Dataset Information

Towards an optimal composition of general practitioners and nurse practitioners in out-of-hours primary care teams: a quasi-experimental study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To gain insights into the ability of general practitioners (GPs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) to meet patient demands in out-of-hours primary care by comparing the outcomes of teams with different ratios of practitioners. DESIGN:Quasi-experimental study. SETTING:A GP cooperative (GPC) in the Netherlands. INTERVENTION:Team 2 (1?NP, 3 GPs) and team 3 (2 NPs, 2 GPs) were compared with team 1 (4 GPs). Each team covered 35 weekend days. PARTICIPANTS:All 9503 patients who were scheduled for a consultation at the GPC through a nurse triage system. OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was the total number of consultations per provider for weekend cover between 10:00 and 18:00 hours. Secondary outcomes concerned the numbers of patients outside the NPs' scope of practice, patient safety, resource use, direct healthcare costs and GPs' performance. RESULTS:The mean number of consultations per shift was lower in teams with NPs (team 1: 93.9, team 3: 87.1; p<0.001). The mean proportion of patients outside NPs' scope of practice per hour was 9.0% (SD 6.7), and the highest value in any hour was 40%. The proportion of patients who did not receive treatment within the targeted time period was higher in teams with NPs (team 2, 5.2%; team 3, 8.3%) compared with GPs only (team 1 3.5%) (p<0.01). Team 3 referred more patients to the emergency department (14.7%) compared with team 1 (12.0%; p=0.028). In teams with NPs, GPs more often treated urgent patients (team 1: 13.2%, team 2: 16.3%, team 3: 21.4%; p<0.01) and patients with digestive complaints (team 1: 11.1%, team 2: 11.8%, team 3: 16.7%; p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Primary healthcare teams with a ratio of up to two GPs and two NPs provided sufficient capacity to provide care to all patients during weekend cover. Areas of concern are the number of consultations, delay in patient care and referrals to the emergency department. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT02407847.

SUBMITTER: van der Biezen M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5730011 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Towards an optimal composition of general practitioners and nurse practitioners in out-of-hours primary care teams: a quasi-experimental study.

van der Biezen Mieke M Wensing Michel M van der Burgt Regi R Laurant Miranda M

BMJ open 20170530 5

<h4>Objectives</h4>To gain insights into the ability of general practitioners (GPs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) to meet patient demands in out-of-hours primary care by comparing the outcomes of teams with different ratios of practitioners.<h4>Design</h4>Quasi-experimental study.<h4>Setting</h4>A GP cooperative (GPC) in the Netherlands.<h4>Intervention</h4>Team 2 (1 NP, 3 GPs) and team 3 (2 NPs, 2 GPs) were compared with team 1 (4 GPs). Each team covered 35 weekend days.<h4>Participants</h4>All ...[more]

PMID: 28559458

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIncreasingly, nurse practitioners (NPs) are deployed in teams along with general practitioners (GPs) to help meet the demand for out-of-hours care. The purpose of this study was to explore factors influencing collaboration between GPs and NPs in teams working out-of-hours.MethodsA descriptive qualitative study was done using a total of 27 semi-structured interviews and two focus group discussions. Data was collected between June, 2014 and October, 2015 at an out-of-hours primary care organisation in the Netherlands. Overall, 38 health professionals (GPs, NPs, and support staff) participated in the study. The interviews were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. Two researchers conducted an inductive content analysis, involving the identification of relevant items in a first phase and clustering into themes in a second phase.ResultsThe following four themes emerged from the data: clarity of NP role and regulation, shared caseload and use of skills, communication concerning professional roles, trust and support in NP practice. Main factors influencing collaboration between GPs and NPs included a lack of knowledge regarding the NPs' scope of practice and regulations governing NP role; differences in teams in sharing caseload and using each other's skills effectively; varying support of GPs for the NP role; and limited communication between GPs and NPs regarding professional roles during the shift. Lack of collaboration was perceived to result in an increased risk of delay for patients who needed treatment from a GP, especially in teams with more NPs. Collaboration was not perceived to improve over time as teams varied across shifts.ConclusionIn out-of-hours primary care teams constantly change and team members are often unfamiliar with each other or other's competences. In this environment, knowledge and communication about team members' roles is continuously at stake. Especially in teams with more NPs, team members need to use each other's skills to deliver care to all patients on time.

