Expanding the opioid use disorder medication treatment workforce in rural communities through the RCORP initiative.

PURPOSE: The Rural Communities Opioid Response Program (RCORP) was funded to help rural communities improve prevention, treatment, and recovery services for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD), including increasing the supply of clinicians with a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) waiver to prescribe buprenorphine, which was required before 2023. This research investigates the impact of RCORP funding on the supply of DEA-waivered clinicians in rural communities. METHODS: We used 2017-2022 DEA lists of waivered clinicians to assign clinicians to US counties. Using RCORP service area data, we classified rural counties as either being served by an RCORP grantee or not. We calculated the number of counties in each category with a waivered clinician, clinician-to-population ratios, and treatment slot-to-population ratios. FINDINGS: In 2017, 3.7% more of RCORP funded counties had a waivered clinician than non-RCORP counties. RCORP counties also had 1.2 more waivered clinicians per 100,000 population and 57.5 more treatment slots per 100,000 population compared to non-RCORP counties. From 2017 to 2022, these differences more than doubled. The supply of waivered clinicians varied across Census Divisions. In most Census Divisions, a greater percentage of RCORP counties had a waivered clinician as well as more waivered clinicians and treatment slots per population, except for the Pacific Census Division, which had more clinicians and treatment slots per population in non-RCORP counties. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that federal investments to expand rural OUD patients' access to care may have been successful, but only if increases in clinician supply translate into greater provision of OUD treatment.

Growing a rural family physician workforce: The contributions of rural background and rural place of residency training.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the distinct influences of rural background and rural residency training on rural practice choice among family physicians. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: We used a subset of The RTT Collaborative rural residency list and longitudinal data on family physicians from the American Board of Family Medicine National Graduate Survey (NGS; three cohorts, 2016-2018) and American Medical College Application Service (AMCAS). STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a logistic regression, computing predictive marginals to assess associations of background and residency location with physician practice location 3 years post-residency. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We merged NGS data with residency type-rural or urban-and practice location with AMCAS data on rural background. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Family physicians from a rural background were more likely to choose rural practice (39.2%, 95% CI = 35.8, 42.5) than those from an urban background (13.8%, 95% CI = 12.5, 15.0); 50.9% (95% CI = 43.0, 58.8) of trainees in rural residencies chose rural practice, compared with 18.0% (95% CI = 16.8, 19.2) of urban trainees. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing rural programs for training residents from both rural and urban backgrounds, as well as recruiting more rural students to medical education, could increase the number of rural family physicians.

Impact of Primary Care Exception Expansion on Family Medicine Resident Billing During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Medicare Primary Care Exception (PCE) permits indirect supervision of residents performing lower-complexity visits in primary care settings. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicare expanded the PCE to all patient visits regardless of complexity. This study investigates how PCE expansion changed resident billing practices at a family medicine residency during calendar year 2020. We hypothesized that residents not constrained by the PCE would bill more high-level visits. METHODS: We queried billing codes from attendings' and residents' established evaluation and management visits associated with the University of Washington Family Medicine Residency (UWFMR) from January to December 2020. We used χ2 tests to compare resident and attending physicians' use of low/moderate and high-level codes by quarter. RESULTS: Resident high-complexity code use increased after PCE expansion in Q4 (odds ratio [OR] 3.50 [2.34-5.23]) compared to Q1. No change was observed among attending physicians (OR 1.05 [0.86-1.28]). Resident and attending billing patterns became more similar following PCE expansion. CONCLUSIONS: With the PCE expansion, senior family medicine resident physicians at UWFMR used higher-complexity billing codes at a rate approximating that of attending physicians. The findings of this study have implications regarding the financial well-being and sustainability of primary care residency training and raise a relevant policy question about whether the PCE expansion should persist. More research is needed to determine whether these findings were replicated in other primary care residency practices, the impact on resident education, and the impact on patient outcomes.

