Nurse Practitioners' and Physicians' Views of NPs as Providers of Primary Care to Veterans

Psychometric evaluation of the Australian interprofessional socialisation and valuing scale: An invariant measure for health practitioners and students

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Australian Interprofessional Socialisation and Valuing Scale (ISVS)-21 and provide an invariant measure for health practitioners and students to assess interprofessional socialisation.

METHODS

The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) were used as guidelines. This research began with a key step: conducting a pilot study to assess content validity, a requirement of COSMIN for item development. The ISVS-21 has not yet been validated in Australia. Content validity checks ensure the developed items accurately represent the measured construct in the intended cultural context. In addition to conducting more comprehensive tests of psychometric properties compared to previous studies on ISVS-21, this paper introduces something new by evaluating the internal structure of the instrument involving measurement invariance and hypothesis testing for construct validity based on several assumptions related to interprofessional socialisation and values. An invariant measure validates the use of the Australian ISVS-21 on practitioner and student equivalently, allowing the comparison of outcomes at both levels.

RESULTS

The evaluation of content validity indicated that the items were relevant, comprehensible (practitioners and students had an agreement score of >70% for all 21 items), and comprehensive to the concepts intended to be measured. Structural validity confirms ISVS-21 Australia as unidimensional, with good internal consistency reliabilities, Cronbach's α scores = 0.96 (practitioner) and 0.96 (student). Measurement invariance tests confirm ISVS-21 Australia is configural, metric and scalar invariance (ΔCFI ≤ 0.01) across the tested groups of practitioner and student, and therefore suitable for use by both cohorts in Australia. Age and length of work/study were discriminant factors for interprofessional socialisation in both cohorts; the professional background was a differentiating factor for practitioners but not for students. Hypotheses testing results support the COSMIN construct validity requirement for the measure, with 83.3% of assumptions tested accepted.

CONCLUSION

The Australian ISVS has good psychometric properties based on evaluating the content validity, internal structure, and hypotheses testing for construct validity. In addition, Australian ISVS is an invariant measure for use by health practitioners and students and, therefore, confirmed as a quality measure to assess interprofessional socialisation for both cohorts in Australia.

Psychometric evaluation of the culturally adapted interprofessional socialisation and valuing scale (ISVS)-19 for health practitioners and students in Indonesia

We aimed to develop a culturally appropriate psychometrically robust measure for assessing interprofessional socialization for health practitioners and students in Indonesia. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) were used as guidelines. Our study was organized in three phases (a) translation, (b) cross-cultural validation by evaluating the content validity and internal structure of the translated instrument (i.e. structural validity, internal consistency reliability, and measurement invariances), and (c) hypotheses testing for construct validity. A total of 266 health practitioners and 206 students from various professional backgrounds participated. The Indonesian ISVS-19 was confirmed unidimensional. Content validity evaluation confirmed the inclusion of relevant, understandable items and was comprehensive. Factor analysis supported removal of two items. Configural, metric, and scalar tests confirmed the invariance of the 1-Factor 19-Items model in practitioner and student cohorts. Age was a differentiating factor in both cohorts; length of work was only significant for practitioners, and educational background was significant for students (80% of assumptions were accepted, fulfilling COSMIN requirement for construct validity). The Indonesian ISVS-19 has good psychometric properties regarding content validity, internal structure, and construct validity and, therefore, is a psychometrically robust measure for assessing interprofessional socialization for health practitioners and students in Indonesia.

State-level scope of practice regulations for nurse practitioners impact work environments: Six state investigation

Nurse practitioner (NP) scope of practice (SOP) policies are different across the United States. Little is known about their impact on NP work environment in healthcare organizations. We investigated the association between SOP policies and organizational-level work environment of NPs. Through a cross-sectional survey design, data were collected from 1244 NPs in six states with variable SOP regulations (Arizona, New Jersey, Washington, Pennsylvania, Texas, and California) in 2018-2019. Arizona and Washington had full SOP-NPs had full authority to deliver care. New Jersey and Pennsylvania had reduced SOP with physician collaboration requirement; California and Texas had restricted SOP with physician supervision requirement. NPs completed mail or online surveys containing the Nurse Practitioner Primary Care Organizational Climate Questionnaire, which has these subscales: NP-Administration Relations (NP-AR), NP-Physician Relations (NP-PR), Independent Practice and Support (IPS), and Professional Visibility (PV). Regression models assessed the relationship between state-level SOP and practice-level NP work environment. NP-AR scores were higher in full SOP states compared to reduced (β = 0.22, p < 0.01) and restricted (β = 0.15, p < 0.01) SOP states. Similarly, IPS scores were higher in full SOP states. The PV scores were also higher in full SOP states compared to reduced (β = 0.16, p < 0.001) and restricted (β = 0.12, p < 0.05) SOP states. There was no relationship between SOP and NP-PR score. State-level policies affect NP work environment. In states with more favorable policies, NPs have better relationships with administration and report more role visibility and support. Efforts should be made to remove unnecessary SOP restrictions.

