Search

zwijnenberg n.c. & bours g.j.j.w. (2012) Nurse practitioners and physician assistants in Dutch hospitals: their role, extent of substitution and facilitators and barriers experienced in the reallocation of tasks. Journal of Advanced Nursing 68(6), 1235-1246. Abstract Aims. This paper is a report of a study exploring the role of nurse practitioners and physician assistants, the extent of substitution and the barriers and facilitators experienced by them as a consequence of substitution in public hospitals. Background. Nurse practitioners and physician assistants are emerging worldwide. However, despite the large amount of evidence showing the added value of these professionals, little evidence is available concerning the role, extent of substitution and facilitators and barriers experienced by them as a consequence of substitution. Methods. Interviews were conducted and a questionnaire was completed by 43 nurse practitioners and 13 physician assistants employed in public hospitals in the south of the Netherlands in 2007. Results. Nurse practitioners and physician assistants performed a broad spectrum of tasks, but differed significantly in the time spent and the kind of tasks performed. Nurse practitioners spent 25% (10·4 hours; sd = 5·5) and physician assistants 40% (18·7 hours; sd = 7·6) of their time on medical procedures. They both also performed new tasks or tasks for which there previously was insufficient capacity. Many of them experienced policy/organizational, legal, financial or facility problems in the reallocation of tasks. Conclusion. Nurse practitioners and physician assistants have wide ranging but different responsibilities in public hospitals. By performing medical procedures and new tasks or tasks for which there was not enough capacity, they function as substitutes and supplements for doctors. However, barriers are affecting the extent of substitution. The challenge ahead is to remove the barriers experienced by nurse practitioners and physician assistants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

arts e.e.a., landewe-cleuren s.a.n.t., schaper n.c. & vrijhoef h.j.m. (2012) The cost-effectiveness of substituting physicians with diabetes nurse specialists: a randomized controlled trial with 2-year follow-up. Journal of Advanced Nursing 68(6), 1224-1234. Abstract Aims. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an intervention substituting physicians with nurse specialists. Background. Increasing populations of people with diabetes in most Western countries require creative solutions that give high-quality chronic care while controlling costs. Instigating nurse specialists as a substitute for physicians yields positive results in this area. Research about such interventions in a hospital-based setting is limited. Methods. This paper is a report of a study of a randomized, non-blinded clinical trial including people with diabetes mellitus types 1 and 2. In the intervention group nurse specialists were the central carers, providing care that conformed to a preset protocol. Patients were included between 2004 and 2007. Costs, quality of life and adverse events were measured, cost-effect ratios and incremental cost-effect ratios were calculated based on health-resource utilization rates, corresponding market prices and national tariffs from 2007. Results. Health related quality of life scores did not differ significantly between the control and the intervention group. In the intervention group, fewer patients were hospitalized and fewer side effects from drugs were reported compared to controls. Nurse specialists as central care givers generated a modest reduction in costs per quality adjusted life year gained compared to usual care. Conclusion. Nurse specialists give diabetes care that is similar to care provided by physicians in terms of quality of life and economic value. Instigating a nurse specialist as central carer yields opportunities to generate cost savings. Developing interventions which also focus on prevention of complications is recommended when aiming for long-term organisational cost savings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on an evaluation of a 'social participation' improvement project in a mental health care and care for the intellectually disabled setting. The main research question is how sociality (i.e. clients' social lives) was constructed and what consequences this had for the project and for the clients. We undertook a dual approach: investigating the predefined outcomes and analysing the improvement processes in terms of how these processes construct sociality. As to the predefined outcomes, clients' social networks were not widened, but clients felt significantly less lonely at the end of the project. In a bottom-up analysis of data gathered on the improvement processes, we articulated two ways of constructing sociality: individualization, in which clients had to verbalize their wishes (verbalization) and to act upon them more actively (enterprising); and normalization, in which a good social life was one embedded in 'normal' community. We argue that this (explorative) way of conceptualizing change corresponds with some of the quantitative findings but also brings to light aspects that would have gone unnoticed by using only the predefined outcomes. Therefore, a mixed methods approach in studying effectiveness is a fruitful addition to the quality improvement literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]