• Brandon T Sawyer and Adit A Ginde.
• The Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.
• Acad Emerg Med. 2014 May 1;21(5):520-5.

ObjectivesThis was a study of the scope of practice and autonomy of emergency medicine (EM) physician assistants (PAs) practicing in rural versus urban emergency departments (EDs).MethodsUsing the American Academy of Physician Assistants (AAPA) Masterfile, a random sample of 200 U.S. EM PAs were surveyed, with oversampling of an additional 200 rural PAs. Location was classified by zip code-based rural-urban commuting area codes, and responses were compared about conditions managed, procedures performed, and physician supervision between rural versus urban groups.ResultsA total of 237 responses were received from PAs in 44 U.S. states, of which (201) were valid responses (105 rural, 96 urban) from PAs currently practicing in EDs (59.3% exclusion-adjusted response rate). Compared to urban PAs, rural PAs more frequently managed cardiac arrest (67% vs. 44%), stroke (86% vs. 72%), multisystem trauma (83% vs. 70%), active labor (44% vs. 23%), and critically ill children (82% vs. 65%) in the past year. They were more likely to have performed intubation (65% vs. 44%), needle thoracostomy (21% vs. 8%), and tube thoracostomy (46% vs. 26%). Rural PAs more often reported never having a physician present in the ED (38% vs. 0%) and less often reported always having a physician present (50% vs. 98%). Rural PAs were also less likely to report that a physician evaluates more than 75% of their patients (8% vs. 18%) and more likely that a physician never evaluates all of their patients (19% vs. 7%).ConclusionsRural PAs reported a broader scope of practice, more autonomy, and less access to physician supervision than urban PAs.© 2014 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

33 keywords...

hide…