The patient experience of skill mix changes in primary care: an in-depth study of patient 'work' when accessing primary care.

BACKGROUND: This paper presents insights into patient experiences of changes in workforce composition due to increasing deployment in general practice of practitioners from a number of different professional disciplines (skill mix). We explore these experiences via the concept of 'patient illness work'; how a patient's capacity for action is linked to the work arising from healthcare. METHODS: We conducted four focus group interviews with Patient Participation Group members across participating English general practitioner practices. Thematic analysis and a theoretical lens of illness work were used to explore patients' attempts to understand and navigate new structures, roles and ways to access healthcare. RESULTS: Participants' lack of knowledge about incoming practitioners constrained their agency in accessing primary care. They reported both increased and burdensome illness work as they were given responsibility for navigating and understanding new systems of access while simultaneously understanding new practitioner roles. CONCLUSIONS: While skill mix changes were not resisted by patients, they were keen to improve their agency in capacity to access, by being better informed about newer practitioners to accept and trust them. Some patients require support to navigate change, especially where new systems demand specific capacities such as technological skills and adaptation to unfamiliar practitioners.

To be or not to be: The identity work of pharmacists as clinicians.

This study explores how pharmacists legitimise the expansion of their clinical work and considers its impact on pharmacists' professional identity work. In the context of pharmacy in the English NHS, there has been an ongoing policy shift towards pharmacists moving away from 'medicines supply' to patient-facing, clinical work since the 1950s. Pharmacists are continuously engaging in 'identity work' and 'boundary work' to reflect the expansion of their work, which has led to the argument that pharmacists lack a clear professional identity. Drawing insights from linguistics and specifically Van Leeuwen's 'grammar of legitimation', this study explains how the Pharmacy Integration Fund, a nationally funded learning programme, provides the discursive strategies for pharmacists to legitimise their identity work as clinicians.

The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Historically, primary medical care in the UK has been delivered by general practitioners who are independent contractors, operating under a contract, which until 2004 was subject to little performance management. In keeping with the wider political impetus to introduce markets and competition into the NHS, reforms were introduced to allow new providers to bid for contracts to provide primary care services in England. These contracts known as 'Alternative Provider Medical Services', were encouraged by two centrally-driven rounds of procurement (2007/8 and 2008/9). This research investigated the commissioning and operation of such Alternative Providers of Primary Care (APPCs). METHODS: Two qualitative case studies were undertaken in purposively sampled English Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and their associated APPCs over 14 months (2009-10). We observed 65 hours of meetings, conducted 23 interviews with PCT and practice staff, and gathered relevant associated documentation. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We found that the procurement and contracting process was costly and time-consuming. Extensive local consultation was undertaken, and there was considerable opposition in some areas. Many APPCs struggled to build up their patient list sizes, whilst over-performing on walk-in contracts. Contracting for APPCs was 'transactional', in marked contrast to the 'relational' contracting usually found in the NHS, with APPCs subject to tight performance management. These complicated and costly processes contrast to those experienced by traditionally owned GP partnerships. However, managers reported that the perception of competition had led existing practices to improve their services. The Coalition Government elected in 2010 is committed to 'Any Qualified Provider' of secondary care, and some commentators argue that this should also be applied to primary care. Our research suggests that, if this is to happen, a debate is needed about the operation of a market in primary care provision, including the trade-offs between transparent processes, fair procurement, performance assurance and cost.

Contribution of supervision to the development of advanced practitioners: a qualitative study of pharmacy learners' and supervisors' views.

OBJECTIVE: To apply educational theory to explore how supervision can contribute to the development of advanced practitioners using the example of several postregistration primary care training pathways for pharmacy professionals (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians). DESIGN: Qualitative semistructured telephone interviews applying Billet's theory of workplace pedagogy for interpretation. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-one learners and ten supervisors. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Contribution of clinical and educational supervision to the development of advanced practitioners in primary care. RESULTS: Findings were mapped against the components of Billet's theory to provide insights into the role of supervision in developing advanced practitioners. Key elements for effective supervision included supporting learners to identify their learning needs (educational supervision), guiding learners in everyday work activities (clinical supervision), and combination of regular prearranged face-to-face meetings and ad hoc contact when needed (clinical supervision), along with ongoing support as learners progressed through a learning pathway (educational supervision). Clinical supervisors supported learners in developing proficiency and confidence in translating and applying the knowledge and skills they were gaining into practice. Learners benefited from having clinical supervisors in the workplace with good understanding and experience of working in the setting, as well as receiving clinical supervision from different types of healthcare professionals. Educational supervisors supported learners to identify their learning needs and the requirements of the learning pathway, and then as an ongoing available source of support as they progressed through a pathway. Educational supervisors also filled in some of the gaps where there was a lack of local clinical supervision and in settings like community pharmacy where pharmacist learners did not have access to any clinical supervision. CONCLUSIONS: This study drew out important elements which contributed to effective supervision of pharmacy advanced practitioners. Findings can inform the education and training of advanced practitioners from different professions to support healthcare workforce development in different healthcare settings.