Effects of Professional Autonomy and Leadership Style on the Team-Based Practice of Acute Care Nurse Practitioners in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Little is known regarding the factors that affect the team-based practice of nurse practitioners (NPs). Examining the relationships between these factors and team-based practice may provide important insights into the strength of the NP practice.

PURPOSE

This study was designed to examine the effects of practice autonomy and leadership style on the team-based practice of acute care NPs working in hospitals.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, national survey design was conducted to examine the autonomy, leadership, and team-based practice of NPs. One thousand three hundred ninety-one NPs completed the questionnaire, which included demographic and practice variables, the Dempster Practice Behavior Scale, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, and the NP-physician relations subscale of the Nurse Practitioner Primary Care Organizational Climate Questionnaire. The hierarchical linear model was used to differentiate between the NP-level and organization-level effects on team-based practice. Multiple regression was applied to explore the factors associated with team-based practice.

RESULTS

The hierarchical linear model results identified no organization-level effect on team-based practice. Moreover, the results of the regression model found that NPs with greater autonomy in actualization, empowerment and readiness, and idealized influence leadership style enhanced the performance of the doctor of medicine-NP team-based practice. The final model explained 39% of the variance in doctor of medicine-NP team-based practice. Autonomy in actualization and empowerment were identified as the two most important predictors.

CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The practice autonomy and leadership style of NPs influence the efficiency of team-based practice in Taiwan. To improve the team-based practice of NPs, healthcare administrators must support the practice autonomy of NPs.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of nurse's role in primary care settings: an integrative review

Background

The rapid evolution of the epidemiological picture and the recent SARS-COV-2 pandemic has expressed the vulnerabilities of health systems and focuses attention on the population’s needs.

The nurse’s figure in the care teams is universally identified; however, the implementation of the role within some care settings turns out to be complex and challenging. This integrative review aims to identify the barriers and facilitators in implementing the role of the nurse in primary care settings.

Methods

An integrative review was conducted on the Medline and Cinahl databases until 9 June 2020. Qualitative, quantitative, and Mixed-method research studies were selected to identify studies related to the barriers and facilitators of the nurse’s role in nursing facilities’ primary care. For the extraction of the results, the Consolidating Framework for Research Implementation (CFIR) was used to identify the factors that influence implementation in health care.

Results

Following the duplicates’ removal, the search identified 18,257 articles, of which 56 were relevant to the inclusion criteria; therefore, they were included in the summary.

The selected studies were conducted in thirteen countries, most from Oceania, Europe, North America, Latin America, and the Caribbean.

The barriers reported most frequently concern the nursing profession’s regulatory and regulatory aspects within the contexts of care, cultural and organizational aspects, training, and the transfer of specific skills, which were previously designated to doctors.

The facilitators are mainly linked to the nurse’s adaptability to the various contexts of care, recognizing the patient’s role, and the desire to develop multidisciplinary and effective working groups to respond to the health needs of the population in primary care contexts.

Conclusion

This review highlighted the main barriers and facilitators in implementing the nurse’s role in primary care settings. These results offer useful elements for stakeholders to identify effective strategies in preparing programs and activities for implementing the nurse’s role, acting on the elements identified as barriers and favouring the aspects that emerge as facilitators.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-021-00696-y.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the advanced nurse practitioner role in primary care settings: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Workload and workforce issues in primary care are key drivers for the growing international trend to expand nursing roles. Advanced nurse practitioners are increasingly being appointed to take on activities and roles traditionally carried out by doctors. Successful implementation of any new role within multidisciplinary teams is complex and time-consuming, therefore it is important to understand the factors that may hinder or support implementation of the advanced nurse practitioner role in primary care settings.

OBJECTIVES

To identify, appraise and synthesise the barriers and facilitators that impact implementation of advanced practitioner roles in primary care settings.

