2022, Article / Letter to editor (Journal of Interprofessional Care, (2022))The purpose of this study was to gain insight into change in attitudes held by students in oral healthcare about interprofessional learning and collaboration after one year of work in a student-run dental clinic (SRDC). Third- and fourth-year bachelor of dental hygiene students (n = 221) and first- and second-year master of dentistry students (n = 203) participated in baseline and follow-up measurements and completed 570 questionnaires. The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) was used to measure changes in attitudes toward Interprofessional Education (IPE) during participation in the SRDC. To validate the questionnaire for the setting, professional groups, and wording of RIPLS, we performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Two modified subscales remained: "Teamwork & Collaboration" and "Negative Professional Identity." Mixed linear models were used to assess relationships between students' attitudes toward IPE and participation in the SRDC. Overall, the students had positive attitudes toward IPE. At baseline, the attitudes of the dental hygiene and dentistry students were almost equally positive. After one year, dental hygiene students demonstrated a significantly more positive attitude toward collaborative learning and teamwork than the dentistry students. Further research should investigate whether the positive attitudes impact behavior in professional practice.
2021, Article / Letter to editor (International Journal of Care Coordination, (2021))Task shifting in healthcare has mainly been initiated and studied as a way to react to/or mitigate workforce shortages. Here, we define task shifting as the structural redistribution of tasks, usually including responsibilities and competencies between different professions. As such, task shifting is commonly focused on highly specialised and trained professionals who hand-over specific, standardised tasks to professionals with lower levels of education. It is expected that this type of task shifting will lead to efficiency and cost savings to healthcare organisations. Yet, there are more benefits to task shifting, in particular its contribution to integrated patient-centred quality of care and a tailored system that meets the changing care demands in society. Hence the importance to broaden the scope of task shifting, its goals, manifestations and how task shifting plays a role in addressing both the strengths and weaknesses in the healthcare system. In this focus piece, trends and conditions for task shifting and its (un)anticipated effects are discussed. We argue that, only when designed to face specific complexities at the workplace and taking into account the balance between specialists and generalists, task shifting may substantially contribute to enhanced quality of care that meets the changing needs of society.
2020, Article / Letter to editor (International Journal of Nursing Studies, vol. 104, (2020))Background: General practitioners experience a high workload during out-of-hours care. A possible solution is the shifting of care to nurse practitioners. Objectives: To provide insight into patient- and care characteristics, safety, efficiency, and patient satisfaction of substituting general practitioners with nurse practitioners for home visits by out-of-hours primary care services. Design: Quasi-experimental non-randomised study comparing home visits by nurse practitioners (intervention group; one out-of-hours care service) with home visits by general practitioners (control group; two out-of-hours care services) for 24 protocolised health problems. Setting: Three out-of-hours primary care services in the East of the Netherlands. Participants: 1601 patients who received a home visit by a nurse practitioner (N=386) or a general practitioner (N = 1215). Of these patients, 639 gave informed consent to be included in the protocol adherence assessment and follow-up record review (nurse practitioner: N=358; general practitioner: N=281). Methods: Five nurse practitioners with experience in ambulance care were recruited and trained. From September 2016 to March 2017 the nurse practitioners took over home visits under supervision of a general practitioners. This was evaluated using: (1) data-extraction from the patient registration system, (2) follow-up record review in the patients' general practices, and (3) patient satisfaction survey. Two general practitioners independently assessed protocol adherence based on the extracted registration data. Results: Nurse practitioners prescribed medication significantly less often than general practitioners (19.9% versus 30.6%), and referred patients significantly more often to the hospital (24.1% versus 15.9%). The mean length of the home visit was significantly longer for nurse practitioners (34.1 versus 21.1 min). Nurse practitioners adhered to the protocol significantly more often than general practitioners (84.9% versus 76.2%) and their medication prescribing was significantly more often appropriate (93.7% versus 79.5%). There were no differences in the number of missed diagnoses and complications. The number of follow-up contacts was also similar in both groups. Patient satisfaction was generally high and significantly higher for nurse practitioners on several items. Conclusions: Nurse practitioners with experience in ambulance care can safely, efficiently, and satisfactorily perform low complex out-of-hours primary care home visits. It is recommended to study the safety and efficiency of nurse practitioners' home visits in other regions and with nurse practitioners with different educational levels and different specialisations. In addition, we recommend to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and if it leads increased quality of care. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2020, Part of book or chapter of book (Grol, R.; Laurant, M.; Wensing, M. (ed.), Improving Patient Care: The Implementation of Change in Health Care, 3rd Edition, pp. 263-274)
2017, Article / Letter to editor (BMC Health Services Research, vol. 17, (2017))Background: Increasingly, 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. Methods: A 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. Results: The 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. Conclusion: In 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.
2017, Article / Letter to editor (PLoS One, vol. 12, iss. 8, (2017))Background Medical care for admitted patients in hospitals is increasingly reallocated to physician assistants (PAs). There is limited evidence about the consequences for the quality and safety of care. This study aimed to determine the effects of substitution of inpatient care from medical doctors (MDs) to PAs on patients' length of stay (LOS), quality and safety of care, and patient experiences with the provided care. Methods In a multicenter matched-controlled study, the traditional model in which only MDs are employed for inpatient care (MD model) was compared with a mixed model in which besides MDs also PAs are employed (PA/MD model). Thirty-four wards were recruited across the Netherlands. Patients were followed from admission till one month after discharge. Primary outcome measure was patients' LOS. Secondary outcomes concerned eleven indicators for quality and safety of inpatient care and patients' experiences with the provided care. Results Data on 2,307 patients from 34 hospital wards was available. The involvement of PAs was not significantly associated with LOS (beta 1.20, 95% CI 0.99-1.40, p = .062). None of the indicators for quality and safety of care were different between study arms. However, the involvement of PAs was associated with better experiences of patients (beta 0.49, 95% CI 0.22-0.76, p = .001). Conclusions This study did not find differences regarding LOS and quality of care between wards on which PAs, in collaboration with MDs, provided medical care for the admitted patients, and wards on which only MDs provided medical care. Employing PAs seems to be safe and seems to lead to better patient experiences.