RESUMO
ABSTRACT: The first German physician assistant (PA) program began in 2005 at Steinbeis University in Berlin. Since 2005, there has been a rapid expansion of PA education, and 22 German universities have opened or are planning to develop PA programs. In fall 2021, about 1,100 PAs worked in Germany, mostly in the inpatient setting, with a scope of practice focused on delegation and the performance of medical and administrative activities. After completing a PA program, students are awarded a bachelor of science; programs also offer options for specialization. With no formal PA program-specific accreditation processes, the universities are responsible for ensuring the quality and content of PA courses. The profession is not regulated in Germany, and laws to guide PA education and scope of practice are necessary for the further development of the profession.
Assuntos
Assistentes Médicos , Acreditação , Escolaridade , Alemanha , Humanos , Assistentes Médicos/educação , EspecializaçãoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The contribution of physician assistants (PAs) to the German healthcare workforce has increased significantly since their introduction in 2005. From five training programs, the number has increased to the current 18, with 560 PAs awarded the PA bachelor of science degree as of 2020. Despite the growth, researchers lack systemic and reliable empirical data that provide insight into the German PA educational and professional profile. The German University Association Physician Assistant (DHPA) undertook the first nationwide cross-sectional survey on PAs in Germany to understand the German PA movement. This survey aimed to describe German PAs' entry into the profession and PA educational and job satisfaction. METHODS: PA alumni of all universities affiliated with the DHPA and all subscribers of the Facebook online social media platform PA Blog were invited to complete an online questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 282 PAs who completed the survey, 77% were female and under age 25 years. Almost all (94%) were employed, predominantly as PAs (91%, 241 of 265), although some held other positions. Most worked full time (87%), with some citing child-care needs as reasons for part-time employment (n = 21). Few reported unemployment (1.4%, 4 of 282). Eighty-two percent said they would probably or very likely choose the same course of study again. Most employed participants found the inclusion of frequent rotations between didactic and clinical training in PA programs beneficial. However, a small number of participants (26.8%) agreed that German PA programs' didactic and clinical teaching objectives were well aligned. CONCLUSIONS: German PAs have a high level of satisfaction with their profession and report low unemployment. Improvement in the alignment of didactic and clinical educational objectives to improve academic qualifications and satisfaction emerged as an area of research.
Assuntos
Assistentes Médicos , Feminino , Humanos , Adulto , Masculino , Estudos Transversais , Assistentes Médicos/educação , Recursos Humanos , Satisfação no Emprego , EmpregoRESUMO
Introduction: Given the rapid increase in novel treatments for patients with multiple myeloma (MM), this patient preference study aimed to establish which treatment attributes matter most to MM patients and evaluate discrete choice experiment (DCE) and swing weighting (SW) as two elicitation methods for quantifying patients' preferences. Methods: A survey incorporating DCE and SW was disseminated among European MM patients. The survey included attributes and levels informed by a previous qualitative study with 24 MM patients. Latent class and mixed logit models were used to estimate the DCE attribute weights and descriptive analyses were performed to derive SW weights. MM patients and patient organisations provided extensive feedback during survey development. Results: 393 MM patients across 21 countries completed the survey (M years since diagnosis=6; M previous therapies=3). Significant differences (p<.01) between participants' attribute weights were revealed depending on participants' prior therapy experience, and their experience with side-effects and symptoms. Multivariate analyses showed that participants across the three MM patient classes identified via the latent class model differed regarding their past number of therapies (F=4.772, p=.009). Patients with the most treatments (class 1) and those with the least treatments (class 3) attached more value to life expectancy versus quality of life-related attributes such as pain, mobility and thinking problems. Conversely, patients with intermediary treatment experience (class 2) attached more value to quality of life-related attributes versus life expectancy. Participants highlighted the difficulty of trading-off between life expectancy and quality of life and between physical and mental health. Participants expressed a need for greater psychological support to cope with their symptoms, treatment side-effects, and uncertainties. With respect to patients' preferences for the DCE or SW questions, 42% had no preference, 32% preferred DCE, and 25% preferred SW. Conclusions: Quality of life-related attributes affecting MM patients' physical, mental and psychological health such as pain, mobility and thinking problems were considered very important to MM patients, next to life expectancy. This underscores a need to include such attributes in decision-making by healthcare stakeholders involved in MM drug development, evidence generation, evaluation, and clinical practice. This study highlights DCE as the preferred methodology for understanding relative attribute weights from a patient's perspective.
RESUMO
Background: Investigational and marketed drugs for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) are associated with a range of characteristics and uncertainties regarding long term side-effects and efficacy. This raises questions about what matters most to patients living with this disease. This study aimed to understand which characteristics MM patients find most important, and hence should be included as attributes and levels in a subsequent quantitative preference survey among MM patients. Methods: This qualitative study involved: (i) a scoping literature review, (ii) discussions with MM patients (n = 24) in Belgium, Finland, Romania, and Spain using Nominal Group Technique, (iii) a qualitative thematic analysis including multi-stakeholder discussions. Results: MM patients voiced significant expectations and hopes that treatments would extend their lives and reduce their cancer signs and symptoms. Participants however raised concerns about life-threatening side-effects that could cause permanent organ damage. Bone fractures and debilitating neuropathic effects (such as chronic tingling sensations) were highlighted as major issues reducing patients' independence and mobility. Patients discussed the negative impact of the following symptoms and side-effects on their daily activities: thinking problems, increased susceptibility to infections, reduced energy, pain, emotional problems, and vision problems. MM patients were concerned with uncertainties regarding the durability of positive treatment outcomes, and the cause, severity, and duration of their symptoms and side-effects. Patients feared short-term positive treatment responses complicated by permanent, severe side-effects and symptoms. Conclusions: This study gained an in-depth understanding of the treatment and disease-related characteristics and types of attribute levels (severity, duration) that are most important to MM patients. Results from this study argue in favor of MM drug development and individual treatment decision-making that focuses not only on extending patients' lives but also on addressing those symptoms and side-effects that significantly impact MM patients' quality of life. This study underscores a need for transparent communication toward MM patients about MM treatment outcomes and uncertainties regarding their long-term efficacy and safety. Finally, this study may help drug developers and decision-makers understand which treatment outcomes and uncertainties are most important to MM patients and therefore should be incorporated in MM drug development, evaluation, and clinical practice.