BackgroundIn many countries, substitution of physicians by nurses has become common due to the shortage of physicians and the need for high-quality, affordable care, especially for chronic and multi-morbid patients. We examined the evidence on the clinical effectiveness and care costs of physician-nurse substitution in primary care.MethodsWe systematically searched OVID Medline and Embase, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL, up to August 2012; selected and critically appraised published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared nurse-led care with care by primary care physicians on patient satisfaction, Quality of Life (QoL), hospital admission, mortality and costs of healthcare. We assessed the individual study risk of bias, calculated the study-specific and pooled relative risks (RR) or standardised mean differences (SMD); and performed fixed-effects meta-analyses.Results24 RCTs (38,974 participants) and 2 economic studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analyses showed higher overall scores of patient satisfaction with nurse-led care (SMD 0.18, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.23), in RCTs of single contact or urgent care, short (less than 6 months) follow-up episodes and in small trials (N ≤ 200). Nurse-led care was effective at reducing the overall risk of hospital admission (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91), mortality (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96), in RCTs of on-going or non-urgent care, longer (at least 12 months) follow-up episodes and in larger (N > 200) RCTs. Higher quality RCTs (with better allocation concealment and less attrition) showed higher rates of hospital admissions and mortality with nurse-led care albeit less or not significant. The results seemed more consistent across nurse practitioners than with registered or licensed nurses. The effects of nurse-led care on QoL and costs were difficult to interpret due to heterogeneous outcome reporting, valuation of resources and the small number of studies.ConclusionsThe available evidence continues to be limited by the quality of the research considered. Nurse-led care seems to have a positive effect on patient satisfaction, hospital admission and mortality. This important finding should be confirmed and the determinants of this effect should be assessed in further, larger and more methodically rigorous research.

BackgroundGeneral practitioners often care for patients with several concurrent chronic medical conditions (multimorbidity). Recent data suggest that multimorbidity might be observed more often than isolated diseases in primary care. We explored the age- and gender-related prevalence of multimorbidity and compared these estimates to the prevalence estimates of other common specific diseases found in Swiss primary care.MethodsWe analyzed data from the Swiss FIRE (Family Medicine ICPC Research using Electronic Medical Record) project database, representing a total of 509,656 primary care encounters in 98,152 adult patients between January 1, 2009 and July 31, 2011. For each encounter, medical problems were encoded using the second version of the International Classification of primary Care (ICPC-2). We defined chronic health conditions using 147 pre-specified ICPC-2 codes and defined multimorbidity as 1) two or more chronic health conditions from different ICPC-2 rubrics, 2) two or more chronic health conditions from different ICPC-2 chapters, and 3) two or more medical specialties involved in patient care. We compared the prevalence estimates of multimorbidity defined by the three methodologies with the prevalence estimates of common diseases encountered in primary care.ResultsOverall, the prevalence estimates of multimorbidity were similar for the three different definitions (15% [95%CI 11-18%], 13% [95%CI 10-16%], and 14% [95%CI 11-17%], respectively), and were higher than the prevalence estimates of any specific chronic health condition (hypertension, uncomplicated 9% [95%CI 7-11%], back syndrome with and without radiating pain 6% [95%CI 5-7%], non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus 3% [95%CI 3-4%]), and degenerative joint disease 3% [95%CI 2%-4%]). The prevalence estimates of multimorbidity rose more than 20-fold with age, from 2% (95%CI 1-2%) in those aged 20–29 years, to 38% (95%CI 31-44%) in those aged 80 or more years. The prevalence estimates of multimorbidity were similar for men and women (15% vs. 14%, p=0.288).ConclusionsIn primary care, prevalence estimates of multimorbidity are higher than those of isolated diseases. Among the elderly, more than one out of three patients suffer from multimorbidity. Management of multimorbidity is a principal concern in this vulnerable patient population.

