Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31160367›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2019

Skill-mix change in general practice: a qualitative comparison of three 'new' non-medical roles in English primary care.

Pauline A Nelson, Fay Bradley, Anne-Marie Martindale, Anne McBride, Damian Hodgson

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. GP workforce sustainability to maximise effective and equitable patient care: a realist review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Implementing the Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme in seven English Primary Care Networks: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  13. Negotiating new roles in general practice: a qualitative study of clinical pharmacists.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Organization of primary care.Primary health care research & development · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Pauline A NelsonAlliance Manchester Business School.
Fay BradleyAlliance Manchester Business School.
Anne-Marie MartindaleCentre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester.
Anne McBrideAlliance Manchester Business School.
Damian HodgsonAlliance Manchester Business School.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeneral practice is currently facing a significant workforce challenge. Changing the general practice skill mix by introducing new non-medical roles is recommended as one solution; the literature highlights that organisational and/or operational difficulties are associated with skill-mix changes.

aimTo compare how three non-medical roles were being established in general practice, understand common implementation barriers, and identify measurable impacts or unintended consequences. DESIGN AND

settingIn-depth qualitative comparison of three role initiatives in general practices in one area of Greater Manchester, England; that is, advanced practitioner and physician associate training schemes, and a locally commissioned practice pharmacist service.

methodSemi-structured interviews and focus groups with a purposive sample of stakeholders involved in the implementation of each role initiative were conducted. Template analysis enabled the production of pre-determined and researcher-generated codes, categories, and themes.

resultsThe final sample contained 38 stakeholders comprising training/service leads, role holders, and host practice staff. Three key themes captured participants' perspectives: purpose and place of new roles in general practice, involving unclear role definition and tension at professional boundaries; transition of new roles into general practice, involving risk management, closing training-practice gaps and managing expectations; and future of new roles in general practice, involving demonstrating impact and questions about sustainability.

conclusionThis in-depth, in-context comparative study highlights that introducing new roles to general practice is not a simple process. Recognition of factors affecting the assimilation of roles may help to better align them with the goals of general practice and harness the commitment of individual practices to enable role sustainability.

Indexed as

General PracticeGeneral PractitionersNurse PractitionersPharmacistsPhysician AssistantsProfessional RoleEnglandHumansQualitative Researchadvanced practitionersgeneral practicenew rolespharmacistsphysician associatesqualitative researchskill-mix

Identifiers

PMID31160367
PMCPMC6592332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.