Halasy, Michael P

The objective was to determine if a greater proportion of physician full-time equivalent (FTE%) relative to nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NPs/PAs) on care teams was associated with improved individual clinician diabetes quality outcomes. The authors conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of 420 family medicine clinicians in 110 care teams in a Midwest health system, using administrative data from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. Poisson regression was used to examine the relationship between physician FTE% and the number of patients meeting 5 criteria included in a composite metric for diabetes management (D5). Covariates included panel size, clinician type, sex, years in practice, region, patient satisfaction, care team size, rural location, and panel complexity. Of the 420 clinicians, 167 (40%) were NP/PA staff and 253 (60%) were physicians. D5 criteria were achieved in 37.9% of NP/PA panels compared with 44.5% of physician panels ( P < .001). In adjusted analysis, rate of patients achieving D5 was unrelated to physician FTE% on the care team ( P = .78). Physicians had a 1.082 (95% confidence interval 1.007–1.164) times greater rate of patients with diabetes achieving D5 than NPs/PAs. Clinicians at rural locations had a .904 (.852-.959) times lower rate of achieving D5 than those at urban locations. Physicians had a greater rate of patients achieving D5 compared with NPs/PAs, but physician FTE% on the care team was unrelated to D5 outcomes. This suggests that clinician team composition matters less than team roles and the dynamics of collaborative care between members.

ABSTRACT Background and purpose: To evaluate the ability of the Well-Being Index (WBI) to stratify distress and well-being (high quality of life [QOL]) in nurse practitioners and physician assistants (NPs and PAs) and identify those whose degree of distress place them at an increased risk for medical error or turnover. Methods: A national sample of NPs and PAs completed a survey that included the WBI and instruments to measure QOL, fatigue, burnout, recent suicidal ideation, medical error, and intent to leave the current job. Conclusions: Overall, 1,576 of 4,106 (38.4%) NPs and PAs completed the survey. Those NPs and PAs with low mental QOL, extreme fatigue, recent suicidal ideation, or burnout had less favorable WBI scores (all p < .0001). Using a prevalence of low overall QOL among APPs of 14.4% as the pretest probability, the WBI score can reduce the posttest probability of low QOL to 2% or increase it to 64.7%. As the WBI score worsened, the posttest probability of high overall QOL decreased from 73% to 8.2%. Also, WBI score stratified the NPs and PAs likelihood of reporting recent medical errors and intent to leave his or her current job. Implications for practice: The WBI is a useful screening tool to stratify distress and well-being in APPs across a variety of domains and identify those NPs and PAs whose degree of distress may increase the risk of medical error or turnover.