↓ Skip to main content

Barriers and facilitators to integration of physician associates into the general practice workforce: a grounded theory approach

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Barriers and facilitators to integration of physician associates into the general practice workforce: a grounded theory approach
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, October 2017
DOI 10.3399/bjgp17x693113
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ben Jackson, Michelle Marshall, Susie Schofield

Abstract

Physician associates (PAs) are described as one solution to workforce capacity in primary care in the UK. Despite new investment in the role, how effective this will be in addressing unmet primary care needs is unclear. To investigate the barriers and facilitators to the integration of PAs into the general practice workforce. A modified grounded theory study in a region unfamiliar with the PA role. No a priori themes were assumed. Themes generated from stakeholder interviews informed a literature review and theoretical framework, and were then tested in focus groups with GPs, advanced nurse practitioners (ANPs), and patients. Recorded data were transcribed verbatim, and organised using NVivo version 10.2.2, with iterative analysis of emergent themes. A reflexive diary and independent verification of coding and analysis were included. There were 51 participants (30 GPs, 11 ANPs, and 10 patients) in eight focus groups. GPs, ANPs, and patients recognised that support for general practice was needed to improve access. GPs expressed concerns regarding PAs around managing medical complexity and supervision burden, non-prescriber status, and medicolegal implications in routine practice. Patients were less concerned about specific competencies as long as there was effective supervision, and were accepting of a PA role. ANPs highlighted their own negative experiences entering advanced clinical practice, and the need for support to counteract stereotypical and prejudicial attitudes CONCLUSION: This study highlights the complex factors that may impede the introduction of PAs into UK primary care. A conceptual model is proposed to help regulators and educationalists support this integration, which has relevance to other proposed new roles in primary care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 21%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Lecturer 5 4%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 37 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 40 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2017.
All research outputs
#1,642,734
of 25,151,710 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#798
of 4,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,169
of 330,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#24
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,151,710 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,573 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.