Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38627099›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality & safety2024

Locum doctor working and quality and safety: a qualitative study in English primary and secondary care.

Jane Ferguson, Gemma Stringer, Kieran Walshe, Thomas Allen, Christos Grigoroglou, Darren M Ashcroft, Evangelos Kontopantelis

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Consultations with locum doctors in UK general practice: longitudinal analysis of electronic health records.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 'None of Them Know Me': A Qualitative Study of the Implications of Locum Doctor Working for Patient Experience.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jane FergusonHealth Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK j.ferguson.1@bham.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8129-8376
Gemma StringerAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9325-3362
Kieran WalsheAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0696-480X
Thomas AllenManchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2972-7911
Christos GrigoroglouManchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1621-8648
Darren M AshcroftNIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (PSRC), Division of Pharmacy and Optometry, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2958-915X
Evangelos KontopantelisDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6450-5815
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of temporary doctors, known as locums, has been common practice for managing staffing shortages and maintaining service delivery internationally. However, there has been little empirical research on the implications of locum working for quality and safety. This study aimed to investigate the implications of locum working for quality and safety.

methodsQualitative semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with 130 participants, including locums, patients, permanently employed doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals with governance and recruitment responsibilities for locums across primary and secondary healthcare organisations in the English NHS. Data were collected between March 2021 and April 2022. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and abductive analysis.

resultsParticipants described the implications of locum working for quality and safety across five themes: (1) 'familiarity' with an organisation and its patients and staff was essential to delivering safe care; (2) 'balance and stability' of services reliant on locums were seen as at risk of destabilisation and lacking leadership for quality improvement; (3) 'discrimination and exclusion' experienced by locums had negative implications for morale, retention and patient outcomes; (4) 'defensive practice' by locums as a result of perceptions of increased vulnerability and decreased support; (5) clinical governance arrangements, which often did not adequately cover locum doctors.

conclusionLocum working and how locums were integrated into organisations posed some significant challenges and opportunities for patient safety and quality of care. Organisations should take stock of how they work with the locum workforce to improve not only quality and safety but also locum experience and retention.

Indexed as

Patient SafetyPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchQuality of Health CareEnglandFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMalePhysiciansSecondary Health CareState MedicineGovernanceHealth services researchPatient safetyQualitative researchQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID38627099
PMCPMC11103325
OpenAlexW4394869762

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.