Background
Demand for primary care services has increased in developed countries due to population ageing, rising patient expectations, and reforms that shift care from hospitals to the community. At the same time, the supply of physicians is constrained and there is increasing pressure to contain costs. Shifting care from physicians to nurses is one possible response to these challenges. The expectation is that nurse-doctor substitution will reduce cost and physician workload while maintaining quality of care.

Objectives
Our aim was to evaluate the impact of doctor-nurse substitution in primary care on patient outcomes, process of care, and resource utilisation including cost. Patient outcomes included: morbidity; mortality; satisfaction; compliance; and preference. Process of care outcomes included: practitioner adherence to clinical guidelines; standards or quality of care; and practitioner health care activity (e.g. provision of advice). Resource utilisation was assessed by: frequency and length of consultations; return visits; prescriptions; tests and investigations; referral to other services; and direct or indirect costs.

Search methods
The following databases were searched for the period 1966 to 2002: Medline; Cinahl; Bids, Embase; Social Science Citation Index; British Nursing Index; HMIC; EPOC Register; and Cochrane Controlled Trial Register. Search terms specified the setting (primary care), professional (nurse), study design (randomised controlled trial, controlled before-and-after-study, interrupted time series), and subject (e.g. skill mix).

The searches for this review were conducted in 2002 and are now out-of-date and therefore the review findings should be used with caution. The review is currently being updated and the updated version should be published before the end of 2014.

Selection criteria
Studies were included if nurses were compared to doctors providing a similar primary health care service (excluding accident and emergency services). Primary care doctors included: general practitioners, family physicians, paediatricians, general internists or geriatricians. Primary care nurses included: practice nurses, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, or advanced practice nurses.

Data collection and analysis
Study selection and data extraction was conducted independently by two reviewers with differences resolved through discussion. Meta-analysis was applied to outcomes for which there was adequate reporting of intervention effects from at least three randomised controlled trials. Semi-quantitative methods were used to synthesize other outcomes.

Main results
4253 articles were screened of which 25 articles, relating to 16 studies, met our inclusion criteria. In seven studies the nurse assumed responsibility for first contact and ongoing care for all presenting patients. The outcomes investigated varied across studies so limiting the opportunity for data synthesis. In general, no appreciable differences were found between doctors and nurses in health outcomes for patients, process of care, resource utilisation or cost.

In five studies the nurse assumed responsibility for first contact care for patients wanting urgent consultations during office hours or out-of-hours. Patient health outcomes were similar for nurses and doctors but patient satisfaction was higher with nurse-led care. Nurses tended to provide longer consultations, give more information to patients and recall patients more frequently than did doctors. The impact on physician workload and direct cost of care was variable.

In four studies the nurse took responsibility for the ongoing management of patients with particular chronic conditions. The outcomes investigated varied across studies so limiting the opportunity for data synthesis. In general, no appreciable differences were found between doctors and nurses in health outcomes for patients, process of care, resource utilisation or cost.

Authors' conclusions
The findings suggest that appropriately trained nurses can produce as high quality care as primary care doctors and achieve as good health outcomes for patients. However, this conclusion should be viewed with caution given that only one study was powered to assess equivalence of care, many studies had methodological limitations, and patient follow-up was generally 12 months or less.

While doctor-nurse substitution has the potential to reduce doctors' workload and direct healthcare costs, achieving such reductions depends on the particular context of care. Doctors' workload may remain unchanged either because nurses are deployed to meet previously unmet patient need or because nurses generate demand for care where previously there was none. Savings in cost depend on the magnitude of the salary differential between doctors and nurses, and may be offset by the lower productivity of nurses compared to doctors.

Substitution of doctors by nurses in primary care

From July, 1971, to July, 1972, in a large suburban Ontario practice of two family physicians, a randomized controlled trial was conducted to assess the effects of substituting nurse pract...

The Burlington Randomized Trial of the Nurse Practitioner

Background
Current and expected problems such as ageing, increased prevalence of chronic conditions and multi-morbidity, increased emphasis on healthy lifestyle and prevention, and substitution for care from hospitals by care provided in the community encourage countries worldwide to develop new models of primary care delivery. Owing to the fact that many tasks do not necessarily require the knowledge and skills of a doctor, interest in using nurses to expand the capacity of the primary care workforce is increasing. Substitution of nurses for doctors is one strategy used to improve access, efficiency, and quality of care. This is the first update of the Cochrane review published in 2005.

Objectives
Our aim was to investigate the impact of nurses working as substitutes for primary care doctors on:

• patient outcomes;

• processes of care; and

• utilisation, including volume and cost.

Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), part of the Cochrane Library (www.cochranelibrary.com), as well as MEDLINE, Ovid, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and EbscoHost (searched 20.01.2015). We searched for grey literature in the Grey Literature Report and OpenGrey (21.02.2017), and we searched the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov trial registries (21.02.2017). We did a cited reference search for relevant studies (searched 27.01 2015) and checked reference lists of all included studies. We reran slightly revised strategies, limited to publication years between 2015 and 2017, for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and CINAHL, in March 2017, and we have added one trial to ‘Studies awaiting classification’.

