ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of granting legal full practice authority (FPA) to nurse practitioners (NP) and physician assistants (PA) regarding the performance of specified reserved medical procedures and to support governmental decision-making.DesignNationwide mixed methods design with triangulation of quantitative (Pre-post test design) and qualitative data (expert interviews and focus groups).MethodsSurveys focused on the performance of the procedures (monthly number, authorisation mode, consultations and procedural time) and legal cross-compliance requirements (adherence with protocols, competence). Interviews focused on competence, knowledge, skills, responsibilities, routine behaviour, NP/PA role, acceptance, organisational structure, collaboration, consultation, NP/PA positioning, adherence with protocols and resources. Data collection took place between 2011 and 2015.ResultsQuantitative data included 1251 NPs, 798 PAs and 504 physicians. Besides, expert interviews with 33 healthcare providers and 28 key stakeholders, and 5 focus groups (31 healthcare providers) were held.After obtaining FPA, the proportion of NPs and PAs performing reserved procedures increased from 77% to 85% and from 86% to 93%, respectively; the proportion of procedures performed on own authority increased from 63% to 76% for NPs and from 67% to 71% for PAs. The mean number of monthly contacts between NPs/PAs and physicians about procedures decreased (from 81 to 49 and from 107 to 54, respectively), as did the mean duration in minutes (from 9.9 to 8.6 and from 8.8 to 7.4, respectively). Utilisation of FPA was dependent on the setting, as scepticism of physicians and medical boards hampered full implementation. Legal cross-compliance requirements were mostly fulfilled.ConclusionsInformal practice was legalised. The opportunities to independently perform catheterisations, injections, prescribing, punctures and small surgical procedures were highly used. Care processes were organised more efficiently, services were performed by the most appropriate healthcare provider and conditions were met. This led to the recommendation to continue with FPA.
AimThe study protocol is designed to evaluate the effects of granting independent authorization for medical procedures to nurse practitioners and physician assistants on processes and outcomes of health care.BackgroundRecent (temporarily) enacted legislation in Dutch health care authorizes nurse practitioners and physician assistants to indicate and perform specified medical procedures, i.e. catheterization, cardioversion, defibrillation, endoscopy, injection, puncture, prescribing and simple surgical procedures, independently. Formerly, these procedures were exclusively reserved to physicians, dentists and midwives.DesignA triangulation mixed method design is used to collect quantitative (surveys) and qualitative (interviews) data.MethodsOutcomes are selected from evidence-based frameworks and models for assessing the impact of advanced nursing on quality of health care. Data are collected in various manners. Surveys are structured around the domains: (i) quality of care; (ii) costs; (iii) healthcare resource use; and (iv) patient centredness. Focus group and expert interviews aim to ascertain facilitators and barriers to the implementation process. Data are collected before the amendment of the law, 1 and 2·5 years thereafter.Groups of patients, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, supervising physicians and policy makers all participate in this national study. The study is supported by a grant from the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport in March 2011. Research Ethics Committee approval was obtained in July 2011.ConclusionThis study will provide information about the effects of granting independent authorization for medical procedures to nurse practitioners and physician assistants on processes and outcomes of health care. Study findings aim to support policy makers and other stakeholders in making related decisions. The study design enables a cross-national comparative analysis.
Background Although compression therapy is well established for patients with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and chronic venous disease (CVD), considerable variation exists in its organization in clinical practice which may impact patient outcomes. The current study aims to deepen our understanding of the main drivers of the complex care organization for compression therapy and to identify targets for improvement. Methods This realist evaluation includes a mixed-method design consisting of semi-structured interviews with patients and health care professionals involved in compression therapy (n = 30), stakeholder meetings (n = 2) and surveys (n = 114). Data were collected to create the content of context-mechanism-outcome-configurations (CMOcs) important in compression therapy. Based on these CMOcs, targets for improvement to optimize the organization of compression care were identified. Results We identified overarching context factors and mechanisms targeting four optimal outcomes for the organization of compression therapy: selecting initial compression therapy types that support patient’s self-reliance (1), evidence based selection of elastic compression stocking type and class (2), patient-based selection of assistive devices (3), individualizing treatment duration for DVT patients (4a) and providing follow-up for CVD patients (4b). We found that increasing health care professionals’ knowledge of compression therapy, the availability of unambiguous protocols and guidelines, increasing patient involvement (and if applicable their informal care giver) in the decision making process, the accessible availability of resources, and increasing interdisciplinary consultation enhanced desirable outcomes. These targets triggered mechanisms such as increased health care professionals’ willingness, confidence and motivation to provide patient-based care and increased patients’ self-confidence and self-efficacy. Conclusions This study provides a detailed insight into what needs to be in place to optimize compression care and identified five main targets for improvement.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.