METHODS

A scoping review conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) framework and reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR. Eight databases (Cochrane Library, Health Business Elite, Kings Fund Library, HMIC, Medline, CINAHL, SCOPUS and Web of Science) were searched to identify studies published in English between 2002 and 2017. Study selection and methodological assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. A pre-piloted extraction form was used to extract the following data: study characteristics, context, participants and information describing the advanced nurse practitioner role. Deductive coding for barriers and facilitators was undertaken using a modified Yorkshire Contributory Framework. We used inductive coding for barriers or facilitators that could not be classified using pre-defined codes. Disagreements were addressed through discussion. Descriptive data was tabulated within evidence tables, and key findings for barriers and facilitators were brought together within a narrative synthesis based on the volume of evidence.

FINDINGS

Systematic searching identified 5976 potential records, 2852 abstracts were screened, and 122 full texts were retrieved. Fifty-four studies (reported across 76 publications) met the selection criteria. Half of the studies (n = 27) were conducted in North America (n = 27), and 25/54 employed a qualitative design. The advanced nurse practitioner role was diverse, working across the lifespan and with different patient groups. However, there was little agreement about the level of autonomy, or what constituted everyday activities. Team factors were the most frequently reported barrier and facilitator. Individual factors, lines of responsibility and 'other' factors (i.e., funding), were also frequently reported barriers. Facilitators included individual factors, supervision and leadership and 'other' factors (i.e., funding, planning for role integration).

CONCLUSION

Building collaborative relationships with other healthcare professionals and negotiating the role are critical to the success of the implementation of the advanced nurse practitioner role. Team consensus about the role and how it integrates into the wider team is also essential.

Complexity as a factor for task allocation among general practitioners and nurse practitioners: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

General practitioner (GP) shortages and increasing demand for care led to the introduction of nurse practitioners (NPs) to primary care. Many concepts for task sharing among health professionals feature complexity. The aim of this narrative review was to examine how complexity is used as a factor for task allocation between GPs and NPs.

METHODS

According to the PRISMA statement, PubMed and CINAHL were searched systematically, and eligibility criteria were applied to detect literature concerning GPs and NPs in primary care and complexity in the context of task allocation. Relevant information was extracted, and a narrative analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies from seven countries were included, comprising quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Complexity was used to describe patients, their needs, and health professionals' tasks. The understanding of the use of complexity as a factor for task allocation between NPs and GPs was based on the patient population (specific vs. unspecific), the setting (specific vs. unspecific), the numbers of health professionals involved (two vs. more than two), and the NP role (distinct model of care vs. no model). Despite similarities in these areas, the tasks which NPs perform range from providing minor to complex care. However, there is a slight trend towards NPs treating socially complex patients and GPs focusing on medically complex cases.

CONCLUSION

Complexity as a concept is prominent in primary care but remains broad and inconsistent as a factor for task allocation between NPs and GPs. This review can be used as a point of reference when practitioners are seeking methods for task allocation in a collaborative primary care setting.

Challenges faced by Canadian primary health care nurse practitioners in chronic disease management: A qualitative study among key informants

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The increasing prevalence of chronic diseases is driving health care systems to rethink their operations. Despite numerous studies supporting the advantages of primary health care nurse practitioners (PHCNPs) in chronic disease management, implementing practices that fully use the skills of these practitioners seems impeded in the Canadian province of Québec. This study explores the views of leaders involved in primary health care regarding the contributions PHCNPs can make in chronic disease management and the challenges they face in doing so.

METHODS

Through semistructured interviews, an exploratory descriptive qualitative study was conducted with 20 key informants across Québec who hold a variety of professional positions connected to PHCNPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary health care nurse practitioners were perceived to be able to improve self-management support for chronic diseases. In reality, however, PHCNPs are mainly devoting their time to clientele in acute care, and current regulations governing their practices limit their involvement in chronic disease management.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Integrating PHCNPs offers a unique opportunity for health care settings to redefine the roles of family physicians and registered nurses and to restructure practices toward a chronic disease-oriented system. A clinical manager should be designated to monitor this restructuring process and ensure its success.

Presenting the primary care team to the public: a qualitative exploration of general practice websites

BACKGROUND

Increasing demand and expanded primary care provision, coupled with a reduced GP workforce, present challenges for primary care. New workforce models aim to reduce GP workload by directing patients to a variety of alternative clinicians. Concurrently, the principle of patient choice in relation to healthcare providers has gained prominence. It is, therefore, necessary to provide patients with sufficient information to negotiate access to appropriate primary healthcare professionals.

