Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16834880›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2006

Comparing the cost of nurse practitioners and GPs in primary care: modelling economic data from randomised trials.

Sandra Hollinghurst, Sue Horrocks, Elizabeth Anderson, Chris Salisbury

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01388374 (A Study on the), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01388374 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2010, after this paper: background citation

A Study on the (Cost-)Effectiveness of Nurse Practitioners Working at the Primary Out of Hours Emergency Service and the Feasibility of Implementing These Nurses

TypeinterventionalSponsorRadboud University Medical CenterRan2010 to 2012Enrolled12,092ConditionsOut of Hours Medical Care, Primary Health CareArmsOther, care provided by Nurse Practitioners
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Nurses as substitutes for doctors in primary care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Economic evaluation of nurse practitioners versus GPs in treating common conditions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010
    Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Research into practice: accessing primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sandra HollinghurstAcademic Unit of Primary Health Care, Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Cotham House, Cotham Hill, Bristol BS6 6JL. s.p.hollinghurst@bristol.ac.uk
Sue Horrocks
Elizabeth Anderson
Chris Salisbury

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe role of nurse practitioners in primary care has recently expanded. While there are some outcome data available for different types of consultations, little is known about the relative cost.

aimTo compare the cost of primary care provided by nurse practitioners with that of salaried GPs. DESIGN OF STUDY: Synthesis, modelling, and analysis of published data from the perspective of general practices and the NHS. DATA SOURCES: Two published randomised controlled trials.

methodA dataset of resource use for a simulated group of patients in a typical consultation was modelled. Current unit costs were used to obtain a consensus mean cost per consultation.

resultsMean cost of a nurse practitioner consultation was estimated at 9.46 UK pounds (95% confidence interval [CI] = 9.16 to 9.75 pounds) and for a GP was 9.30 UK pounds (95% CI = 9.04 to 9.56 pounds) according to salary and overheads, that is, from the perspective of general practices. From the NHS perspective, which included training costs, the estimated mean costs were 30.35 UK pounds (95% CI = 27.10 to 33.59 pounds) and 28.14 UK pounds (95% CI = 25.43 to 30.84 pounds) respectively. Sensitivity analysis suggested that the time spent by GPs contributing to nurse practitioners' consultations (including return visits) was an important factor in increasing costs associated with nurse practitioners.

conclusionEmploying a nurse practitioner in primary care is likely to cost much the same as employing a salaried GP according to currently available data. There is considerable variability of qualifications and experience of nurse practitioners, which suggests that skill-mix decisions should depend on the full range of roles and responsibilities rather than cost.

Indexed as

Family PracticeHealth Care CostsHumansNurse PractitionersNurse's RolePhysicians, FamilyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReferral and ConsultationSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID16834880
PMCPMC1872064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.