BackgroundPhysicians’ shortage in many countries and demands of high-quality and affordable care make physician-nurse substitution an appealing workforce strategy. The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the impact of physician-nurse substitution in primary care on clinical parameters.MethodsWe systematically searched OVID Medline and Embase, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL, up to August 2012; selected peer-reviewed RCTs comparing physician-led care with nurse-led care on changes in clinical parameters. Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate by independent reviewers. We assessed the individual study risk of bias; calculated the study-specific and pooled relative risks (RR) or weighted mean differences (WMD); and performed fixed-effects meta-analyses.Results11 RCTs (N = 30,247) were included; most were from Europe, generally small with higher risk of bias. In all studies, nurses provided care for complex conditions including HIV, hypertension, heart failure, cerebrovascular diseases, diabetes, asthma, Parkinson’s disease and incontinence. Meta-analyses showed greater reductions in systolic blood pressure (SBP) in favour of nurse-led care (WMD −4.27 mmHg, 95% CI −6.31 to −2.23) but no statistically significant differences between groups in the reduction of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (WMD −1.48 mmHg, 95%CI −3.05 to −0.09), total cholesterol (TC) (WMD -0.08 mmol/l, 95%CI -0.22 to 0.07) or glycosylated haemoglobin (WMD 0.12%HbAc1, 95%CI -0.13 to 0.37). Of other 32 clinical parameters identified, less than a fifth favoured nurse-led care while 25 showed no significant differences between groups.Limitationsdisease-specific interventions from a small selection of healthcare systems, insufficient quantity and quality of studies, many different parameters.Conclusionstrained nurses appeared to be better than physicians at lowering SBP but similar at lowering DBP, TC or HbA1c. There is insufficient evidence that nurse-led care leads to better outcomes of other clinical parameters than physician-led care.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

BackgroundPhysician–nurse task shifting in primary care appeals greatly to health policymakers. It promises to address workforce shortages and demands of high-quality, affordable care in the healthcare systems of many countries. This systematic review was conducted to assess the evidence about physician–nurse task shifting in primary care in relation to the course of disease and nurses’ roles.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL, up to August 2012, and the reference list of included studies and relevant reviews. All searches were updated in February 2014. We selected and critically appraised published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).ResultsTwelve RCTs comprising 22 617 randomized patients conducted mainly in Europe met the inclusion criteria. Nurse-led care was delivered mainly by nurse practitioners following structured protocols and validated instruments in most studies. Twenty-five unique disease-specific measures of the course of disease were reported in the 12 RCTs. While most (84 %) study estimates showed no significant differences between nurse-led care and physician-led care, nurses achieved better outcomes in the secondary prevention of heart disease and a greater positive effect in managing dyspepsia and at lowering cardiovascular risk in diabetic patients. The studies were generally small, of varying follow-up episodes and were at risk of biases. Descriptive details about roles, qualifications or interventions were also incomplete or not reported.ConclusionTrained nurses may have the ability to achieve outcome results that are at least similar to physicians’ for managing the course of disease, when following structured protocols and validated instruments. The evidence, however, is limited by a small number of studies reporting a broad range of disease-specific outcomes; low reporting standards of interventions, roles and clinicians’ characteristics, skills and qualifications; and the quality of studies. More rigorous studies using validated tools could clarify these findings.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12960-015-0049-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ObjectiveTo characterise in details a random sample of multimorbid patients in Switzerland and to evaluate the clustering of chronic conditions in that sample.Methods100 general practitioners (GPs) each enrolled 10 randomly selected multimorbid patients aged ≥18 years old and suffering from at least three chronic conditions. The prevalence of 75 separate chronic conditions from the International Classification of Primary Care-2 (ICPC-2) was evaluated in these patients. Clusters of chronic conditions were studied in parallel.ResultsThe final database included 888 patients. Mean (SD) patient age was 73.0 (12.0) years old. They suffered from 5.5 (2.2) chronic conditions and were prescribed 7.7 (3.5) drugs; 25.7% suffered from depression. Psychological conditions were more prevalent among younger individuals (≤66 years old). Cluster analysis of chronic conditions with a prevalence ≥5% in the sample revealed four main groups of conditions: (1) cardiovascular risk factors and conditions, (2) general age-related and metabolic conditions, (3) tobacco and alcohol dependencies, and (4) pain, musculoskeletal and psychological conditions.ConclusionGiven the emerging epidemic of multimorbidity in industrialised countries, accurately depicting the multiple expressions of multimorbidity in family practices’ patients is a high priority. Indeed, even in a setting where patients have direct access to medical specialists, GPs nevertheless retain a key role as coordinators and often as the sole medical reference for multimorbid patients.

Despite the methodological limitations and the varying nurses' roles and competencies across studies, specially trained nurses can provide care that is at least as equivalent to care provided by physicians for the management of chronic diseases, in terms of process of care. Future, larger studies with better quality methods are needed and should report and assess whether the differences in effects vary due to diversity in roles, qualifications, training competencies and characteristics of clinicians delivering substitution of care.

Using this list of 75 chronic conditions most relevant in the context of MM should enhance the validity of studies of MM in FM.