Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36597086›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

How health care professionals handle limited resources in primary care - an interview study.

Suzana Holmér, Ann- Charlotte Nedlund, Kristin Thomas, Barbro Krevers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Participation in the digital transformation of healthcare: a review of qualitative studies.International journal of health care quality assurance · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Turning to Service Users for the Understanding of Current and Future Mental Health Services in the Development Process of Research and Practice: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Research on the impact of hospital organizational behavior on physicians'patient-centered care.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

4 authors.

Suzana HolmérDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Sandbäcksgatan 7, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden. suzana.holmer@liu.se.
Ann- Charlotte NedlundDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Sandbäcksgatan 7, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden.
Kristin ThomasDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Sandbäcksgatan 7, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden.
Barbro KreversDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Sandbäcksgatan 7, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHealth care systems around the world are struggling with limited resources, in relation to the prevailing health care need. An accessible primary care is an important part of the solution for how to provide affordable care for the population and reduce pressure on the overall health care system such as unnecessary hospital stays and associated costs. As primary care constitutes an important first line of healthcare, the task of prioritising and deciding what to do and for whom lies in practice, primarily with the primary care professionals. Thus, the decisions and behaviour of primary care professionals have a central role in achieving good and equal health in the population. The aim of this study is to explore how primary health care professionals handle situations with limited resources and enhance our knowledge of priorities in practice. 

methodsSemi-structured interviews with 14 health care professionals (7 nurses, 7 physicians) working in Swedish primary care were interviewed. Data were analysed inductively with content analysis.

findingsThree main categories were found: Influx of patients; Structural conditions; and Actions. Each category illustrates an important aspect for what primary care professionals do to achieve good and equal care. The influx of patients concerned what the professionals handled in terms of patients' healthcare needs and patient behaviour. Structural conditions consisted of policies and goals set for primary care, competence availability, technical systems, and organisational culture. To handle situations due to limited resources, professionals performed different actions: matching health care needs with professionals' competency, defining care needs to suit booking systems appointments, giving care at the inappropriate health care level, rearranging workhours, and passing on the decision making.

conclusionPriorities in primary care are not, "one fits all" solution. Our study shows that priorities in primary care comprise of ongoing daily processes that are adapted to the situation, context of patient influx, and structural conditions. Healthcare professional's actions for how influx of patients' is handled in relation to limited resources, are created, and shaped within this context which also sets the boundaries for their actions.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHealth FacilitiesHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchEthical principlesHealth prioritiesPrimary health carePriority settingQualitative methodsRationing

Identifiers

PMID36597086
PMCPMC9808951

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.