Negotiating new roles in general practice: a qualitative study of clinical pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: To address general practice workforce shortages, policy in England has supported the recruitment of 'non-medical' roles through reimbursement funding. As one of the first to receive funding, the clinical pharmacist role offers insight into the process of new role negotiation at general practice level. AIM: To identify factors influencing clinical pharmacist role negotiation at practice level, comparing the process under two different funding and employment models. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study with staff involved in the following schemes: 1) the national NHS England (NHSE) Clinical Pharmacists in General Practice scheme; and 2) a local clinical commissioning group-funded scheme, providing clinical pharmacist support to general practices in one area of Greater Manchester in the UK. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with purposive and snowball sampling of pharmacists, GPs, and practice staff took place. The interviews were analysed using template analysis. RESULTS: In total, 41 interviews were conducted. The following four factors were found to influence role negotiation: role ambiguity; competing demands and priorities; potential for (in)appropriate utilisation of clinical skills; and level of general practice control over the role. Key differences between the two funding and employment models were the level of influence GPs had in shaping the role and how adaptable pharmacists could be to practice needs. The potential for inappropriate utilisation was reported under both schemes, but most apparent under the role reimbursement, direct employment model of the NHSE scheme. CONCLUSION: This study has highlighted lessons applicable for the introduction of non-medical roles more widely in general practice. It has provided insight into the factors that can influence role negotiation at practice level and how different funding and/or employment models can impact on this process.

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.

General practice managers' motivations for skill mix change in primary care: Results from a cross-sectional survey in England.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives are to determine the factors that motivated GP practice managers in England to employ non-medical roles, and to identify an ideal hypothetical GP practice workforce. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of GP practice managers in England (n = 1205). The survey focused on six non-medical roles: advanced nurse practitioner, specialist nurse, health care assistant, physician associate, paramedic and pharmacist. RESULTS: The three most commonly selected motivating factors were: (i) to achieve a better match between what patients need and what the practitioner team can deliver; (ii) to increase overall appointment availability and (iii) to release GP time. Employment of pharmacists and physician associates was most commonly supported by additional funding. Practice managers preferred accessing new non-medical roles through a primary care network or similar, while there was a clear preference for direct employment of additional GPs, advanced nurse practitioners or practice nurses. The ideal practice workforce would comprise over 70% of GPs and nurses, containing, on average, fewer GPs than the current GP practice workforce. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that more diverse teams of practitioners are playing an increasing role in providing primary care in England. Managers prefer not to employ all new roles directly within the practice. A more detailed investigation of future workforce requirements is necessary to ensure that health policy supports the funding (whether practice or population based), recruitment, training, deployment and workloads associated with the mix of roles needed in an effective primary care workforce.

Processes supporting effective skill-mix implementation in general practice: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Health policy and funding initiatives have addressed increasing workloads in general practice through the deployment of clinicians from different disciplinary backgrounds. This study examines how general practices in England operate with increasingly diverse groups of practitioners. METHODS: Five general practices were selected for maximum variation of the duration and diversity of skill-mix in their workforce. Individual interviews were recorded with management and administrative staff and different types of practitioner. Patient surveys and focus groups gathered patients' perspectives of consulting with different practitioners. Researchers collaborated during coding and thematic analysis of transcripts of audio recordings. RESULTS: The introduction of a wide range of practitioners required significant changes in how practices dealt with patients requesting treatment, and these changes were not necessarily straightforward. The matching of patients with practitioners required effective categorization of health care patients' reported problem(s) and an understanding of practitioners' capabilities. We identified individual and organizational responses that could minimize the impact on patients, practitioners and practices of imperfections in the matching process. CONCLUSIONS: The processes underpinning the redistribution of tasks from GPs to non-GP practitioners are complex. As practitioner employment under the Primary Care Network contracts continues to increase, it is not clear how the necessarily fine-grained adjustments will be made for practitioners working across multiple practices.

The challenges of integrating signposting into general practice: qualitative stakeholder perspectives on care navigation and social prescribing in primary care.

