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.

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.

Using normalisation process theory to understand implementation of integrated multi-sector pre-registration trainee pharmacy technician training.

BACKGROUND: The pre-registration trainee pharmacy technician (PTPT) integrated training programme is a workforce intervention designed to train PTPTs in multiple sectors. The programme recruited 35 PTPTs to 2-year training posts which involved employment in one sector, and a minimum of 12 weeks' work-based training in ≥2 further settings each year. AIM: To identify facilitating and inhibiting factors to implementation of the PTPT integrated training programme and make recommendations on ways to embed and maintain PTPT integrated training in routine practice. METHODS: Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) constructs were used as a framework for analysis. Semi-structured interviews (14 PTPTs, 15 supervisors) explored PTPTs' learning and practice experiences over their 2-year training. A survey explored training outcomes (confidence and preparedness to practise) of integrated (n = 31) and single sector PTPTs (n = 39). RESULTS: Whilst some understood the intervention well, others had differing understandings of its purpose and potential benefits (coherence). Educational and practice supervisors acknowledged the importance of regular communication but reported difficulties implementing this due to time constraints (cognitive participation). PTPTs benefitted from having an educational supervisor oversee learning and progress over 2-years, and a practice supervisor for their day-to-day learning. PTPTs' experiences of supervision were inconsistent due to variation in supervisors' availability, knowledge, experience, and level of support (collective action). Participants perceived the PTPT integrated training as supporting development of a flexible pharmacy technician workforce able to work across sectors. The survey found that integrated PTPTs felt significantly more prepared than single-sector PTPTs to work in different settings (reflective monitoring). CONCLUSIONS: PTPTs on the programme had better ability to work in different sectors. Improving implementation requires clear understanding of the intervention's purpose by all stakeholders; clarity on supervisors' roles/contributions; and effective communication between supervisors to create effective learning opportunities. Findings can inform implementation of future multi-sector education and training globally.

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.

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.

Challenges of maintaining accountability in networks of health and care organisations: A study of developing Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships in the English National Health Service.

The English National Health Service (NHS) constitutes a unique institutional context, which combines elements of hierarchy, markets and networks. This has always raised issues about competing forms of accountability. Recent policy has emphasised a move from quasi market competition towards collaboration in the form of new regional organisational arrangements known as Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs). We explore accountability relationships in STPs, focusing on the challenges of increasing horizontal accountability given existing vertical accountabilities, most notably to national regulators. We utilize a case study approach concentrated on three Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in urban and rural settings in England. We conducted in-person interviews with 22 managers from NHS organisations and local authorities and examined local documents to obtain information on governance and accountability structures. The fieldwork was undertaken between November 2017 and July 2018. We analysed results by considering which actors were accountable to what forums and the nature of the obligation (vertical or horizontal). We found that individual organisations still retained vertical accountabilities and were reluctant to be held accountable for the whole STP, given they were responsible for only part of the joint effort. Moreover, organisations did not feel accountable to STPs and instead highlighted vertical accountabilities upwards to their own boards and to national regulators; and downwards to the public. But while local commissioning organisations, CCGs engaged with their members and the public, STPs failed to engage adequately with the public. Nevertheless, there were indications that horizontal accountability was starting to develop. This could become complementary to vertical accountability by facilitating mutual learning and peer review to anticipate and defer regulatory intervention. While vertical accountability is necessary to provide oversight and apply sanctions, it is not sufficient and should be accompanied by horizontal accountability.

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.

Agreeing the allocation of scarce resources in the English NHS: Ostrom, common pool resources and the role of the state.

A challenge facing health systems such as the English National Health Service (NHS), which operate in a context of diversity of provision and scarcity of financial resources, is how organisations engaged in the provision of services can be encouraged to adopt collective resource utilisation strategies to ensure limited resources are utilised in the interests of service users and, in the case of tax funded services, the general public. In this paper the authors apply Elinor Ostrom's work concerning communities' self-governance of common pool resources to the development of collective approaches to the utilisation of resources for the provision of health services. Focusing on the establishment of Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs) in the English NHS, and drawing on interviews with senior managers in English NHS purchaser and provider organisations, we use Ostrom's work as a frame to analyse STPs, as vehicles to agree and enact shared rules governing the allocation of financial resources, and the role of the state in relation to the development of this collective governance. While there was an unwillingness to use STPs to agree collective rules for resource allocation, we found that local actors were discussing and agreeing collective approaches regarding how resources should be utilised to deliver health services in order to make best use of scarce resources. State influence on the development of collective approaches to resource allocation through the STP was viewed by some as coercive, but also provided a necessary function to ensure accountability. Our analysis suggests Ostrom's notion of resource 'appropriation' should be extended to capture the nuances of resource utilisation in complex production chains, such as those involved in the delivery of health services where the extraction of funds is not an end in itself, but where the value of resources depends on how they are utilised.

