scholarly journals The predictive values of a deliberative and a paternalistic attitude towards two situations of moral conflict: A study among Dutch nurse practitioners and physician assistants

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luppo Kuilman ◽  
Gerard J. Jansen ◽  
Laetitia B. Mulder ◽  
Petrie F. Roodbol
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Moral Conflict ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Paternalistic Attitude

scholarly journals Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Bipolar I Disorder Screening and the Rapid Mood Screener (RMS), a Pragmatic, New Tool

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-183
Author(s):  
Michael E. Thase ◽  
Stephen M. Stahl ◽  
Roger S. McIntyre ◽  
Tina Matthews-Hayes ◽  
Mehul Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Bipolar I Disorder ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Patient Reported

AbstractIntroductionAlthough mania is the hallmark symptom of bipolar I disorder (BD-I), most patients initially present for treatment with depressive symptoms. Misdiagnosis of BD-I as major depressive disorder (MDD) is common, potentially resulting in poor outcomes and inappropriate antidepressant monotherapy treatment. Screening patients with depressive symptoms is a practical strategy to help healthcare providers (HCPs) identify when additional assessment for BD-I is warranted. The new 6-item Rapid Mood Screener (RMS) is a pragmatic patient-reported BD-I screening tool that relies on easily understood terminology to screen for manic symptoms and other BD-I features in <2 minutes. The RMS was validated in an observational study in patients with clinically confirmed BD-I (n=67) or MDD (n=72). When 4 or more items were endorsed (“yes”), the sensitivity of the RMS for identifying patients with BP-I was 0.88 and specificity was 0.80; positive and negative predictive values were 0.80 and 0.88, respectively. To more thoroughly understand screening tool use among HCPs, a 10-minute survey was conducted.MethodsA nationwide sample of HCPs (N=200) was selected using multiple HCP panels; HCPs were asked to describe their opinions/current use of screening tools, assess the RMS, and evaluate the RMS versus the widely recognized Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ). Results were reported by grouped specialties (primary care physicians, general nurse practitioners [NPs]/physician assistants [PAs], psychiatrists, and psychiatric NPs/PAs). Included HCPs were in practice <30 years, spent at least 75% of their time in clinical practice, saw at least 10 patients with depression per month, and diagnosed MDD or BD in at least 1 patient per month. Findings were reported using descriptive statistics; statistical significance was reported at the 95% confidence interval.ResultsAmong HCPs, 82% used a tool to screen for MDD, while 32% used a tool for BD. Screening tool attributes considered to be of the greatest value included sensitivity (68%), easy to answer questions (66%), specificity (65%), confidence in results (64%), and practicality (62%). Of HCPs familiar with screening tools, 70% thought the RMS was at least somewhat better than other screening tools. Most HCPs were aware of the MDQ (85%), but only 29% reported current use. Most HCPs (81%) preferred the RMS to the MDQ, and the RMS significantly outperformed the MDQ across valued attributes; 76% reported that they were likely to use the RMS to screen new patients with depressive symptoms. A total of 84% said the RMS would have a positive impact on their practice, with 46% saying they would screen more patients for bipolar disorder.DiscussionThe RMS was viewed positively by HCPs who participated in a brief survey. A large percentage of respondents preferred the RMS over the MDQ and indicated that they would use it in their practice. Collectively, responses indicated that the RMS is likely to have a positive impact on screening behavior.FundingAbbVie Inc.

scholarly journals Barriers to identifying and obtaining CME: a national survey of physicians, nurse practitioners and physician assistants

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen O’Brien Pott ◽  
Anissa S. Blanshan ◽  
Kelly M. Huneke ◽  
Barbara L. Baasch Thomas ◽  
David A. Cook
Keyword(s):  
Travel Time ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Professional Associations ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Online Search ◽  
The Past ◽  
Online Tools ◽  
Source Of Information

