Background
Medicine is transitioning from an acute-focused paradigm to a population-centric strategy in the modern healthcare era. Healthcare institutions must adopt an integrated and systematic approach to improve patient outcomes in light of this transformation. A primary care team (PCT) must be the cornerstone of healthcare organizations’ efforts to accomplish this goal.
PCTs are medical professionals who provide most patient care in their practices (Chevillard & Mousquès, 2021). They offer a standardized treatment alternative, including routine in-person exams with a doctor, nurse practitioner, and physician assistant. They are required in many community hospitals and diagnostic care.
Primary care teams are collections of medical professionals who provide the best patient safety in their practices. They can include a variety of healthcare professionals, including experts, nurse practitioners (NPs), pharmacists, and primary care physicians (PCPs) (Pandhi et al., 2018). A health system may occasionally offer both PCTs and the option of healthcare professionals. To alleviate the primary care physician shortage and enhance patient access to care, this study aims to demonstrate that mandated NP-led primary care teams are a viable alternative.
Desired Impact
Creating primary care teams can be a successful strategy for enhancing patient outcomes and access to healthcare. By providing care in a team-based manner, primary care teams can help address the shortage of primary care physicians (Pandhi et al., 2018). Patients’ access to care may improve, particularly in regions where primary care doctors are scarce.
Primary care teams may contribute to better patient care coordination (Chevillard & Mousquès, 2021). Patients can receive more thorough care when multiple healthcare professionals collaborate, with each focusing on their specific area of expertise. This could enhance the continuity of care and produce better results.
By allowing group members to focus on their own areas of expertise, primary care teams can enhance the effectiveness of healthcare delivery and reduce healthcare expenditures. For instance, NPs are qualified to manage everyday primary care tasks and can thus direct primary care teams. They can cut costs and ease the load on general practitioners, freeing them up to concentrate on more complicated situations. PCTs that offer thorough and coordinated treatment can enhance patient outcomes (Dewan & Norcini, 2019). Patients are more likely to receive the proper care at the right time and achieve improved health outcomes when multiple healthcare professionals collaborate to meet their needs.
Stakeholders
Engaging stakeholders in a way that answers their concerns and fosters support for the idea is crucial. Additionally, collaborating with stakeholders to identify potential issues and create solutions may be beneficial. Since patients are the primary beneficiaries of the proposal, access to care, satisfaction with care, and treatment outcomes should all be considered (Dewan & Norcini, 2019). The support of and readiness to accept new responsibilities from NPs, who would play a vital role in leading primary care teams, are crucial to consider.
The proposal may concern primary care doctors, especially if they believe it could diminish the role or relevance of primary care physicians. Engaging primary care physicians is crucial in order to communicate how the idea could enhance patient access to care and healthcare outcomes while preserving their position within the primary care system (Dewan & Norcini, 2019). Hospitals and health systems may also be concerned about the concept, especially if they believe it might diminish the importance or role of primary care physicians. They might also be concerned about the proposal’s implementation costs.
This idea may worry insurance companies, especially if they think it could lead to higher healthcare costs. However, this approach will ultimately lead to better health outcomes and lower costs, and they are more likely to approve of it. The idea will require the backing of regulators and politicians, as they are crucial in setting the scope of practice for NPs and other healthcare professionals (Dewan & Norcini, 2019). They should be consulted and provided with the necessary data to assess the plan and its potential impact on healthcare delivery systems.
Media Use
Media can be essential in shaping public opinion about healthcare policies and proposals, including the establishment of a mandatory NP-led primary care team. Media coverage can significantly impact how stakeholders perceive the proposal and whether it is likely to be supported. Favorable media coverage can help to build public support for the proposal and increase awareness of the potential benefits of NP-led primary care teams. Favorable coverage can focus on the potential benefits of the proposal, such as increased access to care and improved healthcare outcomes for patients. It can be used to counter any negative perceptions of the proposal.
Even if the idea has potential benefits, negative media coverage may harm the proposal’s public image and erode popular support. Negative coverage may highlight the proposal’s possible downsides, such as higher healthcare spending or patient safety concerns. As a result, it is crucial to prepare for and anticipate any potential unfavorable press coverage.
To promote the plan and its advantages, it is also crucial to actively seek out favorable media attention. By educating the media about the plan and its advantages, it may be possible to guarantee honest and fair coverage. Engaging with skeptical media sources and journalists, and providing evidence and research that supports the proposal’s success, can be beneficial.
It is essential to actively promote the plan through media outlets. Press releases, news conferences, and social media can all be used to promote the concept and its benefits. Further consideration must be given to how the media may shape public opinion and result in either support for or opposition to the proposition (Dewan & Norcini, 2019). It is crucial to apply the strategy while speaking with the media and be prepared to respond to any potential negative coverage.
Evaluating Outcomes
Patient satisfaction is a crucial indicator of healthcare quality, as it demonstrates how effectively the proposal meets patients’ needs and requirements. Patients who receive care from NP-led primary care teams can be surveyed or interviewed to gauge this (Görges et al., 2021). The effectiveness of the idea can be assessed by gauging the satisfaction of NPs and doctors who deliver primary care through NP-led teams. It can be helpful to monitor how they feel about leadership and working in teams, as well as their overall satisfaction with the results of their work.
The readmission rate, or the number of patients who are readmitted to the hospital within a specific time frame after being released, is one measure to assess the plan’s effectiveness. Lower readmission rates may indicate that patients are receiving better care and experiencing improved health outcomes (Görges et al., 2021). The effectiveness of the plan can also be determined by quality indicators, such as the percentage of patients receiving preventive services and the percentage of patients with chronic diseases whose care is effectively managed.
References
Chevillard, G., & Mousquès, J. (2021). Medically underserved areas: Are primary care teams efficient at attracting and retaining general practitioners? Social Science & Medicine, 287. Web.
Dewan, M. J., & Norcini, J. J. (2019). Pathways to independent primary care clinical practice: How tall is the shortest giant?. Academic Medicine, 94(7), 950-954. Web.
Görges, M., Rush, K. L., Burton, L., Mattei, M., Davis, S., Scott, H., & Currie, L. M. (2021). Preferred functions of personal health records in rural primary health clinics in Canada: health care team perspectives. Applied Clinical Informatics, 12(01), 41-48. Web.
Pandhi, N., Kraft, S., Berkson, S., Davis, S., Kamnetz, S., Koslov, S., & Caplan, W. (2018). Developing primary care teams prepared to improve quality: A mixed-methods evaluation and lessons learned from implementing a microsystems approach. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 1-10. Web.
