Integrating nurse practitioners into primary care: policy considerations from a Canadian province.
Collaboration
Funding
Integration
Nurse practitioners
Policy
Primary care
Role
Journal
BMC family practice
ISSN: 1471-2296
Titre abrégé: BMC Fam Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967792
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 12 2020
04 12 2020
Historique:
received:
06
04
2020
accepted:
15
11
2020
entrez:
5
12
2020
pubmed:
6
12
2020
medline:
25
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The integration of nurse practitioners (NPs) into primary care health teams has been an object of interest for policy makers seeking to achieve the goals of improving care, increasing access, and lowering cost. The province of Alberta in Canada recently introduced a policy aimed at integrating NPs into existing primary care delivery structures. This qualitative research sought to understand how that policy - the NP Support Program (NPSP) - was viewed by key stakeholders and to draw out policy lessons. Fifteen semi-structured interviews with NPs and other stakeholders in Alberta's primary care system were conducted, recorded, transcribed and analyzed using the interpretive description method. Stakeholders predominantly felt the NPSP would not change the status quo of limited practice opportunities and the resulting underutilization of primary care NPs in the province. Participants attributed low levels of NP integration into the primary care system to: 1) financial viability issues that directly impacted NPs, physicians, and primary care networks (PCNs); 2) policy issues related to the NPSP's reliance on PCNs as employers, and a requirement that NPs panel patients; and 3) governance issues in which NPs are not afforded sufficient authority over their role or how the key concept of 'care team' is defined and operationalized. In general, stakeholders did not see the NPSP as a long-term solution for increasing NP integration into the province's primary care system. Policy adjustments that enable NPs to access funding not only from within but also outside PCNs, and modifications to allow greater NP input into how their role is utilized would likely improve the NPSP's ability to reach its goals.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The integration of nurse practitioners (NPs) into primary care health teams has been an object of interest for policy makers seeking to achieve the goals of improving care, increasing access, and lowering cost. The province of Alberta in Canada recently introduced a policy aimed at integrating NPs into existing primary care delivery structures. This qualitative research sought to understand how that policy - the NP Support Program (NPSP) - was viewed by key stakeholders and to draw out policy lessons.
METHODS
Fifteen semi-structured interviews with NPs and other stakeholders in Alberta's primary care system were conducted, recorded, transcribed and analyzed using the interpretive description method.
RESULTS
Stakeholders predominantly felt the NPSP would not change the status quo of limited practice opportunities and the resulting underutilization of primary care NPs in the province. Participants attributed low levels of NP integration into the primary care system to: 1) financial viability issues that directly impacted NPs, physicians, and primary care networks (PCNs); 2) policy issues related to the NPSP's reliance on PCNs as employers, and a requirement that NPs panel patients; and 3) governance issues in which NPs are not afforded sufficient authority over their role or how the key concept of 'care team' is defined and operationalized.
CONCLUSIONS
In general, stakeholders did not see the NPSP as a long-term solution for increasing NP integration into the province's primary care system. Policy adjustments that enable NPs to access funding not only from within but also outside PCNs, and modifications to allow greater NP input into how their role is utilized would likely improve the NPSP's ability to reach its goals.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33276736
doi: 10.1186/s12875-020-01318-3
pii: 10.1186/s12875-020-01318-3
pmc: PMC7717104
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
254Références
Healthc Policy. 2007 Aug;3(1):e160-81
pubmed: 19305749
Nurs Leadersh (Tor Ont). 2010 Dec;23 Spec No 2010:88-113
pubmed: 21478689
Qual Health Res. 2009 Sep;19(9):1284-92
pubmed: 19690208
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jan 13;17(1):33
pubmed: 28086869
JAMA. 2016 Aug 23-30;316(8):826-34
pubmed: 27552616
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 May 15;17(1):351
pubmed: 28506224
Can J Public Health. 2006 Sep-Oct;97(5):409-11
pubmed: 17120883
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015 Sep;42(5):533-44
pubmed: 24193818
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Sep 21;8:188
pubmed: 18803881
Int Nurs Rev. 2013 Dec;60(4):435-47
pubmed: 24131230
Healthc Policy. 2017 Nov;13(2):20-30
pubmed: 29274224
Inquiry. 1979 Winter;16(4):339-49
pubmed: 162055
Nurs Econ. 2012 Sep-Oct;30(5):268-74, 294
pubmed: 23198609
Nurs Leadersh (Tor Ont). 2010 Dec;23 Spec No 2010:35-60
pubmed: 21478686
Health Serv Res. 2018 Apr;53(2):1163-1179
pubmed: 28255992
Nurs Leadersh (Tor Ont). 2010 Dec;23 Spec No 2010:239-59
pubmed: 21478696
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Jul 29;17:99
pubmed: 27473745
J Adv Nurs. 2016 Feb;72(2):451-60
pubmed: 26412414
Soc Sci Med. 2012 Nov;75(10):1811-9
pubmed: 22898720
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jun 7;18(1):420
pubmed: 29880042
Health Aff (Millwood). 2010 May;29(5):893-9
pubmed: 20439877
Can J Public Health. 2010 Jul-Aug;101(4):309-13
pubmed: 21033544
Aust Health Rev. 2013 Nov;37(5):588-93
pubmed: 24028790
Health Serv Res. 2016 Aug;51(4):1407-23
pubmed: 26707840
Can J Nurs Res. 2005 Dec;37(4):116-37
pubmed: 16541822
Res Nurs Health. 1997 Apr;20(2):169-77
pubmed: 9100747
Milbank Q. 2019 Jun;97(2):383-386
pubmed: 30900302
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jul 17;17(1):493
pubmed: 28716120