Rotation 7 – Rotation Reflection

What one thing would you want the preceptor or other colleagues to notice about your work in this rotation?
From starting my rotation at NYPQ for Internal Medicine, to my Long Term Care rotation, I have spent a total of 9 weeks working with the Internal Medicine team. When I first started, I did not know what to expect. The physician assistants I worked with were extremely busy, and there were so many moving parts to their daily schedule. I felt out of place, and did not know how I can learn from, or contribute to the rotation. After spending two nearly two months with the team, I can now say that I have a much stronger grasp at the role and responsibilities of a medicine PA. I felt like I gained the trust from the team, and therefore was given the opportunity to take part in their daily tasks. I helped review the patient’s charts and notes/recommendations from other specialties, so we would know the next steps for the patients’ hospital course/treatments. I joined the PAs when they rounded on their patients in the morning so we can update them on what has been going on and planned for their care. I was able to help out with writing admission and discharge notes, as well carry out tasks that were asked of me. I was most proud that the PAs would come to me, and trusted me to do ABGs on their patients. I practiced so many of them that I can see myself perform it independently! I hope that my preceptor and the PAs I worked with noticed my strong work ethic, curiosity to learn, and my commitment to helping the team.How could the knowledge I’ve gained here be applicable in other rotations/disciplines?
Long Term Care has additional parts of the history and physical that is needed in caring for this patient population. The first major example can be seen in describing the patient’s social history. There is an emphasis placed on the patient’s living situation, specifically to identify the type of residence. Regardless of whether it was an apartment building or house, I learned that it was important to inquire on how many flights of stairs may be involved. Additionally, we need to ask if the patient is able to ambulate with or without assistive devices. These components of the history are important to understand the patients’ functional status. It can also highlight potential areas that can affect the patients’ independence, and where assistance may be needed. Describing the types of ADLs and IADLs the patient could do, and whether or not they had familial or outside help was another important component to highlight the needs of the patient. In a patient that I presented who had a fall, I learned how important it was to check the patient’s feet. It is important to check if the patient has full range of motion at the feet and ankles, since any issue there may be the reason for the fall. I found that all these important parts of the history and physical could be applicable to my patients in other specialties as well. Noting these aspects can be useful when evaluating and documenting patients with physical disabilities, or those suffering a recent health/physical issue that prevents them from carrying out their daily activities.

Types of patients you found challenging in this rotation and what you learned about dealing with them
The elderly population was always the patient group that made me the most nervous. I believe this is because of the number of diseases and conditions that arise with age. I came into the rotation with the belief that these patients are vulnerable and “closer to death”. I felt that any of the medical conditions the patients had, risked their deterioration at the hospital. For the most part, I still believe this is true, but have seen exceptions where patients over 80s, still had less medical problems than those in their 40s-60s. Interviewing the geriatric patients with cancer was another hurdle. I have had family members pass away from cancer, so this disease hit close to home. At first it was difficult hearing their stories since I often would be reminded of my experiences. Towards the middle of the rotation, I realized that these interactions were reminders of why I wanted to become a PA. I wanted to give back to the medical community with the same care and compassion my family and I experienced.

What was a memorable patient or experience that I’ll carry with me?
One memorable patient I met on this rotation was a man who was brought in for evaluation of a stroke. The day before, he had an episode of dizziness at 4pm while going grocery shopping with his daughter, who is a nurse. He had to be escorted to his car during that episode, and had his daughter drive him home. At 11pm, the patient felt generalized weakness as he went to bed but did not mention this to his family. He was awake and worried until 1:30am, when his daughter asked him why he was not asleep yet. At this moment, he and his daughter noticed he was having slurred speech and right sided weakness. When the overnight stroke team first received him, the patient was already out of the window for tPA. With no evidence of large vessel occlusion on the CT and CTA, and presenting more than 6 hours after onset of symptoms, the patient was unable to get a thrombectomy. This patient stood out to me, because I was sent to assess him the morning I came in. His voice was mildly slurred, and the only other positive finding on exam was ⅘ strength on the right arm with no limb drift. When I returned to see the patient later in the day with the stroke team, his right arm strength became ⅖ and he had limb drift. It was a devastating case because medically, there was not much else the medical team could do besides consider anticoagulants and physical/speech therapy. I also felt for the patient’s daughter. When placing myself in her shoes, I too may not have had “stroke” cross my mind with the initial symptom of just dizziness. It makes me reconsider my differential diagnoses, and threshold for suspecting medical issues in my future practice, and with my family.

Rotation 7 – Site Visit Summary

For my Long Term Care site evaluations, each meeting we were to present an H&P. What was different about these write ups was that there was additional focus on our patients’ living situations, as well as functional abilities. It was necessary to specify the patient’s place of residence, whether it was an apartment building or house; and to mention how many flights of stairs may be involved. If the patient is able to ambulate with or without assistive devices, or unable to ambulate in general, it should have been mentioned. Additionally, the types of ADLs and IADLs the patient could do was important to describe, since it gives providers and care-takers an idea of what the patient may need assistance with. The presence of family, friends, or health aide support should have also been identified. In general, all this additional note taking is meant to see how independent patients may be in their living situations. I appreciated practicing this type of note taking, since it can also be applicable to other patients who may be living with disabilities as well.