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.

Achieving integrated care through commissioning of primary care services in the English NHS: a qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Since April 2015, Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) have taken on the responsibility to commission primary care services. The aim of this paper is to analyse how CCGs have responded to this new responsibility and to identify challenges and factors that facilitated or inhibited achievement of integrated care systems. DESIGN: We undertook an exploratory approach, combining data from interviews and national telephone surveys, with analysis of policy documents and case studies in four CCGs. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We reviewed 147 CCG application documents and conducted two national telephone surveys with CCGs (n=49 and n=21). We interviewed 6 senior policymakers and 42 CCG staff who were involved in primary care co-commissioning (general practitioners and managers). We observed 74 primary care commissioning committee meetings and their subgroups (approx. 111 hours). RESULTS: CCGs in our case studies focused their primary care commissioning activities on developing strategic plans, 'new' primary care initiatives, and dealing with legacy work. Many plans focused on incentivising and supporting practices to work together and provide a broad range of services. There was a clear focus on ensuring the sustainability of general practice. Our respondents expressed mixed views as to what new collaborative service models, such as the new models of care and sustainability and transformation partnerships (STPs), would mean for the future of primary care and the impact they could have on CCGs and their members. CONCLUSIONS: There is a disconnect between locally based primary care and the wider system. One of the major challenges we identified is the lack of knowledge and expertise in the field of primary care at STP level. While primary care commissioning by CCGs seems to be supporting local collaborations between practices, there is some way to go before this is translated into broader integration initiatives across wider footprints.

How are clinical commissioning groups managing conflicts of interest under primary care co-commissioning in England? A qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVES: From April 2015, NHS England (NHSE) started to devolve responsibility for commissioning primary care services to clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). The aim of this paper is to explore how CCGs are managing potential conflicts of interest associated with groups of GPs commissioning themselves or their practices to provide services. DESIGN: We carried out two telephone surveys using a sample of CCGs. We also used a qualitative case study approach and collected data using interviews and meeting observations in four sites (CCGs). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We conducted 57 telephone interviews and 42 face-to-face interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and CCG staff involved in primary care co-commissioning and observed 74 meetings of CCG committees responsible for primary care co-commissioning. RESULTS: Conflicts of interest were seen as an inevitable consequence of CCGs commissioning primary care. Particular problems arose with obtaining unbiased clinical input for new incentive schemes and providing support to GP provider federations. Participants in meetings concerning primary care co-commissioning declared conflicts of interest at the outset of meetings. Different approaches were pursued regarding GPs involvement in subsequent discussions and decisions with inconsistency in the exclusion of GPs from meetings. CCG senior management felt confident that the new governance structures and policies dealt adequately with conflicts of interest, but we found these arrangements face limitations. While the revised NHSE statutory guidance on managing conflicts of interest (2016) was seen as an improvement on the original (2014), there still remained some confusion over various terms and concepts contained therein. CONCLUSIONS: Devolving responsibility for primary care co-commissioning to CCGs created a structural conflict of interest. The NHSE statutory guidance should be refined and clarified so that CCGs can properly manage conflicts of interest. Non-clinician members of committees involved in commissioning primary care require training in order to make decisions requiring clinical input in the absence of GPs.

Engaging GPs in commissioning: realist evaluation of the early experiences of Clinical Commissioning Groups in the English NHS.

Objectives To explore the 'added value' that general practitioners (GPs) bring to commissioning in the English NHS. We describe the experience of Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in the context of previous clinically led commissioning policy initiatives. Methods Realist evaluation. We identified the programme theories underlying the claims made about GP 'added value' in commissioning from interviews with key informants. We tested these theories against observational data from four case study sites to explore whether and how these claims were borne out in practice. Results The complexity of CCG structures means CCGs are quite different from one another with different distributions of responsibilities between the various committees. This makes it difficult to compare CCGs with one another. Greater GP involvement was important but it was not clear where and how GPs could add most value. We identified some of the mechanisms and conditions which enable CCGs to maximize the 'added value' that GPs bring to commissioning. Conclusion To maximize the value of clinical input, CCGs need to invest time and effort in preparing those involved, ensuring that they systematically gather evidence about service gaps and problems from their members, and engaging members in debate about the future shape of services.