AIM

To explore how practice websites present three exemplar healthcare professional groups (GPs, advanced nurse practitioners [ANPs], and practice nurses [PNs]) to patients and the implications for informing appropriate consultation choices.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative thematic analysis of a sample of general practice websites.

METHOD

In total, 79 accessible websites from a metropolitan district in the north of England were thematically analysed in relation to professional representation and signposting of the three identified professional groups.

RESULTS

Information about each group was incomplete, inconsistent, and sometimes inaccurate across the majority of general practice websites. There was a lack of coherence and strategy in representation and direction of website users towards appropriate primary healthcare practitioners.

CONCLUSION

Limited and unclear representation of professional groups on general practice websites may have implications for the direction of patients to the wider clinical healthcare team. Patients may not have appropriate information to make choices about consulting with different healthcare practitioners. This constitutes a missed opportunity to signpost patients to appropriate clinicians and enhance understanding of different professional roles. The potential for websites to disseminate information to the public is not being maximised.

Knowing Your Limits: A Qualitative Study of Physician and Nurse Practitioner Perspectives on NP Independence in Primary Care

BACKGROUND

The shortage of primary care providers and the provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have spurred discussion about expanding the number, scope of practice (SOP), and independence of primary care nurse practitioners (NPs). Such discussions in the media and among professional organizations may insinuate that changes to the laws governing NP practice will engender acrimony between practicing physicians and NPs. However, we lack empirical, descriptive data on how practicing professionals view NP independence in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to explore and describe the attitudes about NP independence among physicians and NPs working in primary care.

DESIGN

A qualitative study based on the principles of grounded theory.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty primary care professionals in Missouri, USA, including 15 primary care physicians and 15 primary care NPs.

APPROACH

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews, with data analysis guided by grounded theory.

KEY RESULTS

Participants had perspectives that were not well represented by professional organizations or the media. Physicians were supportive of a wide variety of NP roles and comfortable with high levels of NP independence and autonomy. Physicians and NPs described prerequisites to NP independence that were complementary. Physicians generally believed that NPs needed some association with physicians for patient safety, and NPs preferred having a physician readily accessible as needed. The theme "knowing your limits" was important to both NPs and physicians regarding NP independence, and has not been described previously in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

NP and physician views about NP practice in primary care are not as divergent as their representative professional organizations and the news media would suggest. The significant agreement among NPs and physicians, and some of the nuances of their perspectives, supports recommendations that may reduce the perceived acrimony surrounding discussions of NP independent practice in primary care.

Collaborative arrangements and privately practising nurse practitioners in Australia: results from a national survey

Objective Since the introduction of legislative changes in 2010, services provided by privately practising nurse practitioners (PPNPs) in Australia have been eligible for subsidisation through the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). To provide eligible services, PPNPs must collaborate formally with a medical practitioner or an entity that employs medical practitioners. This paper provides data from a national survey on these collaborative arrangements in Australia. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of PPNP services on patient access to care in Australia. Methods PPNPs in Australia were invited to complete an electronic survey. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, whereas qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis. Seventy-three surveys were completed. Results Ninety-three per cent of participants reported having a collaborative arrangement in place. Frequency of communication ranged from daily (27%) to never (1%). Participants reported that collaborative arrangements facilitate learning, patient care and offer support to PPNPs. However, for some PPNPs, organising a formal collaborative arrangement is demanding because it is dependent on the availability and willingness of medical practitioners and the open interpretation of the arrangement. Only 19% of participants believed that collaborative arrangements should be a prerequisite for PPNPs to access the MBS and PBS. Conclusion Although there are benefits to collaborative arrangements, there is also concern from PPNPs that mandating such arrangements through legislation presents a barrier to establishing PPNP services and potentially reduces patient access to care. Collaboration with medical practitioners is intrinsic to nursing practice. Thus, legislating for collaborative arrangements is unnecessary, because it makes the normal abnormal. What is known about the topic? To access the MBS and PBS, PPNPs are required by law to have a collaborative arrangement with a medical practitioner or entity that employs medical practitioners. To date, the effects of these collaborative arrangements on PPNP services in Australia have not been known. What does the paper add? This paper provides unique data from a national survey on collaborative arrangements between PPNPs and medical practitioners in Australia. What are the implications for practitioners? Although there are benefits to collaborative arrangements, there is also concern that mandating such arrangements presents a barrier to establishing PPNP services and potentially reduces patient access to care.