Routes to Rural Readiness: Enhancing Clinical Training Experiences for Physician Assistants.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe practices and experiences of rurally oriented physician assistant (PA) training programs in providing rural clinical training to PA students. METHODS: A survey of PA program directors (PDs) included questions about program characteristics, student and clinical preceptor (CP) recruitment in rural areas, and barriers to, and facilitators of, rural clinical training. Programs that considered rural training "very important" to their goals were identified. We interviewed PDs from rurally oriented programs about their rural clinical training and rural CPs about their experiences training PA students for rural practice. We identified key themes through content analysis. RESULTS: Of 178 programs surveyed, 113 (63.5%) responded, 61 (54.0%) of which were rurally oriented and more likely than other programs to recruit rural students or those with rural practice interests and to address rural issues in didactic curriculum. The 13 PDs interviewed linked successful rural training to finding and supporting rural preceptors who enjoy teaching and helping students understand rural communities. The 13 rural CPs identified enthusiastic and rurally interested students as key elements to successful rural training. Interviewees identified systemic barriers to rural training, including student housing, decreased productivity, competition for training slots, and administrative burden. CONCLUSIONS: Physician assistant students can be coached to capitalize on their rural clinical experiences. Knowing how to "jump in" to rotations and having genuine interest in the community are particularly important. Student housing, competition for training slots, and lack of financial incentives are major system-level challenges for sustaining and increasing the availability of PA rural clinical training.

Understanding and Overcoming Barriers to Rural Obstetric Training for Family Physicians.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family physicians are the most common health professional providing rural obstetric (OB) care, but the number of family physicians practicing OB is declining. To address rural/urban disparities in parental and child health, family medicine must provide robust OB training to prepare family physicians to care for parent-newborn dyads in rural communities. This mixed-methods study aimed to inform policy and practice solutions. METHODS: We surveyed 115 rural family medicine residency programs (program directors, coordinators, or faculty) and conducted semistructured interviews with personnel from 10 rural family medicine residencies. We calculated descriptive statistics and frequencies for survey responses. Two authors conducted a directed content analysis of qualitative survey and interview responses. RESULTS: The survey yielded 59 responses (51.3%); responders and nonresponders were not significantly different by geography or program type. Most programs (85.5%) trained residents to provide comprehensive prenatal and postpartum care. Continuity clinic sites were predominantly rural across all years and OB training was largely rural in postgraduate year 2 (PGY2) and PGY3. Almost half of programs listed "competition with other OB providers" (49.1%) and "shortage of family medicine faculty providing OB care" (47.3%) as major challenges. Individual programs tended to report either few challenges or multiple challenges. In qualitative responses, common themes included the importance of faculty interest and skill, community and hospital support, volume, and relationships. CONCLUSIONS: To improve rural OB training, our findings support prioritizing relationships between family medicine and other OB clinicians, sustaining family medicine OB faculty, and developing creative solutions to interrupt cascading and interrelated challenges.

A Match Made in Rural: Interpreting Match Rates and Exploring Best Practices.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although rural family medicine residency programs are effective in placing trainees into rural practice, many struggle to recruit students. Lacking other public measures, students may use residency match rates as a proxy for program quality and value. This study documents match rate trends and explores the relationship between match rates and program characteristics, including quality measures and recruitment strategies. METHODS: Using a published listing of rural programs, 25 years of National Resident Matching Program data, and 11 years of American Osteopathic Association match data, this study (1) documents patterns in initial match rates for rural versus urban residency programs, (2) compares rural residency match rates with program characteristics for match years 2009-2013, (3) examines the association of match rates with program outcomes for graduates in years 2013-2015, and (4) explores recruitment strategies using residency coordinator interviews. RESULTS: Despite increases in positions offered over 25 years, the fill rates for rural programs have improved relative to urban programs. Small rural programs had lower match rates relative to urban programs, but no other program or community characteristics were predictors of match rate. Match rates were not indicative of any of five measures of program quality nor of any single recruiting strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the intricacies of rural residency inputs and outcomes is key to addressing rural workforce gaps. Match rates likely reflect challenges of rural workforce recruitment generally and should not be conflated with program quality.

