Diversity and consistency: The challenge of maintaining quality in a multidisciplinary workforce

Author:

Cooper Richard1,Stoflet Sandra1

Affiliation:

1. Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

Abstract

Non-physician clinicians have become prominent providers of patient services within the practice of medicine. They include nurse practitioners and clinical nurse specialists, physician assistants, the alternative and complementary disciplines (chiropractic, naturopathy and acupuncture), mental health providers (psychologists, clinical social workers, counsellors and therapists) and specialty disciplines (optometrists, podiatrists, nurse anaesthetists and nurse–midwives). Although these various disciplines have differing histories and philosophic frameworks, which create distinctive approaches to patient care, they have shared a struggle to obtain recognition and autonomy through state licensure, to expand their state-granted practice prerogatives and to achieve broader reimbursement from third-party payers and managed care. Most entered into a growth spurt beginning in the early 1990s. All now provide care that not only overlaps that of physicians but that complements and supplements that care. The central question is, how does their care contribute to quality? The evidence thus far shows that non-physician clinicians throughout the range of disciplines can produce high-quality outcomes under particular circumstances. However, the strongest body of evidence is derived from care that is at the least complex end of the clinical spectrum or that is provided under the umbrella of physicians. Unfortunately, few studies have critically examined the outcomes of non-physician clinicians at the leading edge of their practice prerogatives and under conditions that are free of physician oversight. Thus, while the principle that they can deliver high quality care within the practice of medicine is unequivocally true, more research is needed to test this principle under conditions of greater clinical complexity and autonomy, and, pending the results of such research, caution must be exercised in applying this principle too broadly.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3