Describing team development within a novel GP-led urgent care centre model: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Urgent care centres (UCCs) co-located within an emergency department were developed to reduce the numbers of inappropriate emergency department admissions. Since then various UCC models have developed, including a novel general practitioner (GP)-led UCC that incorporates both GPs and emergency nurse practitioners (ENPs). Traditionally these two groups do not work alongside each other within an emergency setting. Although good teamwork is crucial to better patient outcomes, there is little within the literature about the development of a team consisting of different healthcare professionals in a novel healthcare setting. Our aim was therefore to describe staff members' perspectives of team development within the GP-led UCC model.

DESIGN

Open-ended semistructured interviews, analysed using thematic content analysis.

SETTING

GP-led urgent care centres in two academic teaching hospitals in London.

PARTICIPANTS

15 UCC staff members including six GPs, four ENPs, two receptionists and three managers.

RESULTS

Overall participants were positive about the interprofessional team that had developed and recognised that this process had taken time. Hierarchy within the UCC setting has diminished with time, although some residual hierarchical beliefs do appear to remain. Staff appreciated interdisciplinary collaboration was likely to improve patient care. Eight key facilitating factors for the team were identified: appointment of leaders, perception of fair workload, education on roles/skill sets and development of these, shared professional understanding, interdisciplinary working, ED collaboration, clinical guidelines and social interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

A strong interprofessional team has evolved within the GP-led UCCs over time, breaking down traditional professional divides. Future implementation of UCC models should pro-actively incorporate the eight facilitating factors identified from the outset, to enable effective teams to develop more quickly.

How Do Primary Care Physicians Perceive the Role of Nurses in Quality Measurement and Improvement? The Israeli Story

Background

Israel has boasted a highly effective national quality monitoring program for community-based health services since 2004. The program involves ongoing monitoring of the quality of selected services provided by Israeli health plans and includes approximately 70 indicators.

Objective

To analyze Israeli primary care physicians’ (PCPs) perceptions of nurses’ roles in the national quality monitoring program and their contribution to improving health-care quality.

Design

A cross sectional survey using self-reported questionnaire.

Setting

Four Israeli health plans, covering 100% of the Israeli population.

Participants

A representative sample of 1,000 Israeli PCPs. Response rate of 69% (605 out of the 884 physicians who met the study criteria).

Methods

A questionnaire combined with closed questions on the attitudes and behaviors of the physicians regarding nurses’ involvement in quality monitoring and open questions about the changes that had made in their practice as a result of the quality monitoring program.

Results

Most respondents (74%) agreed that nurses contribute to practice quality and share responsibility for improving quality measures. Physicians who felt that quality monitoring improved the quality of care and those who supported the program were more likely to consider that nurses shared responsibility for the quality of care. However, in open-ended questions about the changes they made in their practices as a result of the program, they made minimal reference to the importance of nurses and their contribution to improved quality indicators.

Conclusion

There was a disparity between the closed-ended and open-ended questions regarding the way physicians depicted the role of nurses in quality monitoring and improvement. This disparity may be due to the fact that physicians do not yet fully appreciate the growing involvement of nurses in these areas.

The tortuous journey of introducing the nurse practitioner as a new member of the healthcare team: a meta-synthesis

The aim of this study was to explore the obstacles to and the opportunities for achieving optimal interprofessional team collaboration with the introduction of the nurse practitioner (NP). A team approach can contribute importantly to sustainable and safe patient care, and NPs have been added to the healthcare team in many countries. Following the international trend towards the development of the acute care NP, the role has recently been initiated in surgical care in Sweden. The introduction of an advanced nursing role into existing organisations raises questions about how the role will be developed and what its effects will be on collaboration between the different professions. We conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies using the meta-ethnographic approach developed by Noblit and Hare. Literature in the field of nursing was searched on PubMed and CINAHL, and empirical qualitative studies from outpatient and inpatient care in seven countries were included. The studies were appraised according to national guidelines and templates and were analysed and synthesised according to the meta-ethnographic approach. A total of 26 studies were included in the synthesis. The analysis revealed four themes: (i) a threat to professional boundaries, (ii) a resource for the team, (iii) the quest for autonomy and control, and (iv) necessary properties of a developing interprofessional collaboration. Based on these themes, the synthesis was created and presented as a metaphorical journey. The implementation of a new nursing role in a traditional healthcare team is a complex process influenced by many factors and can be described as "a tortuous journey towards a partially unknown destination". The synthesised obstacles and opportunities drawn from international studies may help healthcare organisations and new NPs prepare for, and optimise, the implementation of a new nursing role.