Academic Achievement and Competency in Rural and Urban Family Medicine Residents.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The quality of training in rural family medicine (FM) residencies has been questioned. Our objective was to assess differences in academic performance between rural and urban FM residencies. METHODS: We used American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) data from 2016-2018 residency graduates. Medical knowledge was measured by the ABFM in-training examination (ITE) and Family Medicine Certification Examination (FMCE). The milestones included 22 items across six core competencies. We measured whether residents met expectations on each milestone at each assessment. Multilevel regression models determined associations between resident and residency characteristics milestones met at graduation, FMCE score, and failure. RESULTS: Our final sample was 11,790 graduates. First-year ITE scores were similar between rural and urban residents. Rural residents passed their initial FMCE at a lower rate than urban residents (96.2% vs 98.9%) with the gap closing upon later attempts (98.8% vs 99.8%). Being in a rural program was not associated with a difference in FMCE score but was associated with higher odds of failure. Interactions between program type and year were not significant, indicating equal growth in knowledge. The proportions of rural vs urban residents who met all milestones and each of six core competencies were similar early in residency but diverged over time with fewer rural residents meeting all expectations. CONCLUSIONS: We found small, but persistent differences in measures of academic performance between rural- and urban-trained FM residents. The implications of these findings in judging the quality of rural programs are much less clear and warrant further study, including their impact on rural patient outcomes and community health.

Rural Versus Urban Family Medicine Residency Scope of Training and Practice.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Little is known about how rural and urban family medicine residencies compare in preparing physicians for practice. This study compared the perceptions of preparation for practice and actual postgraduation scope of practice (SOP) between rural and urban residency program graduates. METHODS: We analyzed data on 6,483 early-career, board-certified physicians surveyed 2016-2018, 3 years after residency graduation, and 44,325 later-career board-certified physicians surveyed 2014-2018, every 7 to 10 years after initial certification. Bivariate comparisons and multivariate regressions of rural and urban residency graduates examined perceived preparedness and current practice in 30 areas and overall SOP using a validated scale, with separate models for early-career and later-career physicians. RESULTS: In bivariate analyses, rural program graduates were more likely than urban program graduates to report being prepared for hospital-based care, casting, cardiac stress tests, and other skills, but less likely to be prepared in some gynecologic care and pharmacologic HIV/AIDS management. Both early- and later-career rural program graduates reported broader overall SOPs than their urban-program counterparts in bivariate analyses; in adjusted analyses this difference remained significant only for later-career physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with urban program graduates, rural graduates more often rated themselves prepared in several hospital care measures and less often in certain women's health measures. Controlling for multiple characteristics, only rurally trained, later-career physicians reported a broader SOP than their urban program counterparts. This study demonstrates the value of rural training and provides a baseline for research exploring longitudinal benefits of this training to rural communities and population health.

Measuring the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Behaviors and Health Care Utilization in Rural and Urban Patients with Cancer and Cancer Survivors.

Healthcare access and health behaviors differ between those living in urban and rural communities and contribute to inequitable cancer health outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant disruptions in daily life and healthcare delivery. This cross-sectional survey aimed to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health behaviors of cancer patients and survivors, comparing outcomes for urban and rural respondents. Survey was administered from January 2021-June 2021 to cancer patients or survivors (treated within the last 5 years) at one of six cancer centers in Washington and Idaho. Respondent ZIP code was used to assess rurality using Rural-Urban Commuting Area designation. 515 rural (43.5% of those contacted) and 146 urban (40% of those contacted) cancer patients and survivors participated. Few differences between urban and rural cancer patients and cancer survivors were noted. Rural residents were older (69.2 years vs. 66.9 years). Rural respondents had higher mean alcohol consumption than urban respondents (4.4 drinks per week vs. 2.7 drinks per week). 12.2% of those who reported drinking in the last 30 days also reported increased alcohol consumption since the start of the pandemic, with no difference in reported increased alcohol consumption in rural vs. urban respondents. 38.5% reported decreased physical activity. 20.5% reported cancelling or delaying cancer care due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Delays in cancer healthcare services and worsening health behaviors due to the COVID-19 pandemic may contribute to poorer health outcomes, with few differences between rural and urban cancer patients and cancer survivors.

