Aim: to identify: (1) nursing competencies for FCC in a hospital setting; and (2) to explore perspectives on these competencies among Dutch and Australian professionals including lecturers, researchers, Registered Nurses and policy makers. Design: A multinational cross-sectional study using Q-methodology. Methods: First, an integrative review was carried out to identify known competencies regarding FCC and to develop the Q-set (search up to July 2018). Second, purposive sampling was used to ensure stakeholder involvement. Third, participants sorted the Q-set using a web-based system between May and August 2019. Lastly, the data were analysed using a by-person factor analysis. The commentaries on the five highest and lowest ranked competencies were thematically analysed. Results: The integrative review identified 43 articles from which 72 competencies were identified. In total 69 participants completed the Q-sorting. We extracted two factors with an explained variance of 24%. The low explained variance hampered labelling. Based on a post-hoc qualitative analysis, four themes emerged from the competencies that were considered most important, namely: (a) believed preconditions for FCC; (b) promote a partnership between nurses, patients and families; (c) be a basic element of nursing; and (d) represent a necessary positive attitude and strong beliefs of the added value of FCC. Three themes appeared from the competencies that were considered least important because they: (a) were not considered a specific nursing competency; (b) demand a multidisciplinary approach; or (c) require that patients and families take own responsibility. Conclusions: Among healthcare professionals, there is substantial disagreement on which nursing competencies are deemed most important for FCC. Impact: Our set of competencies can be used to guide education and evaluate practicing nurses in hospitals. These findings are valuable to consider different views on FCC before implementation of new FCC interventions into nursing practice.
Background: The substitution of healthcare is a way to control rising healthcare costs. The Primary Care Plus (PC+) intervention of the Dutch ‘Blue Care’ pioneer site aims to achieve this feat by facilitating consultations with medical specialists in the primary care setting. One of the specialties involved is dermatology. This study explores referral decisions following dermatology care in PC+ and the influence of predictive patient and consultation characteristics on this decision. Methods: This retrospective study used clinical data of patients who received dermatology care in PC+ between January 2015 and March 2017. The referral decision following PC+, (i.e., referral back to the general practitioner (GP) or referral to outpatient hospital care) was the primary outcome. Stepwise logistic regression modelling was used to describe variations in the referral decisions following PC+, with patient age and gender, number of PC+ consultations, patient diagnosis and treatment specialist as the predicting factors. Results: A total of 2952 patients visited PC+ for dermatology care. Of those patients with a registered referral, 80.2% (N = 2254) were referred back to the GP, and 19.8% (N = 558) were referred to outpatient hospital care. In the multivariable model, only the treating specialist and patient’s diagnosis independently influenced the referral decisions following PC+. Conclusion: The aim of PC+ is to reduce the number of referrals to outpatient hospital care. According to the results, the treating specialist and patient diagnosis influence referral decisions. Therefore, the results of this study can be used to discuss and improve specialist and patient profiles for PC+ to further optimise the effectiveness of the initiative.
In the Netherlands, client and family participation in care for people with intellectual disabilities has been in vogue for a long time, and increasingly receives attention (KPMG and Vilans 2017). However, the perspective and experiential knowledge of service users and relatives is often still insuBiciently used for the co-creation of care. The professional perspective is often still dominant. In addition, professionals mainly focus on clients and less on relatives, even though relatives often play an important role in the client’s (quality of) life (Wiersma 2017). The project ‘Inclusive Collaboration in Disability Care’[1] (ICDC) focusses on enhancing equal communication between people with intellectual disabilities, their relatives, and professional caregivers, and hence contributes to redressing power imbalances in longterm care. It investigates the question: “How can the triangle of client, relative and professional caregiver together co-create better care and support?”.