BACKGROUND: A national policy focus in England to address general practice workforce issues has led to a commitment to employ significant numbers of non-general practitioner (GP) roles to redistribute workload. This paper focuses on two such roles: the care navigation (CN) and social prescribing link worker (SPLW) roles, which both aim to introduce 'active signposting' into primary care, to direct patients to the right professional/services at the right time and free up GP time. There is a lack of research exploring staff views of how these roles are being planned and operationalised into general practice and how signposting is being integrated into primary care. METHODS: The design uses in-depth qualitative methods to explore a wide range of stakeholder staff views. We generated a purposive sample of 34 respondents who took part in 17 semi-structured interviews and one focus group (service leads, role holders and host general practice staff). We analysed data using a Template Analysis approach. RESULTS: Three key themes highlight the challenges of operationalising signposting into general practice: 1) role perception - signposting was made challenging by the way both roles were perceived by others (e.g. among the public, patients and general practice staff) and highlighted inherent tensions in the expressed aims of the policy of active signposting; 2) role preparedness - a lack of training meant that some receptionist staff felt unprepared to take on the CN role as expected and raised patient safety issues; for SPLW staff, training affected the consistency of service offer across an area; 3) integration and co-ordination of roles - a lack of planning and co-ordination across components of the health and care system challenged the success of integrating signposting into general practice. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new insights from staff stakeholder perspectives into the challenges of integrating signposting into general practice, and highlights key factors affecting the success of signposting in practice. Clarity of role purpose and remit (including resolving tensions inherent the dual aims of 'active signposting'), appropriate training and skill development for role holders and adequate communication and engagement between stakeholders/partnership working across services, are required to enable successful integration of signposting into general practice.

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.

Managing death: navigating divergent logics in end-of-life care.

Delivery of end-of-life care has gained prominence in the UK, driven by a focus upon the importance of patient choice. In practice choice is influenced by several factors, including the guidance and conduct of healthcare professionals, their different understandings of what constitutes 'a good death', and contested ideas of who is best placed to deliver this. We argue that the attempt to elicit and respond to patient choice is shaped in practice by a struggle between distinct 'institutional logics'. Drawing on qualitative data from a two-part study, we examine the tensions between different professional and organisational logics in the delivery of end-of-life care. Three broad clusters of logics are identified: finance, patient choice and professional authority. We find that the logic of finance shapes the meaning and practice of 'choice', intersecting with the logic of professional authority in order to shape choices that are in the 'best interest' of the patient. Different groups might be able to draw upon alternative forms of professionalism, and through these enact different versions of choice. However, this can resemble a struggle for ownership of patients at the end of life, and therefore, reinforce a conventional script of professional authority.

Implementing a digital patient feedback system: an analysis using normalisation process theory.

BACKGROUND: Patient feedback in the English NHS is now widespread and digital methods are increasingly used. Adoption of digital methods depends on socio-technical and contextual factors, alongside human agency and lived experience. Moreover, the introduction of these methods may be perceived as disruptive of organisational and clinical routines. The focus of this paper is on the implementation of a particular digital feedback intervention that was co-designed with health professionals and patients (the DEPEND study). METHODS: The digital feedback intervention was conceptualised as a complex intervention and thus the study focused on the contexts within which it operated, and how the different participants made sense of the intervention and engaged with it (or not). Four health care sites were studied: an acute setting, a mental health setting, and two general practices. Qualitative data was collected through interviews and focus groups with professionals, patients and carers. In total 51 staff, 24 patients and 8 carers were included. Forty-two observations of the use of the digital feedback system were carried out in the four settings. Data analysis was based on modified grounded theory and Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) formed the conceptual framework. RESULTS: Digital feedback made sense to health care staff as it was seen as attractive, fast to complete and easier to analyse. Patients had a range of views depending on their familiarity with the digital world. Patients mentioned barriers such as kiosk not being visible, privacy, lack of digital know-how, technical hitches with the touchscreen. Collective action in maintaining participation again differed between sites because of workload pressure, perceptions of roles and responsibilities; and in the mental health site major organisational change was taking place. For mental health service users, their relationship with staff and their own health status determined their digital use. CONCLUSION: The potential of digital feedback was recognised but implementation should take local contexts, different patient groups and organisational leadership into account. Patient involvement in change and adaptation of the intervention was important in enhancing the embedding of digital methods in routine feedback. NPT allowed for a in-depth understanding of actions and interactions of both staff and patients.

More that unites us than divides us? A qualitative study of integration of community health and social care services.

BACKGROUND: The integration of community health and social care services has been widely promoted nationally as a vital step to improve patient centred care, reduce costs, reduce admissions to hospital and facilitate timely and effective discharge from hospital. The complexities of integration raise questions about the practical challenges of integrating health and care given embedded professional and organisational boundaries in both sectors. We describe how an English city created a single, integrated care partnership, to integrate community health and social care services. This led to the development of 12 integrated neighbourhood teams, combining and co-locating professionals across three separate localities. The aim of this research is to identify the context and the factors enabling and hindering integration from a qualitative process evaluation. METHODS: Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with equal numbers of health and social care staff at strategic and operational level. The data was subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: We describe three key themes: 1) shared vision and leadership; 2) organisational factors; 3) professional workforce factors. We found a clarity of vision and purpose of integration throughout the partnership, but there were challenges related to the introduction of devolved leadership. There were widespread concerns that the specified outcome measures did not capture the complexities of integration. Organisational challenges included a lack of detail around clinical and service delivery planning, tensions around variable human resource practices and barriers to data sharing. A lack of understanding and trust meant professional workforce integration remained a key challenge, although integration was also seen as a potential solution to engender relationship building. CONCLUSIONS: Given the long-term national policy focus on integration this ambitious approach to integrate community health and social care has highlighted implications for leadership, organisational design and inter-professional working. Given the ethos of valuing the local assets of individuals and networks within the new partnership we found the integrated neighbourhood teams could all learn from each other. Many of the challenges of integration could benefit from embracing the inherent capabilities across the integrated neighbourhood teams and localities of this city.

