Physician associate/assistant contributions to cancer diagnosis in primary care: a rapid systematic review

Are we ready? assessing effectiveness and implementation of cancer control strategies in primary care: a comprehensive review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Cancer is a major global cause of death, and primary care is crucial for cancer prevention and early detection. However, there is conflicting information on the effectiveness, implementation, and sustainability of cancer control interventions in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to summarize the evidence for cancer control in primary care, focussing on identifying relevant factors for implementation and sustainability.

STUDY SETTING AND DESIGN

We conducted a narrative, mixed-methods review of systematic reviews, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Four databases were screened, and two independent reviewers selected studies reporting on cancer prevention, screening, or early detection in primary or community settings. We analysed findings using the extended Reach-Effectiveness-Adopt-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) Framework.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

From the 37 reviews that met the inclusion criteria, 6 focussed on primary prevention, 23 on screening, and 12 on early detection. Most reviews (78%) addressed intervention effectiveness, such as HPV vaccination, tobacco cessation, and cervical, breast, and colorectal screening. One-third of the reviews mentioned adoption and implementation factors, including barriers and facilitators to the implementation of cancer screening programs. Only one review addressed maintenance and sustainability factors, exploring continuous resources and funding strategies.

CONCLUSION

While numerous interventions are effective for cancer prevention and detection in primary care, literature on implementation and sustainability strategies is lacking. Focusing on continuous resources and funding for cancer strategies in primary care may aid sustainability. Future research should prioritize reporting on implementation and sustainability factors to enhance cancer prevention and control in primary care settings.

The benefits and limitations of establishing the PA profession globally: A systematic review and mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVE

Physician associates/assistants (PAs) and their equivalents offer a solution to the supply and demand crisis to alleviate global healthcare needs. This study investigated how PA and PA equivalents address global healthcare needs across different healthcare systems, revealing recommendations for their use. The study also sought to catalog the global healthcare needs that PAs and equivalents are successfully alleviating, the roles in which they function, and the barriers facing implementation.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted from October 2021 to April 2022 and rerun in June 2023 following PRISMA 2020 guidelines; additionally, supporting interviews were conducted with PAs and global health experts. Primary outcomes were geographic region, economy, healthcare needs, and healthcare systems. Secondary outcomes were PA use, license recognition, and successes or barriers when implementing PAs.

RESULTS

The literature and interviews focused on the global use of PAs and PA equivalents in six geographic regions, 63 countries, and five US territories where PAs or PA equivalents are employed, have been employed, are volunteering, or are being considered to support global healthcare needs. Most countries have a developing economy and an out-of-pocket healthcare system. PAs and PA equivalents hold 35 different practice titles, and most work in primary care. PAs alleviate healthcare shortages and economic disparities, specifically related to inequitable healthcare access. Globally, the profession is limited by a lack of legislation, regulation, and support.

CONCLUSIONS

PAs and PA equivalents worldwide belong to an adaptable profession that has well-documented success in alleviating the global healthcare shortage and addressing healthcare needs. Countries desiring PAs or PA equivalents should identify their specific needs, train their existing workforce, employ pilot programs, and focus on seeking early legislation and regulation. Broad support for existing PA and PA equivalent international organizations is recommended for global collaboration. This study serves as a guide for those advocating for the continued or future implementation of PAs and PA equivalents in their own country and provides a comprehensive resource to aid in the globalization of this profession. We offer recommendations to address the dire healthcare needs and workforce shortage faced across the globe.

Barriers and strategies for primary health care workforce development: synthesis of evidence

BACKGROUND

Having a sufficient and well-functioning health workforce is crucial for reducing the burden of disease and premature death. Health workforce development, focusing on availability, recruitment, retention, and education, is inseparable from acceptability, motivation, burnout, role and responsibility, and performance. Each aspect of workforce development may face several challenges, requiring specific strategies. However, there was little evidence on barriers and strategies towards comprehensive health workforce development. Therefore, this review explored barriers and strategies for health workforce development at the primary health care level around the world.

METHODS

A scoping review of reviews was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews. The article search was performed in Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE. We used EndNote x9 for managing the collected articles, screening processes, and citation purpose. The scoping review included any kind of review articles on the application of health workforce development concepts, such as availability, recruitment, retention, role and responsibility, education and training, motivation, and burnout, with primary health care and published in English anywhere in the world. Based on the concepts above, barriers and strategies for health workforce development were identified. The findings were synthesized qualitatively based on the building blocks of the health system framework. The analysis involved specific activities such as familiarization, construction of the thematic framework, indexing, charting, and interpretation. The results were presented in texts, tables, and figures.

RESULTS

The search strategies yielded 7,276 papers were found. Of which, 69 were included in the scoping review. The most frequently cited barriers were financial challenges and issues related to health care delivery, such as workloads. Barriers affecting healthcare providers directly, including lack of training and ineffective teamwork, were also prominent. Other health system and governance barriers include lack of support, unclear responsibility, and inequity. Another notable barrier was the shortage of health care technology, which pertains to both health care supplies and information technology. The most common cited effective strategies were ongoing support and supervision, engaging with communities, establishing appropriate primary care settings, financial incentives, fostering teamwork, and promoting autonomous health care practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective leadership/governance, a robust health financing system, integration of health information and technology, such as mobile health and ensuring a consistent supply of adequate resources are also vital components of primary health care workforce development. The findings highlight the importance of continuous professional development, which includes training new cadres, implementing effective recruitment and retention mechanisms, optimising the skill mix, and promoting workplace wellness. These elements are essential in fostering a well-trained and resilient primary health care workforce.

Clinical Utility of the 31-Gene Expression Profile Test on the Management of Cutaneous Melanoma by Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants

Objective

The 31-gene expression profile (31-GEP) can predict the risk of recurrence and metastasis in cutaneous melanoma (CM). We assessed the viewpoints and use of 31-GEP testing by physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) for patients with CM.

Methods

NPs and PAs (n = 369) completed an 18-question online survey about their viewpoints and use of the 31-GEP risk-stratification test.

Results

Most practitioners (n = 334, 90.5%) felt prognostic testing improved patient care and would recommend the 31-GEP to a colleague (n = 333, 90.2%) or a friend or family member (n = 289, 78.3%) who was diagnosed with CM. The 31-GEP test was used by 176 respondents in the preceding 12 months (53%). Among users of the 31-GEP test, 78% stated that the results would impact follow-up schedule and referral, 66% overall treatment decisions, 62% sentinel lymph node biopsy recommendations, and 50% surveillance imaging. In thin tumors (≤ 1 mm), 82% of 31-GEP users and 44% of nonusers stated that the 31-GEP results would impact their treatment plan decisions.

Conclusion

The 31-GEP test significantly impacts treatment plans in CM, particularly for thin and stage I melanomas. Importantly, even nonusers stated that 31-GEP test results would impact treatment plans as well as recommendations to a friend or family member.