Objectives: To understand healthcare professionals' experiences and perceptions of nurses' potential or ideal roles in pharmaceutical care (PC). Design: Qualitative study conducted through semi-structured in-depth interviews. Setting: Between December 2018 and October 2019, interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals of 14 European countries in four healthcare settings: hospitals, community care, mental health and long-term residential care. Participants: In each country, pharmacists, physicians and nurses in each of the four settings were interviewed. Participants were selected on the basis that they were key informants with broad knowledge and experience of PC. Data collection and analysis: All interviews were conducted face to face. Each country conducted an initial thematic analysis. Consensus was reached through a face-to-face discussion of all 14 national leads. Results: 340 interviews were completed. Several tasks were described within four potential nursing responsibilities, that came up as the analysis themes, being: 1) monitoring therapeutic/adverse effects of medicines, 2) monitoring medicines adherence, 3) decision making on medicines, including prescribing 4) providing patient education/information. Nurses' autonomy varied across Europe, from none to limited to a few tasks and emergencies to a broad range of tasks and responsibilities. Intended level of autonomy depended on medicine types and level of education. Some changes are needed before nursing roles can be optimised and implemented in practice. Lack of time, shortage of nurses, absence of legal frameworks and limited education and knowledge are main threats to European nurses actualising their ideal role in PC. Conclusions: European nurses have an active role in PC. Respondents reported positive impacts on care quality and patient outcomes when nurses assumed PC responsibilities. Healthcare professionals expect nurses to report observations and assessments. This key patient information should be shared and addressed by the interprofessional team. The study evidences the need of a unique and consensus-based PC framework across Europe.
LINK
Background: Guidance of patients treated with antidepressants is paramount for successful therapy. The aim was to assess patients’ needs and suggestions for improvement of guidance by physicians and pharmacists during second generation antidepressant (SGA) therapy. Methods: Five focus group discussions were held with a total of 34 patients using an SGA. The discussions were conducted flexibly and responsively using a semi-structured topic list. All focus group discussions were videorecorded and transcripts were analyzed using ATLAS.ti for coding, thematic and open analysis. Results: Participants stated they were in need of better guidance. They suggested improving content of information during decisional moments, patient-health care professional communication and communication between health care professionals, and finally, organization of guidance. Barriers to achieving improved guidance were cited. Conclusions: Content, communication and organization of guidance are pivotal for achieving optimal guidance. Participants mentioned their current experienced guidance had limitations and brought up solutions for improvement. A next step would be to discuss the suggested solutions with health care professionals to assess their views and to discuss the possibility for implementation. After implementation, future studies could be aimed at determination of its impact on patients’ treatment efficacy, quality of life, treatment satisfaction and healthcare costs. DOI 10.1186/s12888-017-1522-9
LINK
Background: A highly promoted opportunity for optimizing healthcare services is to expand the role of nonphysician care providers by care reallocation. Reallocating care from physicians to non-physicians can play an important role in solving systemic healthcare problems such as care delays, hospital overcrowding, long waiting lists, high work pressure and expanding healthcare costs. Dermatological healthcare services, such as the acne care provision, are well suited for exploring the opportunities for care reallocation as many different types of care professionals are involved in the care process. In the Netherlands, acne care is mainly delivered by general practitioners and dermatologists. The Dutch healthcare system also recognizes non-physician care providers, among which dermal therapists and beauticians are the most common professions. However, the role and added value of non-physicians is still unclear. The present study aimed to explore the possibilities for reallocating care to nonphysicians and identify drivers for and barriers to reallocation. Methods: A mixed-method design was used collecting quantitative and qualitative data from representatives of the main 4 Dutch professions providing acne care: dermatologists, GP’s, Dermal therapists and beauticians. Results: A total of 560 questionnaires were completed and 24 semi-structured interviews were conducted. A broad spectrum of non-physician tasks and responsibilities were delineated. Interviewed physicians considered acne as a low-complexity skin condition which made them willing to explore the possibilities for reallocating. A majority of all interviewees saw a key role for non-physicians in counselling and supporting patients during treatment, which they considered an important role for increasing patients’ adherence to proposed treatment regimes, contributing to successful clinical outcome. Also, the amount of time non-physicians spend on patients was experienced as driver for reallocation. Legislation and regulations, uncertainties about the extent of scientific evidence and proper protocols use within the non-physician clinical practice were experienced as barriers influencing the possibilities for reallocation. Conclusions: Delineated roles and drivers demonstrate there is room and potential for reallocation between physicians and non-physicians within acne healthcare, when barriers are adequately addressed.
