A comparative case study of prescribing and non-prescribing physiotherapists and podiatrists

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

Increasing numbers of nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals across the world have prescribing rights for medicines: over 90,000 of the eligible United Kingdom workforce are qualified as non-doctor prescribers. In order to inform future developments, it is important to understand the benefits and impact of prescribing by allied health professionals including physiotherapists and podiatrists.

Aim

to compare outcomes of physiotherapist and podiatrist Independent Prescriber (PP- IP) patients with those of physiotherapist and podiatrist non-prescribers (PP-NPs). Outcome measures included patient satisfaction, ease of access to services, quality of life and cost implications.

Design: a mixed method comparative case study.

Methods

Using mixed methods of data collection, outcomes were compared between 7 sites where care was provided from a PP-IP (3 podiatrist and 4 physiotherapist IPs) and 7 sites from a PP-NP (3 podiatrist and 4 physiotherapist NPs). Patients were followed up for 2 months (2015–2016).

Results

489 patients were recruited: n = 243 IP sites, and n = 246 NP sites. Independent prescribing was found to be highly acceptable, and equivalent in terms of quality of life ( p > 0.05) and patient satisfaction ( p ≤ 0.05) compared to care provided by NPs. PP-IP care delivery was found to be more resource intensive than PP-NP, with longer consultation duration for IPs (around 6.5 mins), and a higher proportion of physiotherapy patients discussed with medical colleagues (around 9.5 min).

Conclusion

This study provides new knowledge that PP-IPs provide high levels of care. PP-IP care delivery was found to be more resource intensive. Further research is required to explore cost effectiveness. A more focussed exploration within each profession using targeted outcome measures would enable a more robust comparison, inform future developments around the world and help ensure non-doctor prescribing is recognised as an effective way to alleviate shortfalls in the global workforce.

Related collections

Most cited references 67

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L)

M. Herdman, C. Gudex, S Lloyd … (2011)

Purpose This article introduces the new 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) health status measure. Methods EQ-5D currently measures health using three levels of severity in five dimensions. A EuroQol Group task force was established to find ways of improving the instrument’s sensitivity and reducing ceiling effects by increasing the number of severity levels. The study was performed in the United Kingdom and Spain. Severity labels for 5 levels in each dimension were identified using response scaling. Focus groups were used to investigate the face and content validity of the new versions, including hypothetical health states generated from those versions. Results Selecting labels at approximately the 25th, 50th, and 75th centiles produced two alternative 5-level versions. Focus group work showed a slight preference for the wording ‘slight-moderate-severe’ problems, with anchors of ‘no problems’ and ‘unable to do’ in the EQ-5D functional dimensions. Similar wording was used in the Pain/Discomfort and Anxiety/Depression dimensions. Hypothetical health states were well understood though participants stressed the need for the internal coherence of health states. Conclusions A 5-level version of the EQ-5D has been developed by the EuroQol Group. Further testing is required to determine whether the new version improves sensitivity and reduces ceiling effects.

0 comments Cited 2556 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Yuan-Pang Wang, Maheswar Satpathy, Mathilde Touvier … (2018)

Summary Background As mortality rates decline, life expectancy increases, and populations age, non-fatal outcomes of diseases and injuries are becoming a larger component of the global burden of disease. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) provides a comprehensive assessment of prevalence, incidence, and years lived with disability (YLDs) for 328 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2016. Methods We estimated prevalence and incidence for 328 diseases and injuries and 2982 sequelae, their non-fatal consequences. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, as the main method of estimation, ensuring consistency between incidence, prevalence, remission, and cause of death rates for each condition. For some causes, we used alternative modelling strategies if incidence or prevalence needed to be derived from other data. YLDs were estimated as the product of prevalence and a disability weight for all mutually exclusive sequelae, corrected for comorbidity and aggregated to cause level. We updated the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and total fertility rate. GBD 2016 complies with the Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting (GATHER). Findings Globally, low back pain, migraine, age-related and other hearing loss, iron-deficiency anaemia, and major depressive disorder were the five leading causes of YLDs in 2016, contributing 57·6 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 40·8–75·9 million [7·2%, 6·0–8·3]), 45·1 million (29·0–62·8 million [5·6%, 4·0–7·2]), 36·3 million (25·3–50·9 million [4·5%, 3·8–5·3]), 34·7 million (23·0–49·6 million [4·3%, 3·5–5·2]), and 34·1 million (23·5–46·0 million [4·2%, 3·2–5·3]) of total YLDs, respectively. Age-standardised rates of YLDs for all causes combined decreased between 1990 and 2016 by 2·7% (95% UI 2·3–3·1). Despite mostly stagnant age-standardised rates, the absolute number of YLDs from non-communicable diseases has been growing rapidly across all SDI quintiles, partly because of population growth, but also the ageing of populations. The largest absolute increases in total numbers of YLDs globally were between the ages of 40 and 69 years. Age-standardised YLD rates for all conditions combined were 10·4% (95% UI 9·0–11·8) higher in women than in men. Iron-deficiency anaemia, migraine, Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, major depressive disorder, anxiety, and all musculoskeletal disorders apart from gout were the main conditions contributing to higher YLD rates in women. Men had higher age-standardised rates of substance use disorders, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, cancers, and all injuries apart from sexual violence. Globally, we noted much less geographical variation in disability than has been documented for premature mortality. In 2016, there was a less than two times difference in age-standardised YLD rates for all causes between the location with the lowest rate (China, 9201 YLDs per 100 000, 95% UI 6862–11943) and highest rate (Yemen, 14 774 YLDs per 100 000, 11 018–19 228). Interpretation The decrease in death rates since 1990 for most causes has not been matched by a similar decline in age-standardised YLD rates. For many large causes, YLD rates have either been stagnant or have increased for some causes, such as diabetes. As populations are ageing, and the prevalence of disabling disease generally increases steeply with age, health systems will face increasing demand for services that are generally costlier than the interventions that have led to declines in mortality in childhood or for the major causes of mortality in adults. Up-to-date information about the trends of disease and how this varies between countries is essential to plan for an adequate health-system response.