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.

Investigation of the demand for a 7-day (extended access) primary care service: an observational study from pilot schemes in England.

OBJECTIVES: To understand how the uptake of an extended primary care service in the evenings and weekend varied by day of week and over time. Secondary objectives were to understand patient demographics of users of the service and how these varied by type of appointment and to core hour users. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Primary care extended access appointments data in 13 centres in Greater Manchester, England, during 2016. PARTICIPANTS: Appointments could be booked by 1 261 326 patients registered with a family practitioner in five Clinical Commissioning Group geographic areas. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was whether an appointment was used (booked and attended), secondary outcome measures included whether used appointments were prebooked or booked the same day, and delivered by a family or nurse practitioner. Additional analyses compared patient demographics with patients reporting the use of core hour primary care services. RESULTS: 65.33% of 42 472 appointments were booked and attended (used). Usage of appointments was lowest on a Sunday at 46.73% (18.07 percentage points lower usage than on Mondays (95% CI -32.46 to -3.68)). Prebooked appointments were less likely to be booked among age group 0-9 and to result in patients not attending an appointment. Family practitioner appointments were increasingly less likely to be booked with age in comparison to nurse appointments. Patients attending extended access appointments tended to be younger in comparison to core hour patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is spare capacity in the extended access service, particularly on Sundays, suggesting reconfigurations of the service may be needed to improve efficiency of delivering the service. Patient demographics suggest the service is used by a relatively younger population than core hour services. Patient demographics varied with the types of appointment provided, these findings may help healthcare providers improve usage by tailoring appointment provision to local populations.

Skill-mix change in general practice: a qualitative comparison of three 'new' non-medical roles in English primary care.

BACKGROUND: General practice is currently facing a significant workforce challenge. Changing the general practice skill mix by introducing new non-medical roles is recommended as one solution; the literature highlights that organisational and/or operational difficulties are associated with skill-mix changes. AIM: To compare how three non-medical roles were being established in general practice, understand common implementation barriers, and identify measurable impacts or unintended consequences. DESIGN AND SETTING: In-depth qualitative comparison of three role initiatives in general practices in one area of Greater Manchester, England; that is, advanced practitioner and physician associate training schemes, and a locally commissioned practice pharmacist service. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with a purposive sample of stakeholders involved in the implementation of each role initiative were conducted. Template analysis enabled the production of pre-determined and researcher-generated codes, categories, and themes. RESULTS: The final sample contained 38 stakeholders comprising training/service leads, role holders, and host practice staff. Three key themes captured participants' perspectives: purpose and place of new roles in general practice, involving unclear role definition and tension at professional boundaries; transition of new roles into general practice, involving risk management, closing training-practice gaps and managing expectations; and future of new roles in general practice, involving demonstrating impact and questions about sustainability. CONCLUSION: This in-depth, in-context comparative study highlights that introducing new roles to general practice is not a simple process. Recognition of factors affecting the assimilation of roles may help to better align them with the goals of general practice and harness the commitment of individual practices to enable role sustainability.

Implementing new care models: learning from the Greater Manchester demonstrator pilot experience.

BACKGROUND: Current health policy focuses on improving accessibility, increasing integration and shifting resources from hospitals to community and primary care. Initiatives aimed at achieving these policy aims have supported the implementation of various 'new models of care', including general practice offering 'additional availability' appointments during evenings and at weekends. In Greater Manchester, six 'demonstrator sites' were funded: four sites delivered additional availability appointments, other services included case management and rapid response. The aim of this paper is to explore the factors influencing the implementation of services within a programme designed to improve access to primary care. The paper consists of a qualitative process evaluation undertaken within provider organisations, including general practices, hospitals and care homes. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews, with the data subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-one people participated in interviews. Six key factors were identified as important for the establishment and running of the demonstrators: information technology; information governance; workforce and organisational development; communications and engagement; supporting infrastructure; federations and alliances. These factors brought to light challenges in the attempt to provide new or modify existing services. Underpinning all factors was the issue of trust; there was consensus amongst our participants that trusting relationships, particularly between general practices, were vital for collaboration. It was also crucial that general practices trusted in the integrity of anyone external who was to work with the practice, particularly if they were to access data on the practice computer system. A dialogical approach was required, which enabled staff to see themselves as active rather than passive participants. CONCLUSIONS: The research highlights various challenges presented by the context within which extended access is implemented. Trust was the fundamental underlying issue; there was consensus amongst participants that trusting relationships were vital for effective collaboration in primary care.

