80 new PA programs scheduled to open by mid 2016

[knj27]

I don't usually agree with what he says but this is a fair proposal. Closer to the euro model.

 

Uh I don't know if you've ever lived in Europe, but the healthcare there is absolutely terrible compared to America. I speak from first-hand experience.

 

Admittedly that probably has more to do with having socialized medicine, however I have to say all of the various medical professionals I visited with over there seemed pretty incompetent compared to docs/nurses/PT's, etc. in America.

[Contrarian]

I've "lived in Europe" and think this conversation is about the actual training of physician providers... NOT the MACRO delivery of care to the population. This seems to be an important distinction because US trained, top of the line physicians would likely provide identical care to their european counterparts in THAT system.

[RHC81]

FWIW, I live in Europe and have excellent healthcare. Europe is diverse, so the quality does differ among countries.

 

Now, back to your regularly scheduled topic... :)

[andersenpa]

Uh I don't know if you've ever lived in Europe, but the healthcare there is absolutely terrible compared to America. I speak from first-hand experience.

 

Admittedly that probably has more to do with having socialized medicine, however I have to say all of the various medical professionals I visited with over there seemed pretty incompetent compared to docs/nurses/PT's, etc. in America.

 

 

And we have all met superb clinicians who have trained overseas.

Try this out:

http://www.nationmaster.com/index.php

Browse health stats.

You can't tease out provider quality from care delivery but it's a goos starting point for Europe vs US.

[doubledown10]

Lower academic prerequisites in IPAP? Let me give you a brief history lesson on IPAP. When I was a young sergeant in the early 90s, the PA Program, which was through the University of Oklahoma or the University of Texas, depending on when you went, was usually reserved for special forces medics that had reached the pinnacle of their training or other "line" medics that had done their time and in between deployments and combat missions, had managed to get the required credits to apply. Which, by the way, were always changing. I know a few career officers in the Army that have sat on selection boards and they have told me that in the past the selection process was amazingly subjective.

 

The PAs are commissioned into a the Army Medical Specialist Corps, a mix match of PAs, dieticians etc. Around 2001 the PA corps realized that they were out gunned in the senior officer ranks within that corps. There weren't a whole lot of full bird colonel PAs. The reason being that the typical PA graduate already had about 10-12 years of prior military experience (reference to deployments and combat missions) before they applied. Two years of school later, they have about 12-14 years of active federal service. They do about another 8-10 years and retire, usually as a captain. In an effort to help staff the senior ranks of the Army Medical Specialist Corps, the PA corp decided to open the IPAP program, now through the University of Nebraska, to commissioned officers. My class was the first class that allowed officers to apply, the progam used to be strictly enlisted applicants.

 

My PA class was a mix of officers, enlisted and senior enlisted soldiers from all the services. I can tell you that because they allowed officers into the selection process, the academic requirements became quite important and very competitive. I mean picture this, you're a mid career staff sergeant medic without an actual degree, but you have about 70 semester hours that can be matriculated. You decide to apply to the program and you application goes up against a graduate from west point that already has a degree from a prestigious place. That means that the enlisted guy had better get his academics squared away or he doesn't get selected.

 

On top of the academics, there is the added aspect of soldiering. Now I can only speak for the Army PAs, but they look at the total soldier. So you could be a super genius and be a terrible soldier and you're not going to get in.

 

Add to that the fact that the program, like most is challenging, but nobody is making your do PT etc. Although I'm not offended, I think that the statement about lower academic prerequisites is rather misleading. Some of the best PAs I have ever met have been prior military and graduates of IPAP.

[doubledown10]

Although it's true, you don't need a bachelor's degree to get into IPAP, good luck in the selection process if the rest of the applicant pool has one. I graduated from the program with people that had never so much as considered starting an IV or looking in somebody's ear. I'm talking about Airborne Rangers, military police officers etc. At the end of the program, they were on par with some of us that were medics our entire adult lives, special operations medics, flight paramedics etc. There has been a few studies done in the Army about the difference between PAs that had prior HCE prior to PA school and the ones that didn't and at the six year post graduate mark, there is no difference. IPAP is a very different animal. It's very demanding, the hours are not flexible like in a normal program. It's all go, no quit with a rank structure. O-chem gets hammered in the first semester in San Antonio, and if you haven't taken chemistry before you attend the program, it might be difficult for you.

[68W2PA]

doubledown10,

 

I think you misunderstand my point. I have the highest respect for IPAP and hope to attend the program soon.

 

My comments came in the context of a discussion on the importance of HCE. As I stated, and you restated, it is possible to have a program that produces exceptional PAs without prior HCE. IPAP is also interesting because it is a Masters program that accepts people without bachelors degrees and has less academic prerequisite courses than most other PA programs. Yet despite these "relaxed" academic prerequisites, at the end of the day, it still manages to produce great PAs and still manages to be ranked as one of the best programs in the country.

[johnpeterson]

Hello Everyone. I am a new poster to the forum, but I have followed it for years. I really appreciate reading everyone's comments and ideas to help move the PA profession forward. I finally decided to post a comment, as this topic is extremely important to me and even more important to the future livelihood of PA's. I have sent the below message to the ARC-PA (the organization that accredits PA programs). Below the message I have included the email addresses that I have sent this to. I have sent this message several times over the last few months and have never heard back. Please post any ideas or comments. I would really enjoy the opportunity to band together to make our voices heard and to help guide the profession to ensure future prosperity for all PA's. Thanks everyone, John.

 

 

Letter sent to ARC-PA:

 

We have been tracking the Accreditation of PA programs for several years. Based on our calculations, there will be a significant oversupply of PA's within the next several years due to how many PA programs ARC-PA is choosing to accredit. In addition, this over-supply of PA's will continue to grow. Based on economic principles, this over-supply will lead to a decrease in wages (when supply outpaces demand, price (wages) decrease).

 

 

The below calculation is based on the U.S. BLS estimate of 30% growth in PA employment from 2010-2020.

 

 

Current number of PA's: 83,600

Number of PA's in 2020 based on 30% growth: 83,600 * 1.3 = 108,680

 

 

This equates to 25,080 PA positions created over the next 10 years or 25,080/10 = 2500/year

 

 

Given that there are 170 current programs and an average of 5 programs accredited every year, there will be an average of 195 PA programs over the next 10 years. If 195 programs graduate an average of 30 PA's per year, this will create 5850 new PA's each year. Over 10 years, this equates to 58,500 new PA's.

 

 

Given that PA job growth over the next 10 years is only 25,080, the ARC-PA is helping to create 33,420 PA's that will not be able to find suitable clinical employment with increasing compensation prospects. In addition, this massive oversupply with lead to a decrease in wages for all PA's.

 

 

Why is it that the ARC-PA is purposefully helping to facilitate this dismal future for the profession and for current and future PA's? Did you know that there are only 141 MD programs in the U.S. and that there are less MD programs today than in the 1950's? The The Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) is not increasing the number of MD programs, because they understand that if supply of MD's is kept in line with the demand for MD's, wages and standards for MD's remain high.

 

 

We are very disappointed with the direction the ARC-PA is helping to bring the PA profession.

 

 

arc-pa@arc-pa.org,

arcpaljs@hotmail.com,

Lynn@arc-pa.org,

Karen@arc-pa.org