Texas Jurisprudence Exam Physician Assistant Practice Exam

Disable ads (and more) with a membership for a one time $2.99 payment

Prepare for the Texas Jurisprudence Exam for Physician Assistants with flashcards and multiple choice questions. Each question offers hints and explanations. Get ready for your exam!

Each practice test/flash card set has 50 randomly selected questions from a bank of over 500. You'll get a new set of questions each time!

Practice this question and more.


Which of the following may indicate professional incompetence, prompting the Board to take action against a physician assistant?

  1. Low patient satisfaction

  2. Repeated healthcare liability claims

  3. High patient turnover

  4. Noncompliance with office policies

The correct answer is: Repeated healthcare liability claims

Repeated healthcare liability claims can be a significant indicator of professional incompetence for a physician assistant. Such claims often reflect patterns of negligence or malpractice that suggest a failure to meet the standard of care expected in medical practice. A high number of liability claims could suggest that the physician assistant consistently provides subpar medical care, leading to errors or adverse outcomes for patients. This not only poses a risk to patient safety but also undermines public confidence in the healthcare system. Therefore, the board may view these repeated claims as a serious matter warranting investigation and potentially disciplinary action to ensure that patient safety is maintained and that practitioners meet the expected professional standards. In contrast, while low patient satisfaction, high patient turnover, and noncompliance with office policies can certainly reflect areas for improvement in practice, they do not necessarily indicate professional incompetence. Low patient satisfaction could stem from various factors unrelated to medical skills, high turnover might be influenced by administrative issues, and noncompliance with policies might concern operational aspects rather than clinical competency. Thus, these factors may be less definitive in prompting the Board's actions compared to the implications of repeated liability claims.