Use of locums in the Regular GP Scheme 2016-22. / Vikarlegebruk i fastlegeordningen 2016­22.

Background: Under the Regular GP Scheme, locum GPs must be used when GPs are absent or when a patient list has no GP. We have studied the prevalence and development of locum contracts registered in the Regular GP Scheme in the period from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2022. Material and methods: In this descriptive registry study, we categorised 21 418 locum contracts from the period 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2022 according to municipality and duration. We divided the municipalities into groups according to Statistics Norway's six centrality classes. Classes 1‒2 are central; 3‒4 are less central; and 5‒6 are the least central municipalities. The analysis is based on frequency tables, contingency tables and rates. Results: In the period studied, the number of registered locum contracts increased in Norway from 916 to 5003 (446 %). The increase was largest in centrality group 5‒6. The average duration of the locum positions was 195 days in centrality groups 1‒2 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 190‒200), 130 days in centrality groups 3‒4 (95 % CI 127‒134) and 67 days in centrality groups 5‒6 (95 % CI 64‒69). Centrality groups 5‒6 had twice as many locum contracts for full-time positions compared to centrality groups 1‒2, where part-time positions were more common. Locum contracts per list without a GP increased nationally from 0.5 to 4.7 in the study period. Interpretation: The GP Registry provides increasingly useful, nationwide information on the use of locum GPs. Use of locums in the Regular GP Scheme has increased significantly since 2016, and this may represent a challenge to equal access to health services. Future research should examine the causes and consequences of increased use of locum GPs.

Rural general practice patients' coping with hazards and harm: an interview study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify and analyse rural general practice patients' experiences of hazards and harm that comprise adverse events, and their strategies for coping with them. DESIGN: Interview study using systematic text condensation and coping strategy theory in an abductive analysis process. SETTING: Nine rural general practice clinics in Norway. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty participants, aged 21-79 years, all presenting with recent onset of somatic and/or psychiatric complaints. RESULTS: Participating rural general practice patients described their experiences of a variety of hazards and harms. Their three most discussed cognitive and behavioural coping strategies were: (1) to accept the events; (2) to confront them and (3) to engage in planful problem-solving. While the participants demonstrated a tendency toward accepting hazards and harm that their regular general practitioner created, they were often willing to confront those that locum (ie, substitute) general practitioners created. Participants used planful problem-solving in situations they deemed hazardous, such as breaches of confidentiality or not being taken seriously, as well as during potential/actual emergencies. CONCLUSIONS: Patients at rural general practice clinics actively identify and respond to hazards and harm, applying three coping strategies. Thus, patients themselves may serve as an important safety barrier against hazards and harm; their potential contributions to improving patient safety must be appreciated accordingly and reflected in future research as well as in everyday clinical practice.