Effectiveness of technology-enhanced simulation in teaching digital rectal examination: a systematic review narrative synthesis.

Background: Digital rectal examination (DRE) is a challenging examination to learn. Objective: To synthesise evidence regarding the effectiveness of technology-enhanced simulation (TES) for acquiring DRE skills. Study selection: EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge (Science and Social Science), Scopus and IEEE Xplore were searched; the last search was performed on 3 April 2019. Included were original research studies evaluating TES to teach DRE. Data were abstracted on methodological quality, participants, instructional design and outcomes; a descriptive synthesis was performed. Quality was assessed using a modified Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument. The study design domain was modified by scoring the papers based on (1) evaluation of risk of bias for randomised controlled trials, (2) description of participants and (3) assessment of robustness and degree of simulation fidelity of the assessments used to evaluate learning. Findings: 863 articles were screened; 12 were eligible, enrolling 1507 prequalified medical/clinical students and 20 qualified doctors. For skill acquisition, role player was statistically significantly superior to a static manikin (2 studies). For knowledge acquisition, manikin use was significantly superior to role player (1 study); 2 studies showed no difference. For confidence, manikin use was significantly superior to no manikin (4 studies). For comfort, manikin use was significantly superior to no manikin (2 studies). For anxiety, role player was significantly superior to manikin (1 study).Median overall quality score (QS) was 48% (27-62). Highest median QS was 73% (33-80) for data analysis; lowest median QS was 20% (7-40) for the validity of instrument. Six papers scored over 50% of the maximum score for overall quality. Conclusions: TES training is associated with improved DRE skills and should be used more widely.

Comparing physician associates and foundation year two doctors-in-training undertaking emergency medicine consultations in England: a mixed-methods study of processes and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the contribution of physician associates to the processes and outcomes of emergency medicine consultations with that of foundation year two doctors-in-training. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study: retrospective chart review using 4 months' anonymised clinical record data of all patients seen by physician associates or foundation year two doctors-in-training in 2016; review of a subsample of 40 records for clinical adequacy; semi-structured interviews with staff and patients; observations of physician associates. SETTING: Three emergency departments in England. PARTICIPANTS: The records of 8816 patients attended by 6 physician associates and 40 foundation year two doctors-in-training; of these n=3197 had the primary outcome recorded (n=1129 physician associates, n=2068 doctor); 14 clinicians and managers and 6 patients or relatives for interview; 5 physician associates for observation. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was unplanned re-attendance at the same emergency department within 7 days. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: consultation processes, clinical adequacy of care, and staff and patient experience. RESULTS: Re-attendances within 7 days (n=194 (6.1%)) showed no difference between physician associates and foundation year two doctors-in-training (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.24, p=0.437). If seen by a physician associate, patients were more likely receive an X-ray investigation (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.72 to 4.24), p<0.001), after adjustment for patient characteristics, triage severity of condition and statistically significant clinician intraclass correlation. Clinical reviewers found almost all patients' charts clinically adequate. Physician associates were evaluated as assessing patients in a similar way to foundation year two doctors-in-training and providing continuity in the team. Patients were positive about the care they had received from a physician associate, but had poor understanding of the role. CONCLUSIONS: Physician associates in emergency departments in England treated patients with a range of conditions safely, and at a similar level to foundation year two doctors-in-training, providing clinical operational efficiencies.

Delphi consensus recommendations for a treatment algorithm in pulmonary sarcoidosis.