Where to start? A two stage residual inclusion approach to estimating influence of the initial provider on health care utilization and costs for low back pain in the US.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic testing and treatment recommendations can vary when medical care is sought by individuals for low back pain (LBP), leading to variation in quality and costs of care. We examine how the first provider seen by an individual at initial diagnosis of LBP influences downstream utilization and costs. METHODS: Using national private health insurance claims data, individuals age 18 or older were retrospectively assigned to cohorts based on the first provider seen at the index date of LBP diagnosis. Exclusion criteria included individuals with a diagnosis of LBP or any serious medical conditions or an opioid prescription recorded in the 6 months prior to the index date. Outcome measures included use of imaging, back surgery rates, hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, early- and long-term opioid use, and costs (out-of-pocket and total costs of care) twelve months post-index date. We used a two-stage residual inclusion (2SRI) estimation approach comparing copay for the initial provider visit and differential distance as the instrumental variable to reduce selection bias in the choice of first provider, controlling for demographics. RESULTS: Among 3,799,593 individuals, cost and utilization varied considerably based on the first provider seen by the patient. Copay and differential distance provided similar results, with copay preserving a greater sample size. The frequency of early opioid prescription was significantly lower when care began with an acupuncturist or chiropractor, and highest for those who began with an emergency medicine physician or advanced practice registered nurse (APRN). Long-term opioid prescriptions were low across most providers except physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians and APRNs. The frequency and time to serious illness varied little across providers. Total cost of care was lowest when starting with a chiropractor ($5093) or primary care physician ($5660), and highest when starting with an orthopedist ($9434) or acupuncturist ($9205). CONCLUSION: The first provider seen by individuals with LBP was associated with large differences in health care utilization, opioid prescriptions, and cost while there were no differences in delays in diagnosis of serious illness.

Faculty and Resident Contraceptive Opt Outs and Training Site Restrictions: A CERA Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Contraception is a core component of family medicine residency curriculum. Institutional environments can influence residents' access to contraceptive training and thus their ability to meet the reproductive health needs of their patients. METHODS: Contraceptive training questions were included in the 2020 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) survey of family medicine residency program directors. The survey asked how many faculty and residents opt out of providing contraceptive methods for moral or religious reasons, and whether training sites have institutional restrictions on contraception. We performed descriptive statistics and regression to identify program characteristics associated with having a resident or faculty opt out of providing contraceptive care. RESULTS: Of 626 program directors, 249 responded to the survey, and 237 answered the contraceptive questions. Percentages of program directors reporting any residents or faculty who opted out of contraceptive services are as follows: pill/patch/ring (residents 27%; faculty 17%), emergency contraception (residents 40%, faculty 33%), or intrauterine devices/implants (resident 29%; faculty 23%). Programs in the South (OR 2.78; 1.19-6.49) and those with Catholic affiliation (OR 2.35; 1.23-4.91) had higher adjusted odds of at least one opt-out faculty but were not associated with having opt-out residents. Eleven percent of programs had at least one training site with institutional restrictions on contraception. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure that residents have access to adequate contraceptive training, residencies should proactively seek faculty and training environments that meet residents' needs, and should make limitations on services clear to potential residents and patients.

Brief online implicit bias education increases bias awareness among clinical teaching faculty.

