Search

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Introduction: As a workforce crisis is causing recruitment and retention issues for new to practice GPs, we designed Catalyst, a one-year pilot career development program aiming to help new to practice GPs develop the skills of advanced generalist practice and build capacity for the complex work of primary care. In this paper, we report the findings of our evaluation of Catalyst. Methods: We used normalization process theory to investigate how Catalyst was contributing to the participants' understanding and implementation of generalist practice. We conducted 36 interviews and six focus groups investigating the participants' clinical practice and experience with the program and analyzed data using framework analysis. Results: Establishing a shared language and reframing professional identity helped GPs develop an understanding of their role through generalist lenses. Generalist practice was legitimized by access to scientific evidence and facilitated interactive learning. Integration of scientific, applied knowledge and quality improvement work fostered the enactment of such practice. Structured reflection and research-informed quality improvement projects contributed to the participants' awareness of the primary care context. Discussion: Knowledge creation activities observed through interactive learning and the integration of different types of knowledge facilitated the implementation of advanced generalist practice. The participants valued the community of practice gained through the program and would come to rely on programs designed to encourage networking and enable peer support. Finally, research-informed quality improvement projects built to analyze problems and monitor solutions are crucial for an early career physician to develop a sense of agency that shapes their primary care practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background There is a shortage of general practice nurses worldwide to deal with an ever-increasing workload, and the need to attract new staff into general practice nursing is therefore vital. As part of this, a one-year Vocational Training Scheme (VTS) for new to general practice nurses was developed in 2020 by the South Yorkshire Primary Care Workforce and Training Hub. Methods The aim of the study was to examine the VTS trainees’ views on general practice nursing as a career. A pragmatic, convenience sample of trainees was recruited. Of the 21 trainees, 17 agreed to take part in the study. Data were collected from the trainees using a series of four regular, timed, online focus groups designed to follow the trainees’ trajectory on the programme over a 12-month period. The data were analysed using framework analysis. Results The timed nature of the focus groups meant that the analysis of the data was linked to the trainees’ trajectory over the course of the year. Three themes were generated from the data: ‘pathways into general practice’; ‘learning to be a GPN’; and ‘the future GPN’. In theme one, the trainees talked of the difficulties in accessing general practice as a new graduate, specifically the need for prior experience and how to get it. In the second, the transition to being a general practice nurse was discussed, and the expectation of being able to ‘hit the ground running’ once in post. The new graduate participants were also concerned over the opportunities for clinical supervision and support in the role after the programme. Finally, the participant s expressed concern over future opportunities for professional development and the prospects for a long-term career in general practice. Conclusion To address the worldwide workforce ‘crisis’ in general practice nursing, sustainable career pathways are needed to encourage new graduate nurses to consider working in general practice. Starting at university, changing the culture and providing the necessary infrastructure to support ongoing professional development in general practice nursing are key to its success.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to huge and rapid changes in general practice in Norway as in the rest of Europe. This paper aims to explore to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic changed the work tasks and organization of Norwegian general practice. Material and method: We analysed data from the Norwegian part of the international, cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study, collecting data from general practice via an online self-reported questionnaire. We included 130 Norwegian general practices, representing an estimated 520 Norwegian general practitioners (GPs). All Norwegian GPs were invited to participate. In the analyses, we focused on items related to the use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, changes in the workload, tasks and delegated responsibilities of both the GPs and other personnel in the GP offices, adaptations in routines related to hygiene measures, triage of patients, and how the official rules and recommendations affected the practices. Results: There was a large and significant increase in the use of all forms of alternative consultation forms (digital text-based, video- and telephone consultations). The use of several different infection prevention measures were significantly increased, and the provision of hand sanitizer to patients increased from 29.6% pre-pandemic to 95.1% since the pandemic. More than half of the GPs (59.5%) reported that their responsibilities in the practice had increased, and 41% were happy with the task shift. 27% felt that they received adequate support from the government; however, 20% reported that guidelines from the government posed a threat to the well-being of the practice staff. We found no associations with the rurality of the practice location or size of the municipalities. Conclusion: Norwegian GPs adapted well to the need for increased use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, and reported a high acceptance of their increased responsibilities. However, only one in four received adequate support from the government, which is an important learning point for similar situations in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a shortage of general practice nurses worldwide to deal with an ever-increasing workload, and the need to attract new staff into general practice nursing is therefore vital. As part of this, a one-year Vocational Training Scheme (VTS) for new to general practice nurses was developed in 2020 by the South Yorkshire Primary Care Workforce and Training Hub. Methods: The aim of the study was to examine the VTS trainees' views on general practice nursing as a career. A pragmatic, convenience sample of trainees was recruited. Of the 21 trainees, 17 agreed to take part in the study. Data were collected from the trainees using a series of four regular, timed, online focus groups designed to follow the trainees' trajectory on the programme over a 12-month period. The data were analysed using framework analysis. Results: The timed nature of the focus groups meant that the analysis of the data was linked to the trainees' trajectory over the course of the year. Three themes were generated from the data: 'pathways into general practice'; 'learning to be a GPN'; and 'the future GPN'. In theme one, the trainees talked of the difficulties in accessing general practice as a new graduate, specifically the need for prior experience and how to get it. In the second, the transition to being a general practice nurse was discussed, and the expectation of being able to 'hit the ground running' once in post. The new graduate participants were also concerned