of a difficult airway in a patient undergoing surgery for a thyroid mass.