ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2018
Analysis of the level of clinical skills of physician assistants tested with simulated intensive care patients.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced Practice Providers as Leaders of a Rapid Response Team: A Prospective Cohort Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Procedures Performed by Advanced Practice Providers Compared With Medical Residents in the ICU: A Prospective Observational Study.Critical care explorations · 2020Article
- Analysis of the level of clinical skills of physician assistants tested with simulated intensive care patients.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS, AND
objectivesSince adequate staffing in intensive care units (ICUs) is an increasing problem worldwide, we investigated whether physician assistants (PAs) are able to substitute medical residents (MR) in ICUs with at least the same quality of clinical skills. In this study, we analysed the level of clinical skills of PAs in direct comparison with those who traditionally performed these tasks, ie, MR with 6 to 24 months of work experience in the ICU.
methodPhysician assistants and MRs in the ICUs were observed on their clinical skills by means of a simulated ICU comprising 2 scenarios on a human patient simulator with typical ICU cases. The level of clinical skills of PAs and MRs was videotaped and scored with predefined checklists by 2 independent intensivists per scenario. Percentage of the total score was calculated, and means were compared by Student t test.
resultsA total of 11 PAs and 10 MRs participated in the study. Physician assistants and MRs scored equal (PA 66% ± 13% vs MR 68% ± 9%, P = .86) on their clinical performance in the simulated ICU setting.
conclusionThis study showed equal performance of PAs and MRs on clinical skills in the simulated ICU setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.