Project description:The pressure in out-of-hours primary care is high due to an increasing demand for care and rising health-care costs. During the daytime, substituting general practitioners (GPs) with nurse practitioners (NPs) shows positive results to contribute to these challenges. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the impact during out-of-hours. The current study aims to provide an insight into the impact of substitution on resource use, production and direct health-care costs during out-of-hours.At a general practitioner cooperative (GPC) in the south-east of the Netherlands, experimental teams with four GPs and one NP were compared with control teams with five GPs. In a secondary analysis, GP care versus NP care was also examined. During a 15-month period all patients visiting the GPC on weekend days were included. The primary outcome was resource use including X-rays, drug prescriptions and referrals to the Emergency Department (ED). We used logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders. Secondary outcomes were production per hour and direct health-care costs using a cost-minimization analysis.We analysed 6,040 patients in the experimental team (NPs: 987, GPs: 5,053) and 6,052 patients in the control team. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the teams. In the secondary analysis, in the experimental team NP care was associated with fewer drug prescriptions (NPs 37.1 %, GPs 43 %, p?<?.001) and fewer referrals to the ED (NPs 5.1 %, GPs 11.3 %, p?=?.001) than GP care. The mean production per hour was 3.0 consultations for GPs and 2.4 consultations for NPs (p?<?.001). The cost of a consultation with an NP was €3.34 less than a consultation with a GP (p?=?.02).These results indicated no overall differences between the teams. Nonetheless, a comparison of type of provider showed that NP care resulted in lower resource use and cost savings than GP care. To find the optimal balance between GPs and NPs in out-of-hours primary care, more research is needed on the impact of increasing the ratio of NPs in a team with GPs on resource use and health-care costs.ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01388374 .

Project description:BackgroundRepeated studies of working hours among Norwegian regular general practitioners (RGPs) have shown that the average total number of weekly working hours has remained unchanged since 1994 and up until 2014. For both male and female RGPs, the mean total weekly working hours amounted to almost 50 h in 2014. In recent years, Norwegian RGPs have become increasingly dissatisfied. They experience significantly increased workload without compensation in the form of more doctors or better payment. A study from the Norwegian Directorate of Health in 2018 (the RGP study) showed that Norwegian RGPs worked 55.6 h weekly (median 52.5). 25% of the respondents worked more than 62.2 h weekly. Based on data from the RGP study we investigated Norwegian RGP's out-of-hours (OOH) work, how the working time was distributed, and to what extent the OOH work affected the regular working hours.MethodsIn early 2018, an electronic survey was sent to all 4640 RGPs in Norway. Each RGP reported how many minutes that were spent that particular day on various tasks during seven consecutive days. Working time also included additional tasks in the municipality, other professional medical work and OOH primary health care. Differences were analysed by independent t-tests, and regression analyses.ResultsOne thousand eighty hundred seventy-six RGPs (40.4%) responded, 640 (34.1%) had registered OOH work. Male RGPs worked on average 1.5 h more doing regular work than did females (p = 0.001) and on average 2.3 h more OOH work than females (p = 0.079). RGPs with no OOH work registered a mean of 1.0 h more clinical work than RGPs working OOH (p = 0.043). There was a large variation in OOH working hours. A linear regression analysis showed that male RGPs and RGPs in rural areas had the heaviest OOH workload.ConclusionsOne in three Norwegian RGPs undertook OOH work during the registration week in the RGP study. OOH work was done in addition to a sizeable regular workload as an RGP. We found small gender differences. OOH work was not compensated with reduced regular RGP work.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the quality of communication in out-of-hours (OOH) telephone triage conducted by general practitioners (GPs), nurses using a computerised decision support system and physicians with different medical specialities, and to explore the association between communication quality and efficiency, length of call and the accuracy of telephone triage.DesignNatural quasi-experimental cross-sectional study.SettingTwo Danish OOH services using different telephone triage models: a GP cooperative and the medical helpline 1813.Participants1294 audio-recorded randomly selected OOH telephone triage calls from 2016 conducted by GPs (n=423), nurses using CDSS (n=430) and physicians with different medical specialities (n=441).Main outcome measuresTwenty-four physicians assessed the calls. The panel used a validated assessment tool (Assessment of Quality in Telephone Triage, AQTT) to measure nine aspects of communication, overall perceived communication quality, efficiency and length of call.ResultsThe risk of poor quality was significantly higher in calls triaged by GPs compared with calls triaged by nurses regarding 'allowing the caller to describe the situation' (GP: 13.5% nurse: 9.8%), 'mastering questioning techniques' (GP: 27.4% nurse: 21.1%), 'summarising' (GP: 33.0% nurse: 21.0%) and 'paying attention to caller's experience' (GP: 25.7% nurse: 17.0%). The risk of poor quality was significantly higher in calls triaged by physicians compared with calls triaged by GPs in five out of nine items. GP calls were significantly shorter (2 min 57 s) than nurse calls (4 min 44 s) and physician calls (4 min 1 s). Undertriaged calls were rated lower than optimally triaged calls for overall quality of communication (p<0.001) and all specific items.ConclusionsCompared with telephone triage by GPs, the communication quality was higher in calls triaged by nurses and lower in calls triaged by physicians with different medical specialities. However, calls triaged by nurses and physicians were longer and perceived less efficient. Quality of communication was associated with accurate triage.

