INTRODUCTION:Approximately 80% of physician assistant/associate (PA) new faculty come directly from clinical practice into academia, often with limited preparation for academic career advancement. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the perceived barriers, institutional resources, and predictors of self-efficacy navigating promotion and tenure (P&T) decisions among PA educators nationwide. METHODS:A pilot-tested, IRB-approved survey was administered via multichannel convenience sampling (n = 270). Independent variables included institutional criteria, resource utility, mentorship type, and professional barriers. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, nonparametric tests, and multiple linear regression to identify primary predictors of faculty self-efficacy. RESULTS:Participants reported low overall self-efficacy navigating P&T (M = 2.93, on a 5-point Likert scale). Significant barriers included high teaching/service loads (63.3%) and perceived lack of clinical valuation (52.6%). Faculty at institutions that formally valued clinical experience reported significantly higher self-efficacy (M = 3.33/5) than those at institutions without such criteria (M = 2.84/5; P = .02). The regression model (R2 = .436, P < .001) identified structured mentorship as the strongest independent predictor of self-efficacy (β = 0.36), followed by perceived clinical valuation (β = 0.28) and resource variety (β = 0.26). Gender disparities were noted, with female faculty reporting higher service loads and greater uncertainty regarding resources. DISSCUSSION:Current P&T systems do not adequately account for the clinician-educator role. To foster equity and retention, institutions must prioritize targeted support, including formalized structured mentorship, the formal acknowledgement of clinical expertise in the advancement criterion, and the provision of a diverse set of scholarly resources for P&T.
Introduction Physician assistant (PA) programs face persistent challenges in recruiting and retaining clinical preceptors due to time constraints, administrative burden, lack of compensation, and limited training. Additional pressures, such as health care consolidation, program expansion, clinician burnout, and financial implications of paid clinical sites, further strain preceptorship capacity. This study examines motivators and barriers influencing clinicians’ willingness to precept PA students. Methods This mixed-methods study used snowball sampling to recruit current, former, and nonprecepting PAs across North Carolina. Participants completed surveys with Likert-scale and open-ended items adapted from the 2011 National Survey of Physician Assistants. Four virtual focus groups, selected from survey respondents, underwent semistructured interviews informed by Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression; qualitative data underwent thematic analysis with deductive SDT coding and inductive refinement. Triangulation then integrated these findings. Results Respondents (N = 158) represented diverse clinical experience. Top motivators included student quality (66%), program support (53%), and financial compensation (51%). Key barriers were student quality (61.29%), burnout (53.23%), and lack of compensation (46.77%). From the focused group discussion, four themes emerged: Student Quality, Financial Compensation, Non-Financial Incentives, and Administrative Support. Student preparedness acted as both motivator and barrier; compensation concerns focused on fairness. Discussion Preceptorship relies on relational and professional factors, student quality, recognition, and institutional alignment, rather than financial incentives alone. System inefficiencies, inadequate preparation, and misaligned compensation hinder engagement. Improving student readiness, enhancing institutional support, and implementing transparent, layered incentives may strengthen recruitment and retention.
INTRODUCTION:Suicide is a leading cause of preventable death worldwide, with many individuals interacting with health care providers shortly before their attempt. Medical trainees often report anxiety when managing patients with suicidal ideation. Effective care requires not only clinical knowledge but also empathic understanding. Despite its importance, evidence-based strategies for teaching empathy remain limited. This study draws on Experiential Learning Theory, Transformative Learning Theory, and applies the Jefferson Scale of Empathy as a framework. METHODS:Two cohorts of 131 physician assistant students participated in a panel discussion on suicide, followed by a reflective essay writing activity. The panel consisted of patient survivors of suicide and a psychiatric clinician. Retrospective, qualitative analysis of the reflective essays was conducted to answer 2 research questions: (1) What are the overall student takeaways from the suicide panel discussion? (2) How does experiential learning about suicidality, in the form of a panel discussion, affect the student's ability to develop empathic understanding? RESULTS:Students reported increased preparedness to care for suicidal patients, recognized limitations of lecture-based empathy instruction, and expressed interest in additional training. Jefferson Scale of Empathy-guided analysis demonstrated activation of empathy across all domains, including perspective taking, compassionate care, and understanding patients' lived experiences. DISCUSSION:Experiential panel discussions appear to be an effective approach to fostering empathy in health professions education. Although this intervention enhanced multiple dimensions of empathy, some subdomains were not addressed, highlighting the need for complementary educational strategies.
ABSTRACT:Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping health care and higher education, yet physician associate (PA) education lacks a unified framework for its integration. This consensus statement from the PA Education Association (PAEA) AI Special Interest Group (SIG) offers guidance for PA programs navigating the challenges and opportunities presented by AI technologies.The PAEA AI SIG used a modified Delphi method following the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method framework. Following a twelve-month qualitative phase of iterative discussion and collaborative document development, 13 expert panelists rated 20 consensus position items on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined a priori as a median rating of 7 to 9 without disagreement (per the interpercentile range method for a 13-member panel).All 20 position items achieved consensus endorsement in round 1 (median range: 7-9; overall mean 8.3). The SIG achieved consensus across 5 domains: assessment and academic integrity, AI as a learning tool, admissions processes, faculty workflow, and AI competencies. Items with the greatest variation related to lifting AI prohibitions in application preparation (item 9, median 7) and restricting general-purpose AI in admissions review (item 10, median 8).This consensus statement provides a foundation for PA programs to transition from reactive policies toward proactive, evidence-informed AI integration strategies. The recommendations emphasize rigorous competency validation, equitable access considerations, and the primacy of human judgment in clinical education.