GPs' views of health policy changes: a qualitative 'netnography' study of UK general practice online magazine commentary.

BACKGROUND: Shifts in health policy since 2010 have brought major structural changes to the English NHS, with government stating intentions to increase GPs' autonomy and improve access to care. Meanwhile, GPs' levels of job satisfaction are low, while stress levels are high. PulseToday is a popular UK general practice online magazine that provides a key discussion forum on news relevant to general practice. AIM: To analyse readers' reactions to news stories about health policy changes published in an online general practice magazine. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative 'netnography' was undertaken of readers' comments to PulseToday. METHOD: A sample of readers' comments on articles published in PulseToday was collated and subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Around 300 comments on articles published between January 2012 and March 2016 were included in the analysis, using 'access to care' as a tracer theme. Concern about the demand and strain on general practice was perhaps to be expected. However, analysis revealed various dimensions to this concern: GPs' underlying feelings about their work and place in the NHS; constraints to GPs' control of their own working practices; a perceived loss of respect for the role of GP; and disappointment with representative bodies and GP leadership. CONCLUSION: This study shows a complex mix of resistance and resignation in general practice about the changing character of GPs' roles. This ambivalence deserves further attention because it could potentially shape responses to further change in primary care in ways that are as yet unknown.

The policy work of piloting: Mobilising and managing conflict and ambiguity in the English NHS.

In spite of their widespread use in policy making in the UK and elsewhere, there is a relatively sparse literature specifically devoted to policy pilots. Recent research on policy piloting has focused on the role of pilots in making policy work in accordance with national agendas. Taking this as a point of departure, the present paper develops the notion of pilots doing policy work. It does this by situating piloting within established theories of policy formulation and implementation, and illustrating using an empirical case. Our case is drawn from a qualitative policy ethnography of a local government pilot programme aiming to extend access to healthcare services. Our case explores the collective entrepreneurship of regional policy makers together with local pilot volunteers. We argue that pilots work to mobilise and manage the ambiguity and conflict associated with particular policy goals, and in their structure and design, shape action towards particular outcomes. We conclude with a discussion of the generative but managed role which piloting affords to local implementers.

Associations between Extending Access to Primary Care and Emergency Department Visits: A Difference-In-Differences Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Health services across the world increasingly face pressures on the use of expensive hospital services. Better organisation and delivery of primary care has the potential to manage demand and reduce costs for hospital services, but routine primary care services are not open during evenings and weekends. Extended access (evening and weekend opening) is hypothesized to reduce pressure on hospital services from emergency department visits. However, the existing evidence-base is weak, largely focused on emergency out-of-hours services, and analysed using a before-and after-methodology without effective comparators. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Throughout 2014, 56 primary care practices (346,024 patients) in Greater Manchester, England, offered 7-day extended access, compared with 469 primary care practices (2,596,330 patients) providing routine access. Extended access included evening and weekend opening and served both urgent and routine appointments. To assess the effects of extended primary care access on hospital services, we apply a difference-in-differences analysis using hospital administrative data from 2011 to 2014. Propensity score matching techniques were used to match practices without extended access to practices with extended access. Differences in the change in "minor" patient-initiated emergency department visits per 1,000 population were compared between practices with and without extended access. Populations registered to primary care practices with extended access demonstrated a 26.4% relative reduction (compared to practices without extended access) in patient-initiated emergency department visits for "minor" problems (95% CI -38.6% to -14.2%, absolute difference: -10,933 per year, 95% CI -15,995 to -5,866), and a 26.6% (95% CI -39.2% to -14.1%) relative reduction in costs of patient-initiated visits to emergency departments for minor problems (absolute difference: -£767,976, -£1,130,767 to -£405,184). There was an insignificant relative reduction of 3.1% in total emergency department visits (95% CI -6.4% to 0.2%). Our results were robust to several sensitivity checks. A lack of detailed cost reporting of the running costs of extended access and an inability to capture health outcomes and other health service impacts constrain the study from assessing the full cost-effectiveness of extended access to primary care. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that extending access was associated with a reduction in emergency department visits in the first 12 months. The results of the research have already informed the decision by National Health Service England to extend primary care access across Greater Manchester from 2016. However, further evidence is needed to understand whether extending primary care access is cost-effective and sustainable.