over the opportunities for clinical supervision and support in the role after the programme. Finally, the participant s expressed concern over future opportunities for professional development and the prospects for a long-term career in general practice. Conclusion: To address the worldwide workforce 'crisis' in general practice nursing, sustainable career pathways are needed to encourage new graduate nurses to consider working in general practice. Starting at university, changing the culture and providing the necessary infrastructure to support ongoing professional development in general practice nursing are key to its success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Despite advances in knowledge and science, evidence indicates that health care disparities and inequities continue to exist across diverse populations. Educating and training the next generation of health professionals to focus on addressing social determinants of health (SDOH) and advancing health equity is a key priority. This aim requires educational institutions, communities, and educators to strive for change in health professions education, to attain the goal of creating transformative educational systems that better meet the public health needs of the 21st Century. PURPOSE AND OUTCOMES Communities of practice (CoPs) are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly. The National Collaborative for Education to Address Social Determinants of Health (NCEAS) CoP is focused on integrating SDOH into the formal education of health professionals. The NCEAS CoP is one model to replicate how health professions educators can work together for transformative health workforce education and development. The NCEAS CoP will continue to advance health equity by sharing evidence-based models of education and practice that address SDOH and help build and sustain a culture of health and well-being through sharing models for transformative health professions education. CONCLUSIONS Our work is an example that shows we can build partnerships across communities and professions, thereby freely sharing ideas and curricular innovations that address the systemic inequities that continue to fuel persistent health disparities and inequities, and contribute to moral distress and burnout of our health professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies show positive outcomes for nurse practitioner care compared with physicians, in a variety of clinical settings. Of unique interest is the relationship of nurse practitioner level of practice authority (NP-LPA) and population health., Purpose: Does state population health differ by NP-LPA?, Methods: United Foundation Annual Reports (2019 and 2021) provided data on state health rankings. The American Association of Nurse Practitioners website (2021) provided data on NP-LPA. Analyses used Fisher's exact test to compare the top 25 v. the bottom 25 ranked states., Results: Full NP-LPA states ranked higher than reduced or restricted on overall state health, health outcomes, clinical care, quality of care, access to care, number of primary care providers per 100,000 population, and childhood immunizations., Discussion: States with legislated full NP-LPA showed better population health. The data suggest full NP-LPA could address shortages in primary care while achieving greater population health., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

As nurse practitioners (NPs) are increasingly relied on to deliver primary care in rural communities, it is critical to understand the contexts in which they work and whether they are characterized by work environments and infrastructures that facilitate the provision of high-quality patient care. This study compares urban and rural NPs using data from a survey of 1,244 primary care NPs in Arizona, California, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington. While rural and urban NPs have a number of similarities in terms of demographic characteristics, practice patterns, and job outcomes, they also have noteworthy differences. Rural NPs report higher levels of independent practice, fewer structural capabilities that facilitate quality care, and poorer relationships with physicians. Health care organizations in rural communities may need to invest in work environments and infrastructures that facilitate high-quality care and autonomous practice for NPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: As the average level of medical education indebtedness rises, physicians look to programs such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) and National Health Service Corps (NHSC) to manage debt burden. Both represent service-dependent loan repayment programs, but the requirements and program outcomes diverge, and assessing the relative uptake of each program may help to inform health workforce policy decisions. We sought to describe variation in the composition of repayment program participant groups and measure relative impact on patient access to care., Methods: In this bivariate analysis, we analyzed data from 10,677 respondents to the American Board of Family Medicine's National Graduate Survey to study differences in loan repayment program uptake as well as the unique participant demographics, scope of practice, and likelihood of practicing with a medically underserved or rural population in each program cohort., Results: The rate of PSLF uptake tripled between 2016 and 2020, from 7% to 22% of early career family physicians, while NHSC uptake remained static at 4% to 5%. Family physicians reporting NHSC assistance were more likely than those reporting PSLF assistance to come from underrepresented groups, demonstrated a broader scope of practice, and were more likely to practice in rural areas (23.3% vs 10.8%) or whole-county Health Professional Shortage Areas (12.5% vs 3.7%) and with medically underserved populations (82.2% vs 24.2%)., Conclusions: Although PSLF supports family physicians intending to work in public service, their peers who choose NHSC are much more likely to work in underserved settings. Our findings may prompt a review of the goals of service loan forgiveness programs with potential to better serve health workforce needs., (© 2023 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a large and varying impact on primary care. This paper studies changes in the tasks of general practitioners (GPs) and associated staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from the PRICOV-19 study of 5093 GPs in 38 countries were used. We constructed a scale for task changes and performed multilevel analyses. The scale was reliable at both GP and country level. Clustering of task changes at country level was considerable (25%). During the pandemic, staff members were more involved in giving information and recommendations to patients contacting the practice by phone, and they were more involved in triage. GPs took on additional responsibilities and were more involved in reaching out to patients. Problems due to staff absence, when dealt with internally, were related to more task changes. Task changes were larger in practices employing a wider range of professional groups. Whilst GPs were happy with the task changes in practices with more changes, they also felt the need for further training. A higher-than-average proportion of elderly people and people with a chronic condition in the practice were related to task changes. The number of infections in a country during the first wave of the pandemic was related to task changes. Other characteristics at country level were not associated with task changes. Future research on the sustainability of task changes after the pandemic is needed.