Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

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

Authors: Nicola Carey, Judith Edwards, Simon Otter, Heather Gage, Peter Williams, Molly Courtenay, Ann Moore, Karen Stenner

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

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.
Literature
1.
GBD 2016 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. 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. Lancet. 2017;390:1211–59.CrossRef
2.
Marengoni A, Angleman S. R M. aging with multimorbidity: a systematic review of the literature. Ageing Res Rev. 2011;10:430–9.PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
5.
6.
NHS Digital. Health Survey for England 2016. http://​healthsurveyhsci​cgovuk/​media/​63790/​HSE2016-pres-medpdf accessed 15th August 2019. 2017.
7.
IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics. Global Medicines Use in 2020: Outlook and Implications. https://​wwwiqviacom/​−/​media/​iqvia/​pdfs/​institute-reports/​global-medicines-use-in-2020pdf?​la=​uk-ua&​hash=​968B71C0B0769A17​9F3A56E331C62754​EEF74752 accessed 15th August 2019. 2015.
8.
WHO. Working for health and growth: investing in the health workforce. Report of the High-Level Commission on Health Employment and Economic Growth. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016.
9.
Beech J, Bottery S, Charlesworth A, Evans H, Gershlick B, Hemmings N, et al. Closing the gap: Key areas for action on the health and care workforce: The Health Foundation; The Kings Fund & Nuffield Trust 2019.
10.
11.
Chief Allied Health Professions Officers's Team. AHPs into action. Using allied health professions to transform health, care and wellbeing. London: Chief Allied Heath Professions Officer’s Team, NHS England; 2017.
12.
DH. Allied Health Professions Prescribing and medicines supply mechanisms scoping project report. London: Department of Health; 2009.
13.
DH. A High Quality Workforce: NHS Next Stage Review: Our vision for primary and commmunity health care. London: DH; 2008.
14.
DH. Equity and excellence:liberating the NHS. London: DH; 2010.
15.
DH. Meeting the challange: a strategy for the allied health professions. London: DH; 2000.
16.
DH. Framing the contribution of allied health professions: delivering high quality healthcare. London: DH; 2008.
17.
Hogg D. Prescription, supply and administration of medicines by allied health professionals- where are we now and where are we going?. South West House Taunton TA1 2PX: Regional AHP Non-Medical Prescriber Forum: April 11th 2019. 2019.
18.
NMC. Standards for prescribing programmes. https://​wwwnmcorguk/​globalassets/​sitedocuments/​education-standards/​programme-standards-prescribingpdf 2018;accessed July 2020.
19.
HCPC. Standards for Prescribing. https://​wwwhcpc-ukorg/​globalassets/​standards/​standards-for-prescribing/​standards-for-prescribing2pdf.​ 2019;acessed July 2020.
20.
General Pharmaceutical Council. In: GPhC, editor. Standards for the education and training of pharmacist independent prescribers. London: GpHC; 2019.
21.
DH. Proposals to introduce independent prescribing by physiotherapists: Impact Assessment. London: DH; 2012.
22.
DH. Summary of Public Consulation on proposals to introduce independent prescribing by Physiotherapists. London: Allied Health Professions Team, DH; 2012.
23.
24.
DH. Supplementary Prescribing by Nurses, Pharmacists, Chiropodists, Podiatrists, Physiotherapists and Radiographers within NHS in England. A Guide for Implementation. London: DH; 2005.
25.
Stewart D, Jebara T, Cunningham S, Awaisu A, Pallivalapila A, MacLure K. Future perspectives on nonmedical prescribing. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2017;8(6):186–97.CrossRef
26.
Weeks G, George J, Maclure K, Stewart D. Non-medical prescribing versus medical prescribing for acute and chronic disease management in primary and secondary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;11:Cd011227.PubMed
27.
28.
29.
Stenner K, Edwards J, Mold F, Otter S, Courtenay M, Moore A, et al. Medicines management activity with physiotherapy and podiatry: a systematic mixed studies review. Health Policy. 2018;122(12):1333–9 doi: 10.016/j.healthpol.2018.10.004.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Noblet T, Marriot J, Jones T, Dean C, Rushton A. Views and perceptions of Australian physiotherapists and physiotherapy students about the potential implementation of physiotherapist prescribing in Australia: a survey protocol. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;14(472). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-018-3300-x.
31.