Abstract Background CPD educators and CME providers would benefit from further insight regarding barriers and supports in obtaining CME, including sources of information about CME. To address this gap, we sought to explore challenges that clinicians encounter as they seek CME, and time and monetary support allotted for CME. Methods In August 2018, we surveyed licensed US clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants), sampling 100 respondents each of family medicine physicians, internal medicine and hospitalist physicians, medicine specialist physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants (1895 invited, 500 [26.3%] responded). The Internet-based questionnaire addressed barriers to obtaining CME, sources of CME information, and time and monetary support for CME. Results The most often-selected barriers were expense (338/500 [68%]) and travel time (N = 286 [57%]). The source of information about CME activities most commonly selected was online search (N = 348 [70%]). Direct email, professional associations, direct mail, and journals were also each selected by > 50% of respondents. Most respondents reported receiving 1–6 days (N = 301 [60%]) and $1000–$5000 (n = 263 [53%]) per year to use in CME activities. Most (> 70%) also reported no change in time or monetary support over the past 24 months. We found few significant differences in responses across clinician type or age group. In open-ended responses, respondents suggested eight ways to enhance CME: optimize location, reduce cost, publicize effectively, offer more courses and content, allow flexibility, ensure accessibility, make content clinically relevant, and encourage application. Conclusions Clinicians report that expense and travel time are the biggest barriers to CME. Time and money support is limited, and not increasing. Online search and email are the most frequently-used sources of information about CME. Those who organize and market CME should explore options that reduce barriers of time and money, and creatively use online tools to publicize new offerings.

Comparison of nurse practitioners/physician assistants to gastroenterologists in performing flexible sigmoidoscopy

1998 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. A698-A699 ◽  
Author(s):  
MB Wallace ◽  
KY Ho ◽  
Y Trnka ◽  
C Henderson ◽  
JA Kemp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Flexible Sigmoidoscopy ◽  
Physician Assistants

The Use of Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants in Washington and Oregon Emergency Departments

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 338-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia D. Abbott ◽  
Karen G. Schepp ◽  
Brenda K. Zierler ◽  
Deborah Ward
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Emergency Departments ◽  
Physician Assistants

Quality of HIV Care Provided by Nurse Practitioners, Physician Assistants, and Physicians

2005 ◽  
Vol 143 (10) ◽  
pp. 729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ira B. Wilson ◽  
Bruce E. Landon ◽  
Lisa R. Hirschhorn ◽  
Keith McInnes ◽  
Lin Ding ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Hiv Care

scholarly journals US-based cross-sectional survey of clinicians’ knowledge and attitudes about shared decision-making across healthcare professions and specialties

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e022730 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel C Forcino ◽  
Renata West Yen ◽  
Maya Aboumrad ◽  
Paul J Barr ◽  
Danielle Schubbe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Knowledge And Attitudes ◽  
Positive Attitudes

ObjectiveIn this study, we aim to compare shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge and attitudes between US-based physician assistants (PAs), nurse practitioners (NPs) and physicians across surgical and family medicine specialties.SettingWe administered a cross-sectional, web-based survey between 20 September 2017 and 1 November 2017.Participants272 US-based NPs, PA and physicians completed the survey. 250 physicians were sent a generic email invitation to participate, of whom 100 completed the survey. 3300 NPs and PAs were invited, among whom 172 completed the survey. Individuals who met the following exclusion criteria were excluded from participation: (1) lack of English proficiency; (2) area of practice other than family medicine or surgery; (3) licensure other than physician, PA or NP; (4) practicing in a country other than the US.ResultsWe found few substantial differences in SDM knowledge and attitudes across clinician types, revealing positive attitudes across the sample paired with low to moderate knowledge. Family medicine professionals (PAs) were most knowledgeable on several items. Very few respondents (3%; 95% CI 1.5% to 6.2%) favoured a paternalistic approach to decision-making.ConclusionsRecent policy-level promotion of SDM may have influenced positive clinician attitudes towards SDM. Positive attitudes despite limited knowledge warrant SDM training across occupations and specialties, while encouraging all clinicians to promote SDM. Given positive attitudes and similar knowledge across clinician types, we recommend that SDM is not confined to the patient-physician dyad but instead advocated among other health professionals.

scholarly journals Skill mix change between general practitioners, nurse practitioners, physician assistants and nurses in primary healthcare for older people: a qualitative study

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marleen H. Lovink ◽  
Anneke J. A. H. van Vught ◽  
Anke Persoon ◽  
Lisette Schoonhoven ◽  
Raymond T. C. M. Koopmans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Older People ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Healthcare ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Skill Mix

The Attitudes of Rural Minnesota Family Physicians Toward Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants

1997 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 196-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanette Bergeson ◽  
Richard Cash ◽  
James Boulger ◽  
Dale Bergeron
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Family Physicians ◽  
Physician Assistants
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document