0 comments Cited 1961 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Aging with multimorbidity: a systematic review of the literature.

Alessandra Marengoni, Sara Angleman, René F Melis … (2011)

A literature search was carried out to summarize the existing scientific evidence concerning occurrence, causes, and consequences of multimorbidity (the coexistence of multiple chronic diseases) in the elderly as well as models and quality of care of persons with multimorbidity. According to pre-established inclusion criteria, and using different search strategies, 41 articles were included (four of these were methodological papers only). Prevalence of multimorbidity in older persons ranges from 55 to 98%. In cross-sectional studies, older age, female gender, and low socioeconomic status are factors associated with multimorbidity, confirmed by longitudinal studies as well. Major consequences of multimorbidity are disability and functional decline, poor quality of life, and high health care costs. Controversial results were found on multimorbidity and mortality risk. Methodological issues in evaluating multimorbidity are discussed as well as future research needs, especially concerning etiological factors, combinations and clustering of chronic diseases, and care models for persons affected by multiple disorders. New insights in this field can lead to the identification of preventive strategies and better treatment of multimorbid patients. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 651 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Nicola Carey:

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2841-1760

n.carey@surrey.ac.uk

Judith Edwards: j.a.edwards@surrey.ac.uk

Simon Otter: s.otter@brighton.ac.uk

Heather Gage: h.gage@surrey.ac.uk

Peter Williams: p.williams@surrey.ac.uk

Molly Courtenay: courtenym@cardiff.ac.uk

Ann Moore: a.p.moore@brighton.ac.uk

Karen Stenner: k.stenner@surrey.ac.uk

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Health Serv Res

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Health Serv Res

Title: BMC Health Services Research

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1472-6963

Publication date (Electronic): 24 November 2020

Publication date PMC-release: 24 November 2020

Publication date Collection: 2020

Volume: 20

Electronic Location Identifier: 1074

Affiliations

[1 ]GRID grid.5475.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0407 4824, School of Health Sciences, , University of Surrey, ; Kate Granger Building, Guildford, GU2 7YH UK

[2 ]GRID grid.12477.37, ISNI 0000000121073784, School of Health Science, , University of Brighton, ; Brighton, UK

[3 ]GRID grid.5475.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0407 4824, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Surrey Health Economics, , University of Surrey, ; Guildford, UK

[4 ]GRID grid.5475.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0407 4824, Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, , University of Surrey, ; Guildford, UK

[5 ]GRID grid.5600.3, ISNI 0000 0001 0807 5670, School of Healthcare Sciences, , Cardiff University, ; Cardiff, UK

Author information

Nicola Carey http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2841-1760

Article

Publisher ID: 5918

DOI: 10.1186/s12913-020-05918-8

PMC ID: 7687831

PubMed ID: 33234141

SO-VID: 8645bb39-88a2-4c8d-833c-3d3651ad4584

License:

Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

History

Date received : 19 May 2020

Date accepted : 12 November 2020

Funding

Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;

Award ID: PR-R19-0617-21001

Award Recipient : Nicola Carey

Custom metadata

ScienceOpen disciplines: Health & Social care

Keywords: physiotherapy,podiatry,independent prescribing,comparative case study

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Health & Social care

Keywords: physiotherapy, podiatry, independent prescribing, comparative case study

A comparative case study of prescribing and non-prescribing physiotherapists and podiatrists

Read this article at

Abstract

Background

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Related collections

Life Sciences by AKJournals

Most cited references 67

Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L)

Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Aging with multimorbidity: a systematic review of the literature.

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 130

Cited by 6

Most referenced authors 3,665