Project description:BackgroundNurse practitioners (NPs) play a critical role in the multidisciplinary management of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Neurologists´ behavioral characteristics have been associated with suboptimal clinical decisions. However, limited information is available on their impact among NPs involved in MS care. The aim of this study was to assess nurses´ therapeutic choices to understand behavioral factors influencing their decision making process.MethodsA non-interventional, cross-sectional, web-based study was conducted. NPs actively involved in the care of patients with MS were invited to participate in the study by the Spanish Society of Neurology Nursing. Participants answered questions regarding their standard practice and therapeutic management of seven simulated relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) case scenarios. A behavioral battery was used to measure participants´ life satisfaction, mood, positive social behaviors, feeling of helpfulness, attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based innovations, occupational burnout, and healthcare-related regret. The outcome of interest was therapeutic inertia (TI), defined as the lack of treatment escalation when there is clinical and radiological evidence of disease activity. A score to quantify TI was created based on the number of simulated scenarios where treatment intensification was warranted.ResultsOverall, 331 NPs were invited to participate, 130 initiated the study, and 96 (29%) completed the study. The mean age (SD) was 44.6 (9.8) years and 91.7% were female. Seventy-three participants (76.0%) felt their opinions had a significant influence on neurologists´ therapeutic decisions. Sixteen NPs (16.5%) showed severe emotional exhaustion related to work and 13 (13.5%) had depressive symptoms. The mean (SD) TI score was 0.97 (1.1). Fifty-six of NPs showed TI in at least one case scenario. Higher years of nursing experience (p = 0.014), feeling of helpfulness (p = 0.014), positive attitudes toward innovations (p = 0.046), and a higher intensity of care-related regret (p = 0.021) were associated with a lower risk of TI (adjusted R2 = 0.28). Burnout was associated with higher risk of TI (p = 0.001).ConclusionsAlthough NPs cannot prescribe MS treatments in Spain, their behavioral characteristics may influence the management of patients with RRMS. Continuing education and specific strategies for reducing occupational burnout may lead to better management skills and improve MS care.

Dataset Information

Towards an optimal composition of general practitioners and nurse practitioners in out-of-hours primary care teams: a quasi-experimental study.

Publications

Towards an optimal composition of general practitioners and nurse practitioners in out-of-hours primary care teams: a quasi-experimental study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets