Curricula Mapping of Physician Associate/Physician Assistant-Comparable Professions Worldwide Using the Learning Opportunities, Objectives, and Outcomes Platform.

ABSTRACT: Given the international growth of physician associate/physician assistant (PA) and PA-comparable professions, it is crucial to understand the educational curricula of PA/PA-comparable professions worldwide. This article provides an overview of the process and development of the PA/PA-comparable curricula mapping design applying an international framework. It uses an innovative web-based tool, the Learning Opportunities, Objectives, and Outcomes Platform (LOOOP), to map and evaluate course content, teaching strategies, assessment formats, and learning outcomes. It highlights the project's rationale, challenges, and future implications.

Global accreditation practices for accelerated medically trained clinicians: a view of five countries.

BACKGROUND: Shortages and maldistribution of healthcare workers persist despite efforts to increase the number of practitioners. Evidence to support policy planning and decisions is essential. The World Health Organization has proposed National Health Workforce Accounts (NHWA) to facilitate human resource information systems for effective health workforce planning and monitoring. In this study, we report on the accreditation practices for accelerated medically trained clinicians in five countries: Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malaysia, and Mongolia. METHOD: Using open-ended survey responses and document review, information about accreditation practices was classified using NHWA indicators. We examined practices using this framework and further examined the extent to which the indicators were appropriate for this cadre of healthcare providers. We developed a data extraction tool and noted any indicators that were difficult to interpret in the local context. RESULTS: Accreditation practices in the five countries are generally aligned with the WHO indicators with some exceptions. All countries had standards for pre-service and in-service training. It was difficult to determine the extent to which social accountability and social determinants of health were explicitly part of accreditation practices as this cadre of practitioners evolved out of community health needs. Other areas of discrepancy were interprofessional education and continuing professional development. DISCUSSION: While it is possible to use NHWA module 3 indicators there are disadvantages as well, at least for accelerated medically trained clinicians. There are aspects of accreditation practices that are not readily coded in the standard definitions used for the indicators. While the indicators provide detailed definitions, some invite social desirability bias and others are not as easily understood by practitioners whose roles continue to evolve and adapt to their health systems. CONCLUSION: Regular review and revision of indicators are essential to facilitate uptake of the NHWA for planning and monitoring healthcare providers.

Knowledge and Confidence Level Among Emergency Healthcare Workers in Airway Management and Resuscitation of Suspected COVID-19 Patients: A Cross Sectional Study in Malaysia.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate the knowledge and confidence of emergency healthcare workers (EHCW) in facing the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional online study using a validated questionnaire was distributed to doctors (MD), assistant medical officers (AMO), and staff nurses (SN) at an urban tertiary Emergency Department. It comprised of 40 knowledge and 10 confidence-level questions related to resuscitation and airway management steps. RESULTS: A total of 135 from 167 eligible EHCW were enrolled. 68.9% (n = 93) had high knowledge while 53.3% (n = 72) possessed high confidence level. Overall knowledge mean score was 32.96/40 (SD = 3.63) between MD (33.88±3.09), AMO (32.28±4.03), and SN (32.00±3.60), P= 0.025. EHCWs with a length of service (LOS) between 4-10 years had the highest knowledge compared to those with LOS <4-year (33.71±3.39 versus 31.21±3.19 P = 0.002). Airway-related knowledge was significantly different between the designations and LOS (P = 0.002 and P = 0.003, respectively). Overall, EHCW confidence level against LOS showed significant difference [F (2, 132) = 5.46, P = 0.005] with longer LOS showing better confidence. MD showed the highest confidence compared to AMO and SN (3.67±0.69, 3.53±0.68, 3.26±0.64) P = 0.049. The majority EHCW were confident in performing high-quality chest-compression, and handling of Personal Protective Equipment but less than half were confident in resuscitating, leading the resuscitation, managing the airway or being successful in first intubation attempt. CONCLUSIONS: EHCW possessed good knowledge in airway and resuscitation of COVID-19 patients, but differed between designations and LOS. A longer LOS was associated with better confidence, but there were some aspects in airway management and resuscitation that needed improvement.