Motivating factors behind skill mix change: results from a practice managers' survey in England.

BACKGROUND: The expansion of the primary care workforce by employing a varied range of practitioners ('skill mix') is a key component of the General Practice Forward View (GPFV). The extent of skill mix change and where that has occurred has been examined using publicly available practice level workforce data. However, such data does not provide information regarding specific motivating factors behind employment decisions for individual practices nor future workforce plans. AIM: To identify key motivating factors behind practice workforce decisions and their future workforce plans. METHOD: An online questionnaire was sent to practice managers in England. Data collection is ongoing; however, 1000 practices have responded to the survey so far. The questionnaire was composed of questions related to current workforce, motivating factors behind employment decisions, planned future workforce changes, financial assistance with employing staff (for example, HEE or CCG funding) and ideal workforce. RESULTS: Early results indicate that practices that have employed physician associates have done so to increase appointment availability (78% of practices) and release GP time (68%). Sixty-six per cent of practices who have employed pharmacists have received some form of financial assistance with 21% of practices still receiving assistance. When asked to construct an ideal workforce, 'new' roles accounted for 20% of that workforce on average, which is a significantly larger proportion than those roles currently account for. CONCLUSION: Although data collection and analysis are ongoing, the results of the survey provide novel insights into the underlying motivating factors behind employment decisions, specifically for new roles such as pharmacists, PAs and paramedics.

Regional variation in practitioner employment in general practices in England: a comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, UK health policy makers have responded to a GP shortage by introducing measures to support increased healthcare delivery by practitioners from a wider range of backgrounds. AIM: To ascertain the composition of the primary care workforce in England at a time when policy changes affecting deployment of different practitioner types are being introduced. DESIGN AND SETTING: This study was a comparative analysis of workforce data reported to NHS Digital by GP practices in England. METHOD: Statistics are reported using practice-level data from the NHS Digital June 2019 data extract. Because of the role played by Health Education England (HEE) in training and increasing the skills of a healthcare workforce that meets the needs of each region, the analysis compares average workforce composition across the 13 HEE regions in England RESULTS: The workforce participation in terms of full-time equivalent of each staff group across HEE regions demonstrates regional variation. Differences persist when expressed as mean full-time equivalent per thousand patients. Despite policy changes, most workers are employed in long-established primary care roles, with only a small proportion of newer types of practitioner, such as pharmacists, paramedics, physiotherapists, and physician associates. CONCLUSION: This study provides analysis of a more detailed and complete primary care workforce dataset than has previously been available in England. In describing the workforce composition at this time, the study provides a foundation for future comparative analyses of changing practitioner deployment before the introduction of primary care networks, and for evaluating outcomes and costs that may be associated with these changes.

What happens when GPs engage in commissioning? Two decades of experience in the English NHS.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence on commissioning schemes involving clinicians in the United Kingdom National Health Service, between 1991 and 2010; report on the extent and impact of clinical engagement; and distil lessons for the development of such schemes both in the UK and elsewhere. METHODS: A review of published evidence. Five hundred and fourteen abstracts were obtained from structured searches and screened. Full-text papers were retrieved for UK empirical studies exploring the relationship between commissioners and providers with clinician involvement. Two hundred and eighteen published materials were reviewed. RESULTS: The extent of clinical engagement varied between the various schemes. Schemes allowing clinicians to act autonomously were more likely to generate significant engagement, with 'virtuous cycles' (experience of being able to make changes feeding back to encourage greater engagement) and 'vicious cycles' (failure to influence services generating disengagement) observed. Engagement of the wider general practitioner (GP) membership was an important determinant of success. Most impact was seen in GP prescribing and the establishment of services in general practices. There was little evidence of GPs engaging more widely with public health issues. CONCLUSION: Evidence for a significant impact of clinical engagement on commissioning outcomes is limited. Initial changes are likely to be small scale and to focus on services in primary care. Engagement of GP members of primary care commissioning organizations is an important determinant of progress, but generates significant transaction costs.