Stanhope J, Grimmer-Somers K, Milanese S, Kumar S, Morris J. Extended scope physiotherapy roles for orthopedic outpatients: an update systematic review of the literature. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2012;5:37–45.PubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Bissell P, Cooper R, Guillaume L, Anderson C, Avery A, Hutchinson A, et al. An Evaluation of Supplementary Prescribing in Nursing and Pharmacy: University of Sheffield & University of Nottingham & Flinders University & University of South Australia 2008.
33.
Norman I, While A, Whittlesea C, Coster S, Sibley A, Rosenbloom K, et al. Evaluation of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing. London: Florence Nightingale School of Nursing and Midwifery at King's College London; 2017.
34.
Latter S, Blenkinsopp A, Smith A, Chapman S, TInelli M, Gerard K, et al. Evaluation of nurse and pharmacist independent prescrbing: Department of Health Policy Research Programme: University of Southampton & Keele University 2010.
35.
36.
Kersten P, McPherson K, Lattimer V, George S, Breton A, Ellis B. Physiotherapy extended scope of practice-who is doing what and why? Physiotherapy. 2007;93:235–42.CrossRef
37.
McPherson K, Kersten P, George S, Lattimer V, Breton A, Ellis A, et al. A systematic review of evidence about extended roles for allied health professions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2006;11(240):240–7.
38.
Ramaswamy B. Physiotherapist supplementary prescriber reducing hospital stays duration in an intermediate care, therapy-led bed service: example of implementation of NMP. Derby: Derbyshire Community Health Services; 2009.
39.
Popadiuk S, Rhajbhandari S. Benefits of non-medical prescribing within an NHS podiatry service. J Foot Ankle Res. 2010;3(1):20.CrossRef
40.
Carey N, Stenner K, Courtenay M. Stakeholder views on the impact of nurse prescribing on dermatology services. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19:498–506.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Courtenay M, Stenner K, Carey N. An exploration of the practice of nurse prescribers who care for people with diabetes: a case study. J Nurs Healthc Chronic Illn. 2009;1:311–20.CrossRef
42.
Stewart D, Jebara T, Cunningham S, Awaisu A, Pallivalapila A, MacLure K. Future perspectives on nonmedical prescribing. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2017 Jun;8(6):183–97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
Courtenay M, Carey N, Gage H, Stenner K, Williams P. A comparison of prescribing and non-prescribing nurses in the management of people with diabetes. J Adv Nurs. 2015;71(12):2950–64.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Carey N, Stenner K, Edwards J, Gage H, Williams P, Otter S, et al. Evaluation of physiotherapist and podiatrist independent prescribing, mixing of medicines and prescribing of controlled drugs. Guildford: Uiversity of Surrey; 2017. Contract No.: PR-R7–0513-11002.
45.
46.
47.
Hogg D. An economic evaluation of non-medical prescribing: Association of Prescribers Annual Conference. London: Holiday Inn Regents Park; 2016.
48.
HCPC. Number of Physiotherapist and Podiatrist Independent Prescribers. 2020 https://​wwwhcpc-ukorg/​about-us/​insights-and-data/​the-register/​registrant-snapshot-1-oct-20202/​ accessed 25th October 2020.
49.
50.
Weiss C. Program theory in evaluation: challenges and opportunities, new directions for evaluation. San Fransisco: Jossey Bass; 2000.
51.
Stern E, Stame N, Mayne J, Forss K, Davies R, Befani B. Broadening The Range Of designs and Methods for Impact Evaluations. London: Report of a Study Commissioned by the Department For International Development; 2012.CrossRef
52.
53.
Wolf M, Putnam S, James A, Stiles W. The medical interview satisfaction scale: development of a scale to measure patient perceptions of physician behavior. J Behav Med. 1978;1:301–401.CrossRef
54.
Meakin R, Weinman J. The medical interview satisfaction scale (MISS-21) adapted for British general practice. Fam Pract. 2002;19(3):257–63.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Horne R, Hankins M, Jenkins R. The satisfaction with information about medicines scale (SIMS): a new measurement tool for audit and research. Quality in Health Care. 2001;10:135–40.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
56.
Drennan J, Naughton C, Allen D, Hyde A, Felle P, O'Boyle K, et al. Independent Evaluation of the Nurse and Midwife Prescribing Initiative. Dublin: University College Dublin; 2009.
57.
Poulton B. Use of the consultation satisfaction questionnaire to examine patients’ satisfaction with general practitioners and community nurses: reliability, replicability, