ArticleBMC health services research2026
Patient experiences of consulting advanced practice nurses in primary care: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdvanced practice nursing has been implemented across the world to meet primary care needs and improve care provision. This study had two-fold aims: first, to explore patients' experiences in terms of patient satisfaction and patient enablement after consulting Finnish Advanced Practice Nurses (APNs) in primary care; second, to explore the potential factors associated with these patient experiences, such as patients' overall health status and language differences between the APNs and the patients.
methodsA cross-sectional design was applied in this study, utilising a validated instrument, the Patient Enablement and Satisfaction Survey for Advanced Nurse Practitioners, along with a short questionnaire tailored for APNs. In total, 25 APNs and 483 patients participated in the data collection between January and June 2025. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, independent samples Welch's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, one-way Welch's Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), one-way Kruskal-Wallis test, and Spearman's correlation were used in the analysis.
resultsPatients highly rated their consultation with APNs in primary care, with high levels of patient satisfaction and enablement being reported. However, slight differences were observed regarding these aspects among Nurse Prescribers, Nurse Practitioners (NPs), and NPs with prescriptive authority. Patients who spoke the same language as the APN and rated their overall health status more positively identified increased satisfaction and enablement regarding APN consultations.
conclusionsThis study provides new evidence of patient experiences in utilising care and services provided by APNs in Finland. It also offers more information for policy makers and nurse leaders on the implementation and overall importance of advanced practice nursing in primary care. The results may also contribute to facilitating the legislative process of registering Finnish NPs and Nurse Prescribers as titles at the national level.
trial registrationClinical trial number: Not applicable.
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.