Head to Head: Physician Assistants in 2000 Compared to Family Physicians 1987 - 1999 Class Years

Robert C. Bowman, M.D.

Using PA data from http://depts.washington.edu/uwrhrc/uploads/CHWSWP105.pdf and FPGP data (including osteopathic FPs) from the 2005 OfficeMax version of the AMA Masterfile, the following comparisons can be made regarding rural distributions by state.

 Low levels across the board suggest poor support for either PA or FP regarding rural distributions. In some cases distributional training demonstrates advantages, as in Washington State and the MEDEX program. States such as Nebraska demonstrate similar levels across the board indicating a balanced emphasis of distribution. Comparisons of both PA and FPGP to population can also be interesting. Either PAs or FPs should be distributing close to the rural population distribution of the state, if not, some questions should be asked about the policies for the whole state. The numbers of PAs and PAs were also very comparable for the all PA group in 2000 and this 1987 - 1999 group of family physicians, even without percentages.

Yellow cells have 10% greater PA distribution than FPGP. Gray cells have 10% greater distribution for FPGP. PA distributions on the left, FPGP in the middle, and the rural distributions of population by RUCA 2.0 are on the right

  PA PA1 PA2 PA3 PA4 FPGP FP1 FP2 FP3 FP4 Pop 2 Pop 3 Pop 4
  Number Urban Large Rural Small Rural Isolated Rural Number Urban Large Rural Small Rural Isolated Rural Large Rural Small Rural Isolated
AK 253 44.3% 21.3% 20.2% 14.2% 181 59.7% 12.2% 19.9% 8.3% 22.6% 15.3% 11.9%
AL 269 85.9% 6.7% 4.5% 3.0% 559 70.5% 13.6% 10.7% 5.2% 13.7% 12.0% 5.9%
AR 56 64.3% 16.1% 14.3% 5.4% 528 58.7% 21.0% 17.0% 3.2% 27.8% 23.2% 10.6%
AZ 726 76.2% 12.5% 8.1% 3.2% 739 81.6% 6.6% 9.7% 2.0% 10.4% 6.0% 2.6%
CA 3,895 92.6% 3.8% 2.6% 1.0% 4031 93.0% 4.6% 1.4% 1.0% 3.0% 1.8% 0.5%
CO 913 86.4% 1.9% 7.1% 4.6% 884 78.8% 6.8% 9.7% 4.6% 2.0% 7.8% 5.0%
CT 779 97.6% 1.2% 0.6% 0.6% 235 91.1% 6.8% 0.0% 2.1% 2.7% 1.5% 2.2%
DC 185 100.0%       102 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
DE 94 93.6%   6.4%   137 80.3% 14.6% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 20.4% 0.6%
FL 2,111 92.3% 2.2% 4.0% 1.5% 1873 94.8% 2.8% 1.9% 0.6% 2.2% 3.9% 1.7%
GA 1,313 77.6% 13.7% 5.6% 3.0% 1068 77.6% 9.9% 8.8% 3.7% 14.6% 11.4% 4.4%
HI 93 69.9% 20.4% 5.4% 4.3% 172 63.4% 29.1% 4.7% 2.9% 18.3% 4.0% 5.8%
IA 499 50.1% 12.8% 21.0% 16.0% 674 57.1% 13.6% 22.3% 7.0% 14.5% 19.2% 19.1%
ID 212 53.8% 23.1% 13.7% 9.4% 263 63.1% 12.5% 16.7% 7.6% 30.6% 14.5% 11.3%
IL 909 75.8% 12.0% 8.6% 3.6% 1732 84.6% 7.9% 6.8% 0.7% 7.3% 5.2% 3.3%
IN 277 82.3% 6.1% 9.0% 2.5% 1049 74.9% 14.5% 9.2% 1.4% 13.1% 11.8% 5.5%
KS 465 50.1% 26.0% 11.4% 12.5% 525 60.0% 18.7% 11.8% 9.5% 23.8% 9.9% 11.1%
KY 519 60.9% 17.7% 15.2% 6.2% 485 51.8% 24.1% 15.5% 8.7% 17.3% 21.2% 15.5%
LA 272 81.6% 11.8% 4.4% 2.2% 506 79.1% 13.4% 6.7% 0.8% 13.2% 12.9% 5.2%
MA 869 92.9% 2.0% 4.1% 1.0% 573 97.4% 0.9% 1.2% 0.5% 2.7% 2.6% 1.9%
MD 1,080 95.3% 3.2% 0.9% 0.6% 479 90.2% 5.4% 3.5% 0.8% 4.0% 2.2% 2.2%
ME 380 47.9% 12.6%