PROBLEM AND PURPOSE: Healthcare provider implicit bias influences the learning environment and patient care. Bias awareness is one of the key elements to be included in implicit bias education. Research on education enhancing bias awareness is limited. Bias awareness can motivate behavior change. The objective was to evaluate whether exposure to a brief online course, Implicit Bias in the Clinical and Learning Environment, increased bias awareness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The course included the history of racism in medicine, social determinants of health, implicit bias in healthcare, and strategies to reduce the impact of implicit bias in clinical care and teaching. A sample of U.S. academic family, internal, and emergency medicine providers were recruited into the study from August to December 2019. Measures of provider implicit and explicit bias, personal and practice characteristics, and pre-post-bias awareness measures were collected. RESULTS: Of 111 participants, 78 (70%) were female, 81 (73%) were White, and 63 (57%) were MDs. Providers held moderate implicit pro-White bias on the Race IAT (Cohen's d = 0.68) and strong implicit stereotypes associating males rather than females with 'career' on the Gender-Career IAT (Cohen's d = 1.15). Overall, providers held no explicit race bias (Cohen's d = 0.05). Providers reported moderate explicit male-career (Cohen's d = 0.68) and strong female-family stereotype (Cohen's d = 0.83). A statistically significant increase in bias awareness was found after exposure to the course (p = 0.03). Provider implicit and explicit biases and personal and practice characteristics were not associated with an increase in bias awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Implicit bias education is effective to increase providers' bias awareness regardless of strength of their implicit and explicit biases and personal and practice characteristics. Increasing bias awareness is one step of many toward creating a positive learning environment and a system of more equitable healthcare.

Tracking the geographic distribution and growth of clinicians with a DEA waiver to prescribe buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder.

PURPOSE: Buprenorphine is an effective medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) but access is difficult for patients, especially in rural locations. To improve access, legislation, including the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (2016) and the Substance Use Disorder Prevention that Promotes Opioid Recovery and Treatment for Patients and Communities (SUPPORT) Act (2018), extended the ability to get a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) waiver to prescribe buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) to numerous types of clinicians. This study updates the distribution of waivered clinicians as of July 2020 and notes regional and geographic differences. METHODS: Using the July 2020 Drug Enforcement Administration list of providers with a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine to treat OUD, we assigned waivered clinicians to counties in one of four geographic categories. We calculated the number of counties in each category that did not have a waivered clinician, available treatment slots, and the county provider to population ratios. FINDINGS: The number of DEA-waivered clinicians more than doubled between December 2017 and July 2020 from 37,869 to 98,344. The availability of a clinician with a DEA waiver to provide MOUD has increased across all geographic categories. Nearly two-thirds of all rural counties (63.1%) had at least one clinician with a DEA waiver but more than half of small and remote rural counties lacked one. There were also significant differences in access by the US Census Division. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, MOUD access has improved, but small rural communities still experience treatment disparities and there is significant regional variation.

Gender Differences in Authorship of Family Medicine Publications, 2002-2017.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Representation of women in medicine is increasing, including in academic family medicine. Despite this, women continue to hold a minority of senior faculty and leadership roles. This study examines the trends of women first and senior authorship between 2002 and 2017 in five family medicine journals: Family Medicine, Journal of Family Practice, Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, Annals of Family Medicine, and American Family Physician. The study also examines gender congruence between first and senior authors and women's membership on editorial boards. METHODS: We collected and analyzed data on a total of 1,671 original articles published in the five family medicine journals in 2002, 2007, 2012, and 2017. We also examined the gender composition of the journals' editorial boards. RESULTS: Overall, women first authorship increased significantly from 32.6% in 2002 to 47.7% in 2017. There was no significant difference in women senior authorship or editorial board representation from 2002 to 2017. Both men and women senior authors partnered with women first authors significantly more over the 15 years. CONCLUSIONS: While there was a statistically significant increase in women first authors between 2002 and 2017, there is still a gap between women's authorship and editorial board representation and their representation within academic family medicine. These gaps could help to explain the continued lack of women represented within senior faculty positions.