Selection criteria
Randomised trials evaluating the outcomes of nurses working as substitutes for doctors. The review is limited to primary healthcare services that provide first contact and ongoing care for patients with all types of health problems, excluding mental health problems. Studies which evaluated nurses supplementing the work of primary care doctors were excluded.

Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently carried out data extraction and assessment of risk of bias of included studies. When feasible, we combined study results and determined an overall estimate of the effect. We evaluated other outcomes by completing a structured synthesis.

Main results
For this review, we identified 18 randomised trials evaluating the impact of nurses working as substitutes for doctors. One study was conducted in a middle-income country, and all other studies in high-income countries. The nursing level was often unclear or varied between and even within studies. The studies looked at nurses involved in first contact care (including urgent care), ongoing care for physical complaints, and follow-up of patients with a particular chronic conditions such as diabetes. In many of the studies, nurses could get additional support or advice from a doctor. Nurse-doctor substitution for preventive services and health education in primary care has been less well studied.

Study findings suggest that care delivered by nurses, compared to care delivered by doctors, probably generates similar or better health outcomes for a broad range of patient conditions (low- or moderate-certainty evidence):

• Nurse-led primary care may lead to slightly fewer deaths among certain groups of patients, compared to doctor-led care. However, the results vary and it is possible that nurse-led primary care makes little or no difference to the number of deaths (low-certainty evidence).

• Blood pressure outcomes are probably slightly improved in nurse-led primary care. Other clinical or health status outcomes are probably similar (moderate-certainty evidence).

• Patient satisfaction is probably slightly higher in nurse-led primary care (moderate-certainty evidence). Quality of life may be slightly higher (low-certainty evidence).

We are uncertain of the effects of nurse-led care on process of care because the certainty of this evidence was assessed as very low.

The effect of nurse-led care on utilisation of care is mixed and depends on the type of outcome. Consultations are probably longer in nurse-led primary care (moderate-certainty evidence), and numbers of attended return visits are slightly higher for nurses than for doctors (high-certainty evidence). We found little or no difference between nurses and doctors in the number of prescriptions and attendance at accident and emergency units (high-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in the number of tests and investigations, hospital referrals and hospital admissions between nurses and doctors (low-certainty evidence).

We are uncertain of the effects of nurse-led care on the costs of care because the certainty of this evidence was assessed as very low.

Authors' conclusions
This review shows that for some ongoing and urgent physical complaints and for chronic conditions, trained nurses, such as nurse practitioners, practice nurses, and registered nurses, probably provide equal or possibly even better quality of care compared to primary care doctors, and probably achieve equal or better health outcomes for patients. Nurses probably achieve higher levels of patient satisfaction, compared to primary care doctors. Furthermore, consultation length is probably longer when nurses deliver care and the frequency of attended return visits is probably slightly higher for nurses, compared to doctors. Other utilisation outcomes are probably the same. The effects of nurse-led care on process of care and the costs of care are uncertain, and we also cannot ascertain what level of nursing education leads to the best outcomes when nurses are substituted for doctors.

Nurses as substitutes for doctors in primary care

In a randomized trial of nurse practitioners as providers of primary clinical services, attention was devoted to the "outcomes" of clinical effectiveness and safety. These outcomes—express...

The Burlington Randomized Trial of the Nurse Practitioner: Health Outcomes of Patients

Health care is changing rapidly. Unacceptable variations in service access and quality of health care and pressures to contain costs have led to the redefinition of professional roles. The roles of nonphysician clinicians (nurses, physician assistants, and pharmacists) have been extended to the medical domain. It is expected that such revision of roles will improve health care effectiveness and efficiency. The evidence suggests that nonphysician clinicians working as substitutes or supplements for physicians in defined areas of care can maintain and often improve the quality of care and outcomes for patients. The effect on health care costs is mixed, with savings dependent on the context of care and specific nature of role revision. The evidence base underpinning these conclusions is strongest for nurses with a marked paucity of research into pharmacists and physician assistants. More robust evaluative studies into role revision are needed, particularly with regard to economic impacts, before definitive conclusions can be drawn.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1077558709346277

The impact of nonphysician clinicians: do they improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of health care services?

In 1971 McMaster University offered an educational program for nurse practitioners sponsored jointly by the Faculty of Medicine and the School of Nursing. Priority in the pilot program was given to nurses employed in family practice settings and to those participating in related McMaster studies. Because of the implications of a change in role for both nurse and physician, one requirement for acceptance of a nurse in the program was participation of the physician-associate in the educational program.

The program prepares registered nurses to extend their responsibilities in primary health care activities for the assessment and management of patients in family practice. The current evaluations of the pilot-study results suggest that such programs can contribute effective resources towards meeting expectations of ready access to primary care by the people of Canada.

Nurse practitioners in primary care. I. The McMaster University educational program

For the past decade there has been increasing concern about the shortage of primary care physicians on the one hand, and the apparent maldistribution of health services on the other. At the same time, a consensus seems to have developed that without a successful solution of the related problem of inappropriate utilization of manpower, training large numbers of primary care physicians is not likely to alleviate an emerging crisis.1·3 One response in the United States and Canada has been the development of educational programs to enable nurses to function in a redesigned, expanded role in dealing with ambulatory patients.

Dorothy J. Kergin

Papers

Nurse practitioners in primary care. I. The McMaster University educational program

The nurse practitioner in North America: from concept to reality.