LINK
Currently, 4% of older adults reside in long-term care facilities in the Netherlands. Nursing home residents tend to have multimorbidity that is associated with considerable disabilities and a high level of care dependency. In the Dutch adult population the highest estimated prevalence (>40%) of visual impairment (low vision and blindness) was found in the subgroup of residents in nursing homes (NHs). The aim of this study is to describe the current practice of eye care by Dutch nursing home physicians (NHPs). A digital online survey was developed to describe the eye care activities of nursing home physicians and their cooperation in this perspective with other professionals. Of 1573 NHPs present in the Netherlands, 125 (8%) responded. Results show that more than 50% of the NHPs regularly examine ‘distant vision’, ‘near vision’ and ‘the visual field’ . However, 23%, 33% and 45% almost never or never examine the ‘visual field’, ‘near vision’ and ‘distant vision’, respectively. Data regarding eye care, regularly recorded in the client files by more than 50% of the NHPs, are medical data involving ‘use of eye medication’, ‘eye disease’, and ‘eye surgery in the past’. Less commonly recorded is ‘the use of reading glasses’ as well as ‘eye pain’. Inside of the NH, (head) nurses and ward nurses (chi 2 = 309, df = 5, p = 0.000), and outside of the NH, ophthalmologists and low vision specialists are most frequently contacted about eye related issues (chi 2 = 224, df = 4, p = 0.000). Opticians are rarely contacted, and optometrists and orthoptists are ‘never’ contacted by more than 50% of the NHPs. Moreover, 50% of the NHPs noted that collaboration with external eye care professionals is ‘not structural’. This study shows that, according to NHPs, relevant visual aspects are not structurally examined and recorded in the client files. Outside of the NH, NHPs tend to have a less frequent collaborative relationship with optometrists, orthoptists and opticians compared to ophthalmologists and low vision specialists. The NHP’s role in providing eye care can be improved by development of guidelines for structural eye screening, improvement of recording in client files, and exploring plus undertaking collaboration with other eye care professionals.
LINK
BACKGROUND: Families are introduced as new partners in interprofessional communication and collaboration during hospitalisation of an adult patient. Their introduction into the healthcare team has consequences for the roles and responsibilities of all healthcare professionals. Role clarification is thus needed to create optimal communication and collaboration with families.AIM: To gain insight into how physicians and nurses view their own roles and each other's roles in communication and collaboration with families in the care of adult patients.METHODS: A qualitative interpretive interview design was used. Fourteen semi-structured interviews, with seven physicians and seven nurses, were conducted. Data were analysed according to the steps of thematic analysis. For the study design and analysis of the results, the guidelines of the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative studies (COREQ) were followed. The ethical committee of the University Medical Center Groningen approved the study protocol (research number 202100640).FINDINGS: Thematic analysis resulted in three themes, each consisting of two or three code groups. Two themes "building a relationship" and "sharing information" were described as roles that both nurses and physicians share regarding communication and collaboration with families. The role expectations differed between physicians and nurses, but these differences were not discussed with each other. The theme "providing support to family" was regarded a nurse-specific role by both professions.CONCLUSION: Physicians and nurses see a role for themselves and each other in communication and collaboration with families. However, the division of roles and expectations thereof are different, overlapping, and unclear. To optimise the role and position of family during hospital care, clarification and division of the roles between physicians and nurses in this partnership is necessary.
DOCUMENT
Aim: The prevalence of age‐related malnutrition is increasing in almost all Western countries. Because of their expertise, dietitians should have a central role in the management of malnutrition. This review aimed to synthesise the literature on the role of the dietitian in the management of malnutrition in the elderly in comparison with other health professionals. Methods: In November 2018, a search of Embase, Medline Ovid, Cinahl Ebscohost, Cochrane Central, Web of Science and Google Scholar was undertaken using ‘dietitian’, ‘elderly’ and ‘malnutrition’ as the main search terms. Qualitative and quantitative empirical research studies that focussed on the role of dietitians as the (main) subject of the study were included. Data extraction and data synthesis were performed by the three authors using a thematic synthesis approach. Results: Three themes emerged from the coding and synthesis of the 21 included studies. The first theme demonstrates that other health professionals' time for, and knowledge of, screening policies negatively affects the role of the dietitian. The second theme demonstrates that the importance of nutritional care is acknowledged. However, this does not always imply familiarity with dietetics nor does it always mean that other health professionals think involving dietitians is worth the effort. The third theme demonstrates that issues of workload appeared to be especially important in crossing or guarding role boundaries. Conclusions: The role of dietitians in managing age‐related malnutrition is not always clear and coherent. Therefore, how dietitians shape their role to provide optimal management of malnutrition in the elderly is open to debate. https://doi.org/10.1111/1747-0080.12546 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/matthijs-fleurke-66279110/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/dorien-voskuil-9b27b115/
MULTIFILE
Background: Medical consultations with older patients often include triadic conversations and decision-making processes involving physicians, patients, and family members. The presence of family members may change the communication dynamics and therefore increase the complexity of the consultation and decision-making process. Objective: This study explored associations between physicians' shared decision-making (SDM) behaviour and patients' and family members' participation in the decision-making process. Methods: Using an observational design, we analysed 95 recorded consultations between medical specialists, patients aged ≥65 years, and accompanying family members at a Dutch hospital. The OPTIONMCC was used to assess the physicians' SDM behaviour and patients' and family members' levels of involvement in SDM. Results: We found a strong positive correlation between physicians' behaviour and patients' and family members' participation in SDM (0.68 and 0.64, respectively, p < .01). Family members were more involved in SDM for patients aged 80 and older. Conclusion: While not asserting causation, our study suggests physicians potentially play a facilitating role in shaping the SDM process together with proactive contributions from patients and family members. Innovation: The results offer new insights into triadic SDM and provide suggestions for refining the OPTIONMCC. Further research is recommended into participants' mutual directional influences in triadic SDM.