Comparing the Health Workforce Provider Mix and the Distance Travelled for Mental Health Services by Rural and Urban Medicare Beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: To describe the mix of health professionals who care for rural and urban seniors suffering from mood and/or anxiety disorders, the quantity of services they receive, and to understand where beneficiaries receive care for mood and/or anxiety disorders and the distance and time they travel for care. METHODS: We used 2014 Medicare administrative claims data to examine access to health care for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years who received outpatient services for mood and anxiety disorders. We classified providers into 9 categories: (1) family physicians/general practice, (2) internists, (3) nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs), (4) psychiatrists, (5) psychologists, (6) clinical social workers, (7) emergency medicine physicians, (8) other physicians, and (9) other providers. We calculated the 1-way driving distance and travel time between the beneficiary residence and provider location. We classified beneficiaries into 1 of 4 geographic categories based on their residence ZIP Code. FINDINGS: Urban beneficiaries had an average of 2.7 visits for mood and anxiety disorders, while rural beneficiaries had 2.4. Generalist physicians and NPs/PAs provided 50.8% of all visits. Urban beneficiaries saw more behavioral health specialists (34.3%) than rural beneficiaries (16.1%). NPs and PAs provided more than twice as much of the care for rural beneficiaries (14.8%) as for urban beneficiaries (6.4%). Rural beneficiaries travelled about twice as far as urban beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: Rural and urban Medicare beneficiaries received care for mood/anxiety disorders from different mixes of health care providers, and ensuring access for rural populations will require innovative solutions.

Pipelines to Pathways: Medical School Commitment to Producing a Rural Workforce.

PURPOSE: Despite the efforts of numerous medical schools to produce rural physicians, many rural communities in the United States still experience physician shortages. This study describes the current landscape of rural efforts in US undergraduate medical education and catalogs medical school characteristics and activities that evidence has suggested, and that many experts in rural medical education believe, may result in more graduates choosing rural practice. METHODS: This is a descriptive study of publicly available and rurally relevant characteristics of all 182 allopathic and osteopathic medical schools operating in the 50 states and the District of Columbia in 2016, with rural program information for these schools updated in 2019. The authors constructed a "rural program" definition in order to systematically catalog coordinated and strategic medical school efforts to produce a rural physician workforce. FINDINGS: Few (8.2%) medical schools expressed an explicit commitment to producing rural physicians in public mission statements. However, most (64.8%) provided rural clinical experiences and many demonstrated their commitment in other ways. Only 39 (21.4%) did so through a formal rural program. CONCLUSIONS: In establishing an explicit rural program definition and documenting other markers of rural commitment, this paper provides a baseline for future studies of rural workforce production and medical school investment in these programs, activities, and personnel. Demonstrating the effectiveness of schools' rural physician education efforts will require collaboration across institutions and more intensive evaluations of programs involving students who, though relatively few in number, have great potential for contributing to the health of rural communities across the nation.

Targeted Medical School Admissions: A Strategic Process for Meeting Our Social Mission.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Increased medical school class sizes and new medical schools have not addressed the workforce inadequacies in primary care or underserved settings. While there is substantial evidence that student attributes predict practice specialty and location, little is known about how schools use these factors in admissions processes. We sought to describe admissions strategies to recruit students likely to practice in primary care or underserved settings. METHODS: We surveyed admissions personnel at US allopathic and osteopathic medical schools in 2018 about targeted admissions strategies aimed at recruitment and selection of students likely to practice rurally, in urban underserved areas, or in primary care Results: One hundred thirty-three of 185 (71.8%) US medical schools responded. Respondents reported targeted admissions strategies as follows: rural, 69.2%; urban underserved, 67.4%; and primary care, 45.3%. Nearly 90% reported some type of recruitment outreach to 4-year universities, but much less to community colleges. Student characteristics used to identify those likely to practice in targeted areas were largely evidence-based. Strategies to select students varied widely. CONCLUSIONS: Most responding US medical schools reported a targeted process to recruit and select students likely to practice in rural, urban underserved, or primary care settings, indicating widespread awareness of workforce challenges. This study also demonstrates varying approaches to and allocation of resources toward admissions targeting, especially the application and interviewing processes. Understanding how schools identify and admit students likely to practice in these fields is a first step in identifying best practices for selective admissions focused on addressing workforce gaps.

