Background: A highly promoted opportunity for optimizing healthcare services is to expand the role of nonphysician care providers by care reallocation. Reallocating care from physicians to non-physicians can play an important role in solving systemic healthcare problems such as care delays, hospital overcrowding, long waiting lists, high work pressure and expanding healthcare costs. Dermatological healthcare services, such as the acne care provision, are well suited for exploring the opportunities for care reallocation as many different types of care professionals are involved in the care process. In the Netherlands, acne care is mainly delivered by general practitioners and dermatologists. The Dutch healthcare system also recognizes non-physician care providers, among which dermal therapists and beauticians are the most common professions. However, the role and added value of non-physicians is still unclear. The present study aimed to explore the possibilities for reallocating care to nonphysicians and identify drivers for and barriers to reallocation. Methods: A mixed-method design was used collecting quantitative and qualitative data from representatives of the main 4 Dutch professions providing acne care: dermatologists, GP’s, Dermal therapists and beauticians. Results: A total of 560 questionnaires were completed and 24 semi-structured interviews were conducted. A broad spectrum of non-physician tasks and responsibilities were delineated. Interviewed physicians considered acne as a low-complexity skin condition which made them willing to explore the possibilities for reallocating. A majority of all interviewees saw a key role for non-physicians in counselling and supporting patients during treatment, which they considered an important role for increasing patients’ adherence to proposed treatment regimes, contributing to successful clinical outcome. Also, the amount of time non-physicians spend on patients was experienced as driver for reallocation. Legislation and regulations, uncertainties about the extent of scientific evidence and proper protocols use within the non-physician clinical practice were experienced as barriers influencing the possibilities for reallocation. Conclusions: Delineated roles and drivers demonstrate there is room and potential for reallocation between physicians and non-physicians within acne healthcare, when barriers are adequately addressed.
LINK
Aim To provide insight into the basic characteristics of decision making in the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (SSAS) in Dutch heart centres with specific emphasis on the evaluation of frailty, cognition, nutritional status and physical functioning/functionality in (instrumental) activities of daily living [(I)ADL]. Methods A questionnaire was used that is based on the European and American guidelines for SSAS treatment. The survey was administered to physicians and non-physicians in Dutch heart centres involved in the decision-making pathway for SSAS treatment. Results All 16 Dutch heart centres participated. Before a patient case is discussed by the heart team, heart centres rarely request data from the referring hospital regarding patients’ functionality (n = 5), frailty scores (n = 0) and geriatric consultation (n = 1) as a standard procedure. Most heart centres ‘often to always’ do their own screening for frailty (n = 10), cognition/mood (n = 9), nutritional status (n = 10) and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL (n = 10). During heart team meetings data are ‘sometimes to regularly’ available regarding frailty (n = 5), cognition/mood (n = 11), nutritional status (n = 8) and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL (n = 10). After assessment in the outpatient clinic patient cases are re-discussed ‘sometimes to regularly’ in heart team meetings (n = 10). Conclusions Dutch heart centres make an effort to evaluate frailty, cognition, nutritional status and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL for decision making regarding SSAS treatment. However, these patient data are not routinely requested from the referring hospital and are not always available for heart team meetings. Incorporation of these important data in a structured manner early in the decision-making process may provide additional useful information for decision making in the heart team meeting.
LINK
Background: Non-technical errors, such as insufficient communication or leadership, are a major cause of medical failures during trauma resuscitation. Research on staffing variation among trauma teams on teamwork is still in their infancy. In this study, the extent of variation in trauma team staffing was assessed. Our hypothesis was that there would be a high variation in trauma team staffing. Methods: Trauma team composition of consecutive resuscitations of injured patients were evaluated using videos. All trauma team members that where part of a trauma team during a trauma resuscitation were identified and classified during a one-week period. Other outcomes were number of unique team members, number of new team members following the previous resuscitation and new team members following the previous resuscitation in the same shift (Day, Evening, Night). Results: All thirty-two analyzed resuscitations had a unique trauma team composition and 101 unique members were involved. A mean of 5.71 (SD 2.57) new members in teams of consecutive trauma resuscitations was found, which was two-third of the trauma team. Mean team members present during trauma resuscitation was 8.38 (SD 1.43). Most variation in staffing was among nurses (32 unique members), radiology technicians (22 unique members) and anesthetists (19 unique members). The least variation was among trauma surgeons (3 unique members) and ER physicians (3 unique members). Conclusion: We found an extremely high variation in trauma team staffing during thirty-two consecutive resuscitations at our level one trauma center which is incorporated in an academic teaching hospital. Further research is required to explore and prevent potential negative effects of staffing variation in trauma teams on teamwork, processes and patient related outcomes.
