Purpose: Physician Assistant (PA) programs often set minimum GPA and graduate record examination (GRE) requirements for admission, citing that candidates with higher admission scores will perform better in the PA program. However, to date, there are limited published studies with inconsistent results that have investigated the validity of using these preadmission characteristics to predict performance in PA programs or on the Physician Assistant National Certifying Exam (PANCE). The development of a physician assistant college admission test (PA-CAT) that has predictive validity to determine PANCE success would give PA admissions committees an additional resource to make decisions. This study was conducted to determine the strength of the relationship between PA-CAT and undergraduate cumulative and science GPA. Methods: The PA-CAT is comprised of 180 questions covering 12 subject areas based on research identifying the relative importance of that subject to success in the PA curriculum. The exam was administered through a secured computer-based testing to 479 newly admitted PA students across the United States. Regression analysis was conducted with Rasch scale scores as the dependent variable and two independent variables (undergraduate GPA and undergraduate science GPA). Results: The PA-CAT Rasch scale scores are positively correlated with undergraduate GPA (r=0.16) and undergraduate science GPA (r=0.22). Although these correlation coefficients are statistically significant (pConclusion:Early results from this research study demonstrates there is a statistically significant relationship between the PA-CAT and undergraduate science GPA in newly admitted PA students. Limitations of the study include the fact that students voluntarily took this exam without consequence. Further study is needed to determine if the exam can be generalized to the entire PA applicant pool thereby providing a valid instrument for admissions decisions.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Insufficient pain management and inappropriate use of pain medication are problems across the health care spectrum. Recent clinical practice guidelines and standardized core curricula have been developed to combat the deficiencies in pain education to ensure that health care professionals are proficient in assessing and managing pain; however, the extent to which physician assistant (PA) programs have implemented these in their training programs is unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the magnitude of pain education in current PA programs in the United States, including how pain medicine instruction is incorporated into the curriculum, time spent teaching about pain management, the methods used, and barriers to providing pain medicine education. Methods Data from the 2016 Physician Assistant Education Association's Support to Advance Research grant, which allowed the inclusion of questions in the annual program survey, were analyzed. The response rate was 100%. Descriptive statistics were used to describe results. Nonparametric statistics used the Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis analysis to assess mean ranks and calculate effect sizes. Results Of the 209 programs surveyed, 14% reported that pain management is not included in the curriculum, and 3% reported that it is a stand-alone module. The reason most often cited to explain lack of curriculum was insufficient time (39%), and 32% reported that it is not mandated by the program accreditors. Further analysis included assessment of differences in pain medicine curriculum by program housing, academic health science center status, and geography. Conclusions Eighty-six percent of programs include pain education in their curriculum, suggesting that PA programs recognize the importance of pain education. The methods of instruction and topics included across programs are inconsistent. As the first comprehensive benchmark of pain medicine education for PAs, this study shows that although most programs address pain curriculum, opportunities exist to improve pain training in PA programs in the United States.

(UW HWRC) received a rapid response request from the National Center for Health Workforce Analysis to summarize the state of the evidence on efforts to recruit and retain a racially and ethnically diverse health workforce. The findings presented in this brief are based on a search of the peer-review and grey literature from 2010 to 2015. To set the stage for the findings, the UW HWRC compared the current racial and ethnic mix of the health workforce to the mix ten years prior using the American Community Survey. The key findings are:  The health workforce is more diverse than the U.S. population, and has increased in racial and ethnic diversity over the last decade.  The trends in racial and ethnic diversity varies considerably by occupation, although minorities tend to be more highly represented among the lower skilled occupations.  While various programs exist to increase racial and ethnic diversity of the health professions, the evidence on the effectiveness of such programs and interventions is minimal in the peerreview literature from the last five years.  The majority of published articles are descriptive and present program models or theories on how to design programs to increase racial and ethnic diversity in the health professions.  The fields of medicine and dentistry are most represented among the literature.  The peer-reviewed and grey literature primarily focus on evaluating and assessing the following program outcomes: increasing interest in health professions, increasing interest in and applications to professional schools, and increasing enrollment. The focus is less on graduation and career trajectories.  Promising practices supported by evidence in the literature to increase racial and ethnic diversity across various levels of educational settings include: targeted recruitment and revised admissions policies, curriculum changes, summer enrichment programs, and comprehensive programs that integrate multiple intervention such as financial support, academic support, and social support.  More and better evaluation is needed to assess the extent to which programs and interventions contribute to long-term goals of diversifying the workforce.