Article

A qualitative evaluation of New Zealand consumers perceptions of general practice nurses.

BMC Family Practice (Impact Factor: 1.74). 02/2013; 14(1):26. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2296-14-26
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: An important consideration in health service delivery is ensuring that services meet consumer needs and that consumers are satisfied with service delivery. Patient satisfaction can impact on compliance with suggested treatments and therefore impact on health outcomes. Comparatively few studies have explored consumer satisfaction with nurses in general practice. METHODS: A sub-group of 18 consumers from a larger quantitative evaluation of consumer satisfaction with New Zealand general practice nurses participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Interview data was analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four major themes emerged from the data that highlighted that, despite confusion experienced by some consumer regarding the practice nurse role, consumers were happy with the level of care provided by them. Consumers felt valued by Practice Nurses and considered them competent and highly knowledgeable. Findings also convey that consumers appreciate the accessibility and financial benefits of utilising the services of practice nurses. CONCLUSIONS: Consumers are highly satisfied with practice nurse service delivery and value their relationships with these health professionals. Consumers revealed that greater clarity around the practice nurse role and their scope of practice may enhance their utilisation. Spreading the message of PNs should read practice nurses being the right person to deliver care, within their scope of practice, at the right time may have the potential to provide more timely care within the primary care setting.

Full-text

Available from: Elizabeth Halcomb, Jun 10, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
313 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A team approach in primary care has proven benefits in achieving better outcomes, reducing health care costs, satisfying patient needs, ensuring continuity of care, increasing job satisfaction among health providers and using human health care resources more efficiently. However, some research indicates constraints in collaboration within primary health care (PHC) teams in Lithuania. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon of teamwork in Lithuania by exploring the experiences of teamwork by general practitioners (GPs) and community nurses (CNs) involved in PHC. Six focus groups were formed with 29 GPs and 27 CNs from the Kaunas Region of Lithuania. Discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis of these data was then performed. The analysis of focus group data identified six thematic categories related to teamwork in PHC: the structure of a PHC team, synergy among PHC team members, descriptions of roles and responsibilities of team members, competencies of PHC team members, communications between PHC team members and the organisational background for teamwork. These findings provide the basis for a discussion of a thematic model of teamwork that embraces formal, individual and organisational factors. The need for effective teamwork in PHC is an issue receiving broad consensus; however, the process of teambuilding is often taken for granted in the PHC sector in Lithuania. This study suggests that both formal and individual behavioural factors should be targeted when aiming to strengthen PHC teams. Furthermore, this study underscores the need to provide explicit formal descriptions of the roles and responsibilities of PHC team members in Lithuania, which would include establishing clear professional boundaries. The training of team members is an essential component of the teambuilding process, but not sufficient by itself.
    BMC Family Practice 08/2013; 14(1):118. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-14-118 · 1.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nursing in Australian general practice has grown rapidly over the last decade in response to government initiatives to strengthen primary care. There are limited data about how this expansion has impacted on the nursing role, scope of practice and workforce characteristics. This study aimed to describe the current demographic and employment characteristics of Australian nurses working in general practice and explore trends in their role over time. In the nascence of the expansion of the role of nurses in Australian general practice (2003-2004) a national survey was undertaken to describe nurse demographics, clinical roles and competencies. This survey was repeated in 2009-2010 and comparative analysis of the datasets undertaken to explore workforce changes over time. Two hundred eighty four nurses employed in general practice completed the first survey (2003/04) and 235 completed the second survey (2009/10). Significantly more participants in Study 2 were undertaking follow-up of pathology results, physical assessment and disease specific health education. There was also a statistically significant increase in the participants who felt that further education / training would augment their confidence in all clinical tasks (p < 0.001). Whilst the impact of legal implications as a barrier to the nurses' role in general practice decreased between the two time points, more participants perceived lack of space, job descriptions, confidence to negotiate with general practitioners and personal desire to enhance their role as barriers. Access to education and training as a facilitator to nursing role expansion increased between the two studies. The level of optimism of participants for the future of the nurses' role in general practice was slightly decreased over time. This study has identified that some of the structural barriers to nursing in Australian general practice have been addressed over time. However, it also identifies continuing barriers that impact practice nurse role development. Understanding and addressing these issues is vital to optimise the effectiveness of the primary care nursing workforce.
    BMC Family Practice 03/2014; 15(1):52. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-15-52 · 1.74 Impact Factor