Views and experiences of nurse practitioners and medical practitioners with collaborative practice in primary health care - an integrative review

BACKGROUND

This integrative review synthesises research studies that have investigated the perceptions of nurse practitioners and medical practitioners working in primary health care. The aggregation of evidence on barriers and facilitators to working collaboratively and experiences about the processes of collaboration is of value to understand success factors and factors that impede collaborative working relationships.

METHODS

An integrative review, which used systematic review processes, was undertaken to summarise qualitative and quantitative studies published between 1990 and 2012. Databases searched were the Cochrane Library, the Joanna Briggs Institute Library, PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Informit and ProQuest. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for quality. Study findings were extracted relating to a) barriers and facilitators to collaborative working and b) views and experiences about the process of collaboration. The findings were narratively synthesised, supported by tabulation.

RESULTS

27 studies conducted in seven different countries met the inclusion criteria. Content analysis identified a number of barriers and facilitators of collaboration between nurse practitioners and medical practitioners. By means of data comparison five themes were developed in relation to perceptions and understanding of collaboration. Nurse practitioners and medical practitioners have differing views on the essentials of collaboration and on supervision and autonomous nurse practitioner practice. Medical practitioners who have a working experience with NPs express more positive attitudes towards collaboration. Both professional groups report concerns and negative experiences with collaborative practice but also value certain advantages of collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

The review shows that working in collaboration is a slow progression. Exposure to working together helps to overcome professional hurdles, dispel concerns and provide clarity around roles and the meaning of collaboration of NPs and MPs. Guidelines on liability and better funding strategies are necessary to facilitate collaborative practice whether barriers lie in individual behaviours or in broader policies.

The Role of Dual-trained Conventional/Complementary Physicians as Mediators of Integration in Primary Care

A growing number of physicians study complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Limited data are available on perspectives of physicians with dual training in conventional medicine and CAM, on issues of communication and collaboration with CAM practitioners (CAMPs). Questionnaires were administered to primary care physicians employed in the largest health maintenance organization (HMO) in Israel and to MD and non-MD CAM practitioners employed by a CAM-related agency of the same HMO. Data for statistical analysis were available from 333 primary care physicians (PCPs) and 241 CAM practitioners. Thirty-one of the 241 CAMPs were dual-trained physicians employed in a CAM-related agency as practitioners and/or triage-consultants. Dual trained physicians and CAMPs shared similar attitudes and supported, more so than PCPs, collaborative physician-CAM practitioner teamwork in clinical practice, medical education and research. Nevertheless, dual trained physicians supported a physician-dominant teamwork model (similar to the PCPs' approach) in contrast to non-MD CAM practitioners who mainly supported a co-directed teamwork model. Compared to PCPs and non-MD CAM practitioners, dual trained physicians supported significantly more a medical/referral letter as the preferred means of doctor-CAM practitioner communication. Dual trained physicians have a unique outlook toward CAM integration and physician-practitioner collaboration, compared to non-MD CAM practitioners and PCPs. More studies are warranted to explore the role of dual trained physicians as mediators of integration.

An exploration of personal initiative theory in the role of consultant nurses

The aim in this paper is to investigate the contribution personal initiative theory makes in understanding the consultant nurse role. The role was introduced in the UK in 2000 to improve patient outcomes, clinical leadership and retention of experienced clinicians. A larger study used a multi-method approach to collect quantitative and qualitative data from focus groups, interviews and a questionnaire administered nationally at two time points. Findings from longitudinal telephone interviews with 30 consultant nurses are the focus of this paper.

Three consultant nurses were selected as case studies to examine the potential of personal initiative theory when applied to new nursing roles. The activities of two of the three demonstrated a high level of personal initiative in the job. They persisted in overcoming problems faced in improving practice. The third scored lower: she emerged as a reactive conformist and less likely than the other two to pursue initiatives of her own.

Personal initiative theory has potential as a framework for evaluating the consultant nurse role, although further research is needed to test it. The longitudinal analysis revealed a determination to stay in the job and overcome difficult challenges when consultants show initiative and are making progress in achieving change.