Pulmonary sarcoidosis presents substantial management challenges, with limited evidence on effective therapies and phenotypes. In the absence of definitive evidence, expert consensus can supply clinically useful guidance in medicine. An international panel of 26 experts participated in a Delphi process to identify consensus on pharmacological management in sarcoidosis with the development of preliminary recommendations.The modified Delphi process used three rounds. The first round focused on qualitative data collection with open-ended questions to ensure comprehensive inclusion of expert concepts. Rounds 2 and 3 applied quantitative assessments using an 11-point Likert scale to identify consensus.Key consensus points included glucocorticoids as initial therapy for most patients, with non-biologics (immunomodulators), usually methotrexate, considered in severe or extrapulmonary disease requiring prolonged treatment, or as a steroid-sparing intervention in cases with high risk of steroid toxicity. Biologic therapies might be considered as additive therapy if non-biologics are insufficiently effective or are not tolerated with initial biologic therapy, usually with a tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor, typically infliximab.The Delphi methodology provided a platform to gain potentially valuable insight and interim guidance while awaiting evidenced-based contributions.

What is the contribution of physician associates in hospital care in England? A mixed methods, multiple case study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the deployment of physician associates (PAs); the factors supporting and inhibiting their employment and their contribution and impact on patients' experience and outcomes and the organisation of services. DESIGN: Mixed methods within a case study design, using interviews, observations, work diaries and documentary analysis. SETTING: Six acute care hospitals in three regions of England in 2016-2017. PARTICIPANTS: 43 PAs, 77 other health professionals, 28 managers, 28 patients and relatives. RESULTS: A key influencing factor supporting the employment of PAs in all settings was a shortage of doctors. PAs were found to be acceptable, appropriate and safe members of the medical/surgical teams by the majority of doctors, managers and nurses. They were mainly deployed to undertake inpatient ward work in the medical/surgical team during core weekday hours. They were reported to positively contribute to: continuity within their medical/surgical team, patient experience and flow, inducting new junior doctors, supporting the medical/surgical teams' workload, which released doctors for more complex patients and their training. The lack of regulation and attendant lack of authority to prescribe was seen as a problem in many but not all specialties. The contribution of PAs to productivity and patient outcomes was not quantifiable separately from other members of the team and wider service organisation. Patients and relatives described PAs positively but most did not understand who and what a PA was, often mistaking them for doctors. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers new insights concerning the deployment and contribution of PAs in medical and surgical specialties in English hospitals. PAs provided a flexible addition to the secondary care workforce without drawing from existing professions. Their utility in the hospital setting is unlikely to be completely realised without the appropriate level of regulation and authority to prescribe medicines and order ionising radiation within their scope of practice.

Physician associates working in secondary care teams in England: Interprofessional implications from a national survey.

Physician associates (PAs) are a new type of healthcare professional to the United Kingdom; however, they are well established in the United States (where they are known as physician assistants). PAs are viewed as one potential solution to the current medical workforce doctor shortage. This study investigated the deployment of PAs within secondary care teams in England, through the use of a cross-sectional electronic, self-report survey. The findings from 14 questions are presented. Sixty-three PAs working in a range of specialties responded. A variety of work settings were reported, most frequently inpatient wards, with work generally taking place during weekdays. Both direct and non-direct patient care activities were reported, with the type of work undertaken varying at times, depending on the presence or absence of other healthcare professionals. PAs reported working within a variety of secondary care team staffing permutations, with the majority of these being interprofessional. Line management was largely provided by consultants; however day-to-day supervision varied, often relating to different work settings. A wide variation in ongoing supervision was also reported. Further research is required to understand the nature of PAs' contribution to collaborative care within secondary care teams in England.

Physician associates in England's hospitals: a survey of medical directors exploring current usage and factors affecting recruitment.

In the UK secondary care setting, the case for physician associates is based on the cover and stability they might offer to medical teams. We assessed the extent of their adoption and deployment - that is, their current usage and the factors supporting or inhibiting their inclusion in medical teams - using an electronic, self-report survey of medical directors of acute and mental health NHS trusts in England. Physician associates - employed in small numbers, in a range of specialties, in 20 of the responding trusts - were reported to have been employed to fill gaps in medical staffing and support medical specialty trainees. Inhibiting factors were commonly a shortage of physician associates to recruit and lack of authority to prescribe, as well as a lack of evidence and colleague resistance. Our data suggest there is an appetite for employment of physician associates while practical and attitudinal barriers are yet to be fully overcome.