Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28429886›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2017

Patients' experiences of consultations with physician associates in primary care in England: A qualitative study.

Mary Halter, Vari M Drennan, Louise M Joly, Jonathan Gabe, Heather Gage, Simon de Lusignan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The role of the physician associate: an overview.Irish journal of medical science · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mary HalterFaculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Kingston University and St George's University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6636-0621
Vari M DrennanFaculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Kingston University and St George's University of London, London, UK.
Louise M JolySocial Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London, UK.
Jonathan GabeCentre for Criminology & Sociology, School of Law, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK.
Heather GageSchool of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Simon de LusignanDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 09/1801/1066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysician associates are new to English general practice and set to expand in numbers.

objectiveTo investigate the patients' perspective on consulting with physician associates in general practice.

designA qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews, with thematic analysis. SETTING AND

participantsThirty volunteer patients of 430 who had consulted physician associates for a same-day appointment and had returned a satisfaction survey, in six general practices employing physician associates in England.

findingsSome participants only consulted once with a physician associate and others more frequently. The conditions consulted for ranged from minor illnesses to those requiring immediate hospital admission. Understanding the role of the physician associate varied from 'certain and correct' to 'uncertain', to 'certain and incorrect', where the patient believed the physician associate to be a doctor. Most, but not all, reported positive experiences and outcomes of their consultation, with some choosing to consult the physician. Those with negative experiences described problems when the limits of the role were reached, requiring additional GP consultations or prescription delay. Trust and confidence in the physician associate was derived from trust in the NHS, the general practice and the individual physician associate. Willingness to consult a physician associate was contingent on the patient's assessment of the severity or complexity of the problem and the desire for provider continuity.

conclusionPatients saw physician associates as an appropriate general practitioner substitute. Patients' experience could inform delivery redesign.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionPhysician AssistantsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overContinuity of Patient CareEnglandFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPhysician-Patient RelationsPrimary Health CareProfessional RoleQualitative ResearchGeneral PracticePatient Acceptance of Health Care,Patient SatisfactionPhysician Assistantsphysician associatesPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID28429886
PMCPMC5600217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.