Adaptation and factor structure of three psychometric instruments measuring behavioral aspects of medication prescribing in physician assistants.

OBJECTIVES: (1) Present the factor structure of two psychometric instruments for self-efficacy and one for outcome expectations of medication prescribing; (2) evaluate the reliability of the scales, and (3) present preliminary evidence of validity. METHODS: Physician assistants (PA) and PA students completed a survey evaluating three psychometric instruments: (1) Self-Efficacy in Prescribing (SEP), (2) Self-Efficacy in Prescribing-Geriatric (SEPG), and (3) Outcomes Expectations of Prescribing Errors (OEP). Students also evaluated 3 hypothetical prescriptions, two of which contained a prescribing error. Students were instructed to identify (1) if an error occurred and (2) what type of error. The data were analyzed using parallel analysis with a varimax rotation, Cronbach's α, Pearson and Spearman correlations. RESULTS: One hundred eighty five (n = 185) respondents completed the survey (response rate = 63.8%). The parallel analysis found that the SEP had one 7-item factor with α = 0.94 (M = 5.7 (SD = 1.9) out of 10). The SEPG also had one 7-item factor with α = 0.95 (M = 5.5 (1.9). The OEP had one 6-item factor with α = 0.89 (M = 3.5 (SD = 0.8) out of 5). The SEP and SEPG, were correlated to the OEP each other (both p < 0.01). Actively practicing PAs had the highest composite mean SEP and SEPG scores. First-year PA students had the highest mean scores for the OEP. There was a weak association between the mean SEPG score and the number of correctly identified prescriptions (rs = 0.18, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The SEP, SEPG, and OEP show preliminary evidence of reliability and structural, construct, and known-group validities using simulated prescriptions. These tools may be able to be used by educators and implementation scientists as one method to show the effectiveness of future interventions to reduce incidence of prescribing errors.

Opioid use disorder and motivational interviewing: Training physician assistants for the epidemic.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate the effectiveness of a curriculum on physician assistant (PA) students' knowledge about opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment and management and (2) present student satisfaction with the curriculum. METHODS: Three cohorts of PA students completed pre- and post-intervention questionnaires about their knowledge of motivational interviewing (MI) for OUD. One cohort of students completed the 11-item questionnaire without exposure to the intervention (control group). Students' satisfaction with the curriculum was assessed as was their pre- and post-intervention knowledge about using MI for OUD. Bivariate statistical tests were used to analyze the quantitative data. RESULTS: Three hundred complete and usable responses were obtained from the four cohorts of PA students (n = 300, 87.7 percent response rate). The intervention groups answered a higher number of items correctly (median = 7) than the control group (median = 6, Wilcoxon sign test M = 31, p < 0.0001). Among the intervention group, there was not a statistically significant between cohort difference on: (1) the number of identical pre- and post-intervention questionnaire items answered correctly (Chi-square = 3.77, DF = 2, p = 0.15), and (2) the total number of items answered correctly on the post-intervention questionnaire (Chi-square = 0.32, DF = 2, p = 0.85). Student comments suggest students were supportive of the curriculum, with improvements noted on how to deliver the material. CONCLUSIONS: An educational intervention using MI for PA students was found to be valuable, and students who completed the intervention had greater knowledge about using MI with OUD patients than those who did not complete the training. The size of the effect was small, and more research on the curriculum is necessary prior to widespread adoption.

Psychometric properties of two instruments measuring self-efficacy and outcome expectations of providing inhaler technique education to patients.

INTRODUCTION: Both the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) asthma practice guidelines recommend that providers routinely check inhaler technique and correct any mistakes that patients may make when using these devices. Providers, however, rarely check inhaler technique during asthma visits. The objectives of this study were to: (1) describe the development of an instrument to measure self-efficacy and outcome expectations regarding inhaler technique patient education, (2) evaluate the internal consistency reliability of the new scales, and (3) provide preliminary evidence of construct validity. Methods: First- and second-year physician assistant (PA) students at two institutions completed an anonymous and voluntary survey evaluating two new instruments, the Teaching Inhalers to Patients: Self-efficacy (TIP-SE) and the Teaching Inhalers to Patients: Outcome Expectations (TIP-OE) scales and sociodemographic characteristics. The data were analyzed using Principal Components Analysis (PCA), Cronbach's α, and multivariable logistic regression. Results: We had usable responses from 146 PA students (71.9% participation rate). The PCA identified one factor for the TIP-SE and TIP-OE, respectively. The internal consistency of the TIP-SE and TIP-OE was α = 0.96 and α = 0.92, respectively. The logistic regression found that second-year PA students who had higher mean TIP-SE scores were significantly more likely to report teaching patients to use inhalers during rotations (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.1, 2.9). There was not a statistically significant relationship between reporting teaching patients to use inhalers during rotations and mean TIP-OE scores. Conclusion: The TIP-SE and TIP-OE show preliminary evidence of reliability and validity.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2021.2008428 .