教学提供者健康和医师助理学生健康。

Q2 Health Professions
Adrian Banning, Bettie Coplan, Michael T LeVasseur
{"title":"教学提供者健康和医师助理学生健康。","authors":"Adrian Banning,&nbsp;Bettie Coplan,&nbsp;Michael T LeVasseur","doi":"10.1097/JPA.0000000000000528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this novel study was to determine whether any association exists between student well-being and physician assistant (PA) program approaches to teaching provider health and well-being (provider wellness).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were sourced from 3 PA Education Association surveys. Data from the 2019 Matriculating Student and End of Program Surveys (EOPS) were analyzed to compare student-reported well-being across 6 measures. Next, data from the 2019 Didactic Curriculum Survey were assessed and matched to the 2019 EOPS data. Finally, generalized estimating equation models were used to assess the independent effects of course structure, mode of instruction, and contact hours on well-being scores among end-of-program students (within one month of graduation).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While levels of well-being were generally favorable, except for \"level of social activity\" ( P = .20), across measures, graduating student levels of well-being ( P < .05) were statistically significantly lower than matriculating student levels of well-being. No associations were found between levels of student well-being and whether programs reported teaching or not teaching provider wellness. Some aspects of instruction (eg, contact hours) were inconsistently associated with various well-being measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, no consistent associations between approaches to teaching provider wellness and various measures of student well-being were identified. Further research is needed to determine what approaches to promoting wellness are effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":39231,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teaching Provider Wellness and Physician Assistant Student Well-Being.\",\"authors\":\"Adrian Banning,&nbsp;Bettie Coplan,&nbsp;Michael T LeVasseur\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JPA.0000000000000528\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this novel study was to determine whether any association exists between student well-being and physician assistant (PA) program approaches to teaching provider health and well-being (provider wellness).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were sourced from 3 PA Education Association surveys. Data from the 2019 Matriculating Student and End of Program Surveys (EOPS) were analyzed to compare student-reported well-being across 6 measures. Next, data from the 2019 Didactic Curriculum Survey were assessed and matched to the 2019 EOPS data. Finally, generalized estimating equation models were used to assess the independent effects of course structure, mode of instruction, and contact hours on well-being scores among end-of-program students (within one month of graduation).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While levels of well-being were generally favorable, except for \\\"level of social activity\\\" ( P = .20), across measures, graduating student levels of well-being ( P < .05) were statistically significantly lower than matriculating student levels of well-being. No associations were found between levels of student well-being and whether programs reported teaching or not teaching provider wellness. Some aspects of instruction (eg, contact hours) were inconsistently associated with various well-being measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, no consistent associations between approaches to teaching provider wellness and various measures of student well-being were identified. Further research is needed to determine what approaches to promoting wellness are effective.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Physician Assistant Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Physician Assistant Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000528\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是确定学生幸福感与医师助理(PA)教学提供者健康和幸福感(提供者健康)之间是否存在任何关联。方法:数据来源于3个PA教育协会的调查。对2019年入学学生和项目结束调查(EOPS)的数据进行了分析,以比较6项指标中学生报告的幸福感。接下来,对2019年教学课程调查的数据进行评估,并与2019年EOPS数据进行匹配。最后,使用广义估计方程模型来评估课程结构、教学模式和接触时间对课程结束学生(毕业后一个月内)幸福感得分的独立影响。结果:除了“社会活动水平”(P = .20)外,幸福感水平总体上是有利的,但在所有测量中,毕业生的幸福感水平(P < .05)在统计学上显著低于入学学生的幸福感水平。没有发现学生幸福感水平与项目是否报告教学提供者健康之间的联系。教学的某些方面(例如,接触时间)与各种幸福感指标的关联并不一致。结论:在本研究中,没有确定教学提供者健康的方法与学生健康的各种措施之间的一致关联。需要进一步的研究来确定促进健康的有效方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Teaching Provider Wellness and Physician Assistant Student Well-Being.

Purpose: The purpose of this novel study was to determine whether any association exists between student well-being and physician assistant (PA) program approaches to teaching provider health and well-being (provider wellness).

Methods: Data were sourced from 3 PA Education Association surveys. Data from the 2019 Matriculating Student and End of Program Surveys (EOPS) were analyzed to compare student-reported well-being across 6 measures. Next, data from the 2019 Didactic Curriculum Survey were assessed and matched to the 2019 EOPS data. Finally, generalized estimating equation models were used to assess the independent effects of course structure, mode of instruction, and contact hours on well-being scores among end-of-program students (within one month of graduation).

Results: While levels of well-being were generally favorable, except for "level of social activity" ( P = .20), across measures, graduating student levels of well-being ( P < .05) were statistically significantly lower than matriculating student levels of well-being. No associations were found between levels of student well-being and whether programs reported teaching or not teaching provider wellness. Some aspects of instruction (eg, contact hours) were inconsistently associated with various well-being measures.

Conclusion: In this study, no consistent associations between approaches to teaching provider wellness and various measures of student well-being were identified. Further research is needed to determine what approaches to promoting wellness are effective.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信