In the second meeting, I was also to present a journal article. My journal article’s objective was to see if aspirin-use in the healthy geriatric population was beneficial to a “disability-free survival”. It concluded that the aspirin group did not have a significant difference in “disability-free survival” compared with the placebo group. There was also no significant cardiovascular effect in the aspirin group, but found a higher bleeding risk.

Rotation 7 – Pance Prep Plan

To create my PANCE preparation plan, I first reviewed the PANCE blueprint. I noted the percentages at which the topics are tested to see what is most important to master before taking the exam.

Next, I reviewed the feedback received from my past PACKRAT, EOR exams, and Rosh Review questions. The first thing I noticed was how much Cardiovascular will be on the exam, compared to how I have been scoring on those questions. I have been inconsistent with the subject; sometimes below, average, or slightly above the national performance. Pulmonary was another organ system that is heavily tested on, that I need to focus attention on. Although a few of my exams showed I tested above average, my Rosh Review feedback was way below average. Endocrine, Dermatology, and Renal were other topics where I had consistently below average performance. Even though they are not tested as heavily, it would benefit me to strengthen my knowledge on those topics so that I do not lose easy points on the exam. After reviewing my question feedbacks, I noticed that I have strengths in Musculoskeletal, Hematology, and Infectious Disease. These are topics that I can occasionally review, but not focus too much extra time on.

Due to the pandemic, it is not for certain when we will complete our rotations, and when graduation will be. I plan to give myself 1-2 months after graduation to prepare to take the PANCE. Currently, I try to do 30 questions a week and review those tested topics. I may do these randomly throughout the week during my downtime. However, if I have a chunk of time available, try to do 30-60 questions timed to practice my test taking. I will continue to practice questions like this, with the intention to increase the number of questions per day/week the closer I get to my scheduled PANCE date. My goal is to train myself to run through 60 questions per day. Taking into account my topic weakness previously described, those are the topics I will make sure to practice regularly throughout my practice question sessions. Within two weeks of my exam date, I will consider purchasing and completing the NCCPA practice exam, as well as Rosh Review’s “Mock PANCE Blocks” and “PANCE Power Packs”.

I intend to rotate between Rosh Review, Kaplan, and Exam Master questions, in order to practice different question styles and content. Within a day of doing the questions, I will review the answers and the reasons behind them. In addition, I will also try to figure out why the other answer choices were incorrect, and be aware of the differentials that the test writers wanted us to consider when picking the right answer. If I need further clarification on the topics, I have many resources to turn to. I will use my trusted sources of Pance Prep Pearls, Osmosis, Amboss, our Clinical Wiki on Blackboard, as well as relevant Youtube videos. I also look forward to taking part of the PANCE bootcamp planned by our PA Program at the end of our Clinical rotations!

Rotation 7 – Journal article

Effect of Aspirin on Disability-free Survival in the Healthy Elderly
By McNeil et al.
N Engl J Med 2018;379:1499-508
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa1800722

During my rotations, I have noticed many geriatric patients placed on Aspirin. From my first LTC site evaluation H&P presentation, my patient with a past medical history of hypertension and hyperlipidemia was taking aspirin. I assumed that it was for cardiovascular disease prevention, but I listed the indication under “Hypertension”. My site evaluator challenged me to consider its actual indication, and to consider the guidelines for low dose aspirin in older women. When doing the research, I came across multiple articles that referred to the “ASPEE trial,” which stands for “Aspirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly”. I decided to find this article to understand what the trial was about.
The study described how often patients with a history of stroke or coronary disease would be told to take low dose aspirin to prevent cardiovascular disease. On the other hand, the benefits versus risk of taking aspirin in those patients with no history of stroke or coronary disease, has not been widely studied. ASPREE recruited healthy subjects with no history of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease, chronic diseases that may cause death within 5 years, dementia, high risk of bleed, nor significant physical disability. Inclusion ages were 65 years and older in Hispanics and blacks (due to these population’s higher risk for CV disease or dementia) and 70 years in other populations. The subjects were from the United States and Australia, with recruitment methods ranging from medical providers’ identification of patients, clinic mailing lists, screening EMRs, or placed advertisements; with subsequent letters of invitation. The study was double-blind, and randomized in which patients would be taking 100mg of aspirin (total 9525 subjects) or a placebo (total 9589 subjects). Participants would be reached via phone calls every 3-6 months to check adherence to the study intervention, and to assess whether they reached the “end point” to this study. This end point was defined as having outcomes of “disability-free survival” where the patient does not have dementia nor physical disability, or the composite outcomes of death, dementia, physical disability, cardiovascular disease, cancer, depression, or hemorrhage.
This study lasted for roughly 4.7 years until the researchers found that continuing the study would not yield a significant treatment effect. They found that the aspirin group did not have a significant difference in “disability-free survival” compared with the placebo group. In comparing rates of death, dementia, or physical disability, the aspirin group had “21.5 events per 1000 person-years in the aspirin group and 21.2 per 1000 person-years in the placebo group”. The incidence of major hemorrhage was higher at 3.8% in the aspirin group, compared with the 2.8% in the placebo group. This outcome is similar to other studies who included slightly younger subjects compared with this trial, finding no significant cardiovascular effect in the aspirin group, but a higher bleeding risk.