scholarly journals A Descriptive Correlational Study of the Decision-Making Patterns of Nurse Practitioners in Primary Care

1986 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Rosemary Goodyear
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Correlational Study

scholarly journals A Comparison of Physicians' and Nurse Practitioners' Use of Race in Clinical Decision-Making

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Khadijah E. Abdallah ◽  
Kathleen A. Calzone ◽  
Jean F. Jenkins ◽  
Melissa E. Moss ◽  
Sherrill L. Sellers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Genetic Variation ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
General Internal

Objective: The debate over use of race as a proxy for genetic risk of disease continues, but little is known about how primary care providers (nurse practitioners and general internal medicine physicians) currently use race in their clinical practice. Our study in­vestigates primary care providers’ use of race in clinical practice.Methods: Survey data from three cross-sectional parent studies were used. A total of 178 nurse practitioners (NPs) and 759 general internal medicine physicians were included. The outcome of interest was the Racial At­tributes in Clinical Evaluation (RACE) scale, which measures explicit use of race in clinical decision-making. Predictor variables included the Genetic Variation Knowledge Assessment Index (GKAI), which measures the providers’ knowledge of human genetic variation.Results: In the final multivariable model, NPs had an average RACE score that was 1.60 points higher than the physicians’ score (P=.03). The GKAI score was not significantly associated with the RACE outcome in the final model (P=.67).Conclusions: Physicians had more knowl­edge of genetic variation and used patients’ race less in the clinical decision-making process than NPs. We speculate that these differences may be related to differences in discipline-specific clinical training and approaches to clinical care. Further explora­tion of these differences is needed, including examination of physicians’ and NPs’ beliefs about race, how they use race in disease screening and treatment, and if the use of race is contributing to health care dispari­ties.Ethn Dis.2019;29(1):1-8; doi:10.18865/ ed.29.1.1.

Fool’s Gold: Psychologists Using Disingenuous Reasoning to Mislead Legislatures into Granting Psychologists Prescriptive Authority

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524
Author(s):  
Brent Pollitt
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
Psychotropic Medications ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Prescriptive Authority

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.

scholarly journals A referral aid for smoking cessation interventions in primary care: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniëlle N. Zijlstra ◽  
Jean W.M. Muris ◽  
Catherine Bolman ◽  
J. Mathis Elling ◽  
Vera E.R.A. Knapen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Informed Decision Making

Abstract Background: To expedite the use of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions (EBSCIs) in primary care and to thereby increase the number of successful quit attempts, a referral aid was developed. This aid aims to optimize the referral to and use of EBSCIs in primary care and to increase adherence to Dutch guidelines for smoking cessation. Methods: Practice nurses (PNs) will be randomly allocated to an experimental condition or control condition, and will then recruit smoking patients who show a willingness to quit smoking within six months. PNs allocated to the experimental condition will provide smoking cessation guidance in accordance with the referral aid. Patients from both conditions will receive questionnaires at baseline and after six months. Cessation effectiveness will be tested via multilevel logistic regression analyses. Multiple imputations as well as intention to treat analysis will be performed. Intervention appreciation and level of informed decision-making will be compared using analysis of (co)variance. Predictors for appreciation and informed decision-making will be assessed using multiple linear regression analysis and/or structural equation modeling. Finally, a cost-effectiveness study will be conducted. Discussion: This paper describes the study design for the development and evaluation of an information and decision tool to support PNs in their guidance of smoking patients and their referral to EBSCIs. The study aims to provide insight into the (cost) effectiveness of an intervention aimed at expediting the use of EBSCIs in primary care.

scholarly journals Primary Care Practice Environment and Burnout Among Nurse Practitioners

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cilgy M. Abraham ◽  
Katherine Zheng ◽  
Allison A. Norful ◽  
Affan Ghaffari ◽  
Jianfang Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Practice ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Practice Environment

scholarly journals Decision support tools to improve cancer diagnostic decision making in primary care: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (689) ◽  
pp. e809-e818 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Chima ◽  
Jeanette C Reece ◽  
Kristi Milley ◽  
Shakira Milton ◽  
Jennifer G McIntosh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Decision Support Tools ◽  
Diagnostic Decision ◽  
Support Tools ◽  
Diagnostic Decision Making

BackgroundThe diagnosis of cancer in primary care is complex and challenging. Electronic clinical decision support tools (eCDSTs) have been proposed as an approach to improve GP decision making, but no systematic review has examined their role in cancer diagnosis.AimTo investigate whether eCDSTs improve diagnostic decision making for cancer in primary care and to determine which elements influence successful implementation.Design and settingA systematic review of relevant studies conducted worldwide and published in English between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2018.MethodPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, and a consultation of reference lists and citation tracking was carried out. Exclusion criteria included the absence of eCDSTs used in asymptomatic populations, and studies that did not involve support delivered to the GP. The most relevant Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists were applied according to study design of the included paper.ResultsOf the nine studies included, three showed improvements in decision making for cancer diagnosis, three demonstrated positive effects on secondary clinical or health service outcomes such as prescribing, quality of referrals, or cost-effectiveness, and one study found a reduction in time to cancer diagnosis. Barriers to implementation included trust, the compatibility of eCDST recommendations with the GP’s role as a gatekeeper, and impact on workflow.ConclusioneCDSTs have the capacity to improve decision making for a cancer diagnosis, but the optimal mode of delivery remains unclear. Although such tools could assist GPs in the future, further well-designed trials of all eCDSTs are needed to determine their cost-effectiveness and the most appropriate implementation methods.

scholarly journals Evaluation of an unscheduled care model delivered by advanced nurse practitioners in a primary-care setting

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (8) ◽  
pp. 696-709
Author(s):  
Calum F Leask ◽  
Heather Tennant
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Home Visits ◽  
Rejection Rate ◽  
Service Level ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Unscheduled Care ◽  
Viable Solution

Background Considering new models of delivery may help reduce increasing pressures on primary care. One potentially viable solution is utilising Advanced Practitioners to deliver unscheduled afternoon visits otherwise undertaken by a General Practitioner (GP). Aims Evaluate the feasibility of utilising an Advanced Nurse Practitioner (ANP) to deliver unscheduled home visits on behalf of GPs in a primary care setting. Methods Following a telephone request from patients, ANPs conducted unscheduled home visits on behalf of GPs over a six-month period. Service-level data collected included patient-facing time and outcome of visits. Practice staff and ANPs participated in mind-mapping sessions to explore perceptions of the service. Results There were 239 accepted referrals (total visiting time 106.55 hours). The most common outcomes for visits were ‘medication and worsening statement given’ (107 cases) and ‘self-care advice’ (47 cases). GPs were very satisfied with the service (average score 90%), reporting reductions in stress and capacity improvements. Given the low referral rejection rate, ANPs discussed the potential to increase the number of practices able to access this model, in addition to the possibility of utilising other practitioners (such as paramedics or physiotherapists) to deliver the same service. Conclusions It appears delivering unscheduled care provision using an ANP is feasible and acceptable to GPs.

A Meta-Analysis of Nurse Practitioners and Nurse Midwives in Primary Care

1995 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 332???339 ◽  
Author(s):  
SHARON A. BROWN ◽  
DEANNA E. GRIMES
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Nurse Midwives
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document