DOCUMENT
Abstract Introduction: In 2017, the role of coordinating practitioner was introduced in the Netherlands in order to improve quality of care for patients who receive treatment in specialized mental health care. Psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs) can fulfil this role. Aim/Question: The aim was to obtain insight into how PMHNPs fulfil the coordinating practitioner role and what is needed to improve fulfilment of this role. Method: A survey among PMHNPs in the Netherlands was conducted between July-September 2018. In total, 381 PMHNP filled out the questionnaire; the response rate was 47.6%. Descriptive analyses were performed using SPSS 22® (IBM). Results: 92% Of the PMHNPs fulfilled the coordinating practitioner role and were generally satisfied with their role performance. The following conditions were formulated to improve this role: 1) recognition and trust in the expertise of PMHNPs, 2) a clear description of their role as coordinating practitioner, 3) strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration, and 4) sufficient training budget and opportunities. Discussion: In Dutch mental health care, PMHNPs have strengthened their position as coordinating practitioner in a short period of time. Follow-up research should be conducted to obtain further insights into elements that contribute to an optimal role as coordinating practitioner. Implications for Practice: Having PMHNPs act as coordinating practitioners can contribute to solving the challenges in mental health care regarding coordination of care and effective multidisciplinary collaboration.
DOCUMENT
Clear role descriptions promote the quality of interprofessional collaboration. Currently, it is unclear to what extent healthcare professionals consider pharmaceutical care (PC) activities to be nurses’ responsibility in order to obtain best care quality. This study aimed to create and evaluate a framework describing potential nursing tasks in PC and to investigate nurses’ level of responsibility. A framework of PC tasks and contextual factors was developed based on literature review and previous DeMoPhaC project results. Tasks and context were cross-sectionally evaluated using an online survey in 14 European countries. A total of 923 nurses, 240 physicians and 199 pharmacists responded. The majority would consider nurses responsible for tasks within: medication self-management (86–97%), patient education (85–96%), medication safety (83–95%), monitoring adherence (82–97%), care coordination (82–95%), and drug monitoring (78–96%). The most prevalent level of responsibility was ‘with shared responsibility’. Prescription management tasks were considered to be nurses’ responsibility by 48–81% of the professionals. All contextual factors were indicated as being relevant for nurses’ role in PC by at least 74% of the participants. No task nor contextual factor was removed from the framework after evaluation. This framework can be used to enable healthcare professionals to openly discuss allocation of specific (shared) responsibilities and tasks.
DOCUMENT
Abstract Background: Many countries in Europe have implemented managed competition and patient choice during the last decade. With the introduction of managed competition, health insurers also became an important stakeholder. They purchase services on behalf of their customers and are allowed to contract healthcare providers selectively. It has, therefore, become increasingly important to take one's insurance into account when choosing a provider. There is little evidence that patients make active choices in the way that policymakers assume they do. This research aims to investigate, firstly, the role of patients in choosing a healthcare provider at the point of referral, then the role of the GP and, finally, the influence of the health insurer/insurance policies within this process. Methods: We videotaped a series of everyday consultations between Dutch GPs and their patients during 2015 and 2016. In 117 of these consultations, with 28 GPs, the patient was referred to another healthcare provider. These consultations were coded by three observers using an observation protocol which assessed the role of the patient, GP, and the influence of the health insurer during the referral. Results: Patients were divided into three groups: patients with little or no input, patients with some input, and those with a lot of input. Just over half of the patients (56%) seemed to have some, or a lot of, input into the choice of a healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP. In addition, in almost half of the consultations (47%), GPs inquired about their patients' preferences regarding a healthcare provider. Topics regarding the health insurance or insurance policy of a patient were rarely (14%) discussed at the point of referral. Conclusions: Just over half of the patients appear to have some, or a lot of, input into their choice of a healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP. However, the remainder of the patients had little or no input. If more patient choice continues to be an important aim for policy makers, patients should be encouraged to actively choose the healthcare provider who best fits their needs and preferences.
DOCUMENT