Views of NHS commissioners on commissioning support provision. Evidence from a qualitative study examining the early development of clinical commissioning groups in England.

OBJECTIVE: The 2010 healthcare reform in England introduced primary care-led commissioning in the National Health Service (NHS) by establishing clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). A key factor for the success of the reform is the provision of excellent commissioning support services to CCGs. The Government's aim is to create a vibrant market of competing providers of such services (from both for-profit and not-for-profit sectors). Until this market develops, however, commissioning support units (CSUs) have been created from which CCGs are buying commissioning support functions. This study explored the attitudes of CCGs towards outsourcing commissioning support functions during the initial stage of the reform. DESIGN: The research took place between September 2011 and June 2012. We used a case study research design in eight CCGs, conducting in-depth interviews, observation of meetings and analysis of policy documents. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We conducted 96 interviews and observed 146 meetings (a total of approximately 439 h). RESULTS: Many CCGs were reluctant to outsource core commissioning support functions (such as contracting) for fear of losing local knowledge and trusted relationships. Others were disappointed by the absence of choice and saw CSUs as monopolies and a recreation of the abolished PCTs. Many expressed doubts about the expectation that outsourcing of commissioning support functions will result in lower administrative costs. CONCLUSIONS: Given the nature of healthcare commissioning, outsourcing vital commissioning support functions may not be the preferred option of CCGs. Considerations of high transaction costs, and the risk of fragmentation of services and loss of trusted relationships involved in short-term contracting, may lead most CCGs to decide to form long-term partnerships with commissioning support suppliers in the future. This option, however, limits competition by creating 'network closure' and calls into question the Government's intention to create a vibrant market of commissioning support provision.

Accountable to whom, for what? An exploration of the early development of Clinical Commissioning Groups in the English NHS.

OBJECTIVE: One of the key goals of the current reforms in the English National Health Service (NHS) under the Health and Social Care Act, 2012, is to increase the accountability of those responsible for commissioning care for patients (clinical commissioning groups (CCGs)), while at the same time allowing them a greater autonomy. This study was set out to explore CCG's developing accountability relationships. DESIGN: We carried out detailed case studies in eight CCGs, using interviews, observation and documentary analysis to explore their multiple accountabilities. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 91 people, including general practitioners, managers and governing body members in developing CCGs, and undertook 439 h of observation in a wide variety of meetings. RESULTS: CCGs are subject to a managerial, sanction-backed accountability to NHS England (the highest tier in the new organisational hierarchy), alongside a number of other external accountabilities to the public and to some of the other new organisations created by the reforms. In addition, unlike their predecessor commissioning organisations, they are subject to complex internal accountabilities to their members. CONCLUSIONS: The accountability regime to which CCGs are subject to is considerably more complex than that which applied their predecessor organisations. It remains to be seen whether the twin aspirations of increased autonomy and increased accountability can be realised in practice. However, this early study raises some important issues and concerns, including the risk that the different bodies to whom CCGs are accountable will have differing (or conflicting) agendas, and the lack of clarity over the operation of sanction regimes.

Primary care-led commissioning: applying lessons from the past to the early development of clinical commissioning groups in England.

BACKGROUND: The current reorganisation of the English NHS is one of the most comprehensive ever seen. This study reports early evidence from the development of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), a key element in the new structures. AIM: To explore the development of CCGs in the context of what is known from previous studies of GP involvement in commissioning. DESIGN AND SETTING: Case study analysis from sites chosen to provide maximum variety across a number of dimensions, from September 2011 to June 2012. METHOD: A case study analysis was conducted using eight detailed qualitative case studies supplemented by descriptive information from web surveys at two points in time. Data collection involved observation of a variety of meetings, and interviews with key participants. RESULTS: Previous research shows that clinical involvement in commissioning is most effective when GPs feel able to act autonomously. Complicated internal structures, alongside developing external accountability relationships mean that CCGs' freedom to act may be subject to considerable constraint. Effective GP engagement is also important in determining outcomes of clinical commissioning, and there are a number of outstanding issues for CCGs, including: who feels 'ownership' of the CCG; how internal communication is conceptualised and realised; and the role and remit of locality groups. Previous incarnations of GP-led commissioning have tended to focus on local and primary care services. CCGs are keen to act to improve quality in their constituent practices, using approaches that many developed under practice-based commissioning. Constrained managerial support and the need to maintain GP engagement may have an impact. CONCLUSION: CCGs are new organisations, faced with significant new responsibilities. This study provides early evidence of issues that CCGs and those responsible for CCG development may wish to address.