ArticlePloS one2023
Evaluating task shifting to the clinical technologist in Dutch healthcare: A mixed methods study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExpected rise in the demand for healthcare and a dropping supply of healthcare professionals, has generated an increased interest in the most effective deployment of healthcare professionals. Consequently, task shifting has become a common strategy to redistribute tasks between established professional groups, however, little is known about the effects of shifting tasks to emerging professional groups. The aim of this study was to evaluate a legal amendment to facilitate task shifting to an emerging profession in Dutch healthcare: Clinical Technologists (CTs). CTs were introduced and provided an Extended Scope of Practice (ESP) to perform nine 'reserved procedures' independently.
methodsA concurrent multi-phase mixed methods study was used to evaluate whether a legal amendment to facilitate task shifting to CTs was effective and efficient.
resultsThe results show that CTs use their ESP frequently to perform five categories of reserved procedures independently and suggest that the ESP increased the efficiency of care delivery for those procedures. Additionally, the findings highlight that task shifting was influenced by the setting in which CTs worked, time allotted to patient-contact as well as external factors (e.g., financing).
conclusionsThis study provides tentative lessons for policymakers on how task shifting to emerging professional groups can be improved. Providing a legal amendment to facilitate task shifting to CTs seems to be effective and efficient. However, it also poses multiple challenges. While established professional groups can face similar challenges, it is likely that these are exacerbated for emerging professional groups, particularly when shifting tasks occurs horizontally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.