4.2 Article

Perceptions of Role Transition into Practice among Advanced Practice Providers and Physicians

Journal

WESTERN JOURNAL OF NURSING RESEARCH
Volume 43, Issue 2, Pages 105-114

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0193945920935430

Keywords

fellowships; clinical competence; nurse practitioners; physician assistants

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined the experiences of advanced practice providers (APPs) and compared their perceptions with physicians regarding novice practitioners' acclimation into a provider role within the first year of practice. While there were similar perspectives between physicians and APPs on confidence and competence, significant differences were found in areas such as physician support, time management, and the time it takes to become a fully functional APP.
This study sought to examine the experiences of advanced practice providers (APPs) as an approach to inform the development of formalized programs for transition into practice and to compare APP (N= 122) and physician (N= 84) perceptions of the novice practitioners' acclimation into a provider role within the first year of practice. Using a cross-sectional survey design, two separate web-based questionnaires were distributed to APPs and physicians. The APPs' perspectives echoed findings of earlier studies with regard to perceived confidence, feelings of anxiety/fear, and inadequacy. In 16 of 23 paired items, physicians and APPs had similar perspectives about confidence/competence after orientation. Significant differences in their perceptions included amount of physician support, time management, length of time to become a fully functional APP, and independence. Better understanding of the perceptions of APPs and physicians can augment APP preparation for a shifting workforce composition and team-based, interprofessional practice designed to meet the population's health care needs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available