Complexity in the new NHS: longitudinal case studies of CCGs in England.

OBJECTIVE: The reform in the English National Health Services (NHS) under the Health and Social Care Act 2012 is unlike previous NHS reorganisations. The establishment of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) was intended to be 'bottom up' with no central blueprint. This paper sets out to offer evidence about how this process has played out in practice and examines the implications of the complexity and variation which emerged. DESIGN: Detailed case studies in CCGs across England, using interviews, observation and documentary analysis. Using realist framework, we unpacked the complexity of CCG structures. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: In phase 1 of the study (January 2011 to September 2012), we conducted 96 interviews, 439 h of observation in a wide variety of meetings, 2 online surveys and 38 follow-up telephone interviews. In phase 2 (April 2013 to March 2015), we conducted 42 interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and managers and observation of 48 different types of meetings. RESULTS: Our study has highlighted the complexity inherent in CCGs, arising out of the relatively permissive environment in which they developed. Not only are they very different from one another in size, but also in structure, functions between different bodies and the roles played by GPs. CONCLUSIONS: The complexity and lack of uniformity of CCGs is important as it makes it difficult for those who must engage with CCGs to know who to approach at what level. This is of increasing importance as CCGs are moving towards greater integration across health and social care. Our study also suggests that there is little consensus as to what being a 'membership' organisation means and how it should operate. The lack of uniformity in CCG structure and lack of clarity over the meaning of 'membership' raises questions over accountability, which becomes of greater importance as CCG is taking over responsibility for primary care co-commissioning.

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.

Leadership for health commissioning in the new NHS.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to explore the early experiences of those involved with the development of Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs), examining how the aspiration towards a "clinically-led" system is being realised. The authors investigate emerging leadership approaches within CCGs in light of the criterion for authorisation that calls for "great leaders". DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Qualitative research was carried out in eight case studies (CCGs) across England over a nine-month period (September 2011 to May 2012) when CCGs were in their early development. The authors conducted a mix of interviews (with GPs and managers), observations (at CCG meetings) and examined associated documentation. Data were thematically analysed. FINDINGS: The authors found evidence of two identified approaches to leadership - positive deviancy and responsible guardianship - being undertaken by GPs and managers in the developing CCGs. Historical experiences and past ways of working appeared to be influencing current developments and a commonly emerging theme was a desire for the CCG to "do things differently" to the previous commissioning bodies. The authors discuss how the current reorganisation threatens the guardianship approach to leadership and question if the new systems being implemented to monitor CCGs' performance may make it difficult for CCGs to retain creativity and innovation, and thus the ability to foster the positive deviant approach to leadership. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This is a large scale piece of qualitative research carried out as CCGs were beginning to develop. It provides insight into how leadership is developing in CCGs highlighting the complexity involved in these roles.

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.

The 'added value' GPs bring to commissioning: a qualitative study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The 2012 Health and Social Care Act in England replaced primary care trusts with clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) as the main purchasing organisations. These new organisations are GP-led, and it was claimed that this increased clinical input would significantly improve commissioning practice. AIM: To explore some of the key assumptions underpinning CCGs, and to examine the claim that GPs bring 'added value' to commissioning. DESIGN AND SETTING: In-depth interviews with clinicians and managers across seven CCGs in England between April and September 2013. METHOD: A total of 40 clinicians and managers were interviewed. Interviews focused on the perceived 'added value' that GPs bring to commissioning. RESULTS: Claims to GP 'added value' centred on their intimate knowledge of their patients. It was argued that this detailed and concrete knowledge improves service design and that a close working relationship between GPs and managers strengthens the ability of managers to negotiate. However, responders also expressed concerns about the large workload that they face and about the difficulty in engaging with the wider body of GPs. CONCLUSION: GPs have been involved in commissioning in many ways since fundholding in the 1990s, and claims such as these are not new. The key question is whether these new organisations better support and enable the effective use of this knowledge. Furthermore, emphasis on experiential knowledge brings with it concerns about representativeness and the extent to which other voices are heard. Finally, the implicit privileging of GPs' personal knowledge ahead of systematic public health intelligence also requires exploration.