Frontline Workers' Career Pathways: A Detailed Look at Washington State's Medical Assistant Workforce.

Medical assistants (MAs) are a rapidly growing and increasingly important workforce. High MA turnover, however, is common and employers report applicants frequently do not meet their needs. We collected survey responses from a representative sample of 3,355 of Washington's MAs with certified status (MA-Cs) to understand their demographic, education, and employment backgrounds; job satisfaction; and career plans. Descriptive analyses showed 93.0% were female with a $19.91 mean hourly wage, and while generally satisfied, 56.2% indicated they would seek training or employment in another health care occupation within 5 years, with higher percentages among MA-Cs who felt overwhelmed by their workload and/or not satisfied with promotion opportunities. Regression analyses showed Hispanic, Black, and Asian MA-Cs were more likely than White MA-Cs to express interest in other health care careers. Strategies that strengthen MA career pathways and retain qualified workers should reward both employers and MAs and contribute to a stable and diverse workforce.

Investigating the Impact of Geographic Location on Colorectal Cancer Stage at Diagnosis: A National Study of the SEER Cancer Registry.

BACKGROUND: Early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with decreased mortality and potential avoidance of chemotherapy. CRC screening rates are lower in rural communities and patient outcomes are poorer. This study examines the extent to which United States' rural residents present at a more advanced stage of CRC compared to nonrural residents. METHODS: Using the 2010-2014 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Incidence data, 132,277 patients with CRC were stratified using their county of residence and urban influence codes into 5 categories (metro, adjacent micropolitan, nonadjacent micropolitan, small rural, and remote small rural). Logistic regression was used to investigate the relationship between late stage at diagnosis and county-level characteristics including level of rurality, persistent poverty, low education and low employment, and patient characteristics. RESULTS: In the adjusted analysis the rate of stage 4 CRC at diagnosis differed across geographic classification, with patients living in remote small rural counties having the highest rate of stage 4 disease (range: 19.2% in nonadjacent micropolitan counties to 22.7% in remote small rural counties). Other factors, such as patient characteristics, insurance status, and regional practice variation were also significantly associated with late-stage CRC diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Geographic residence is associated with the rate of stage 4 disease at presentation. Additional patient factors are associated with stage 4 CRC disease at diagnosis. Cancer outcomes are worse for rural patients, and late stage at diagnosis may partially account for this disparity. These differences have persisted over time and suggest areas for further research, patient engagement, and education.

Prescribing Practices of Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants Waivered to Prescribe Buprenorphine and the Barriers They Experience Prescribing Buprenorphine.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the Comprehensive Addiction Recovery Act permitted nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) to obtain a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder (OUD), with the goal of increasing access to this treatment. This study's purpose was to describe the buprenorphine prescribing practices of NPs and PAs and compare the barriers rural and urban providers face delivering treatment. METHODS: From the October 2018 Drug Enforcement Administration list of providers with the waiver to prescribe buprenorphine, all rural NPs and PAs (1,057) and a random sample of 500 urban NPs and PAs were surveyed. The questionnaire queried respondents about demographics, prescribing practices, practice characteristics, reimbursement policies, and barriers to prescribing buprenorphine to treat OUD. RESULTS: Of the waivered NPs and PAs, 80.3% reported having prescribed buprenorphine and 71.1% said they were currently accepting new patients with OUD. Providers with the 30-patient waiver were treating, on average, 13.2 patients; 37.0% were not treating any patients. The most common barrier, cited by half of providers, was concerns about diversion/medication misuse. More rural providers indicated lack of specialty backup and mental health providers as a barrier than urban providers. Never-prescribers and former-prescribers reported 6 barriers at significantly higher rates than did current prescribers. More rural providers accepted Medicaid and cash reimbursement than urban providers. CONCLUSIONS: NPs and PAs face many of the same barriers to providing buprenorphine as physicians have reported. Interventions to address these barriers have the potential to benefit all providers with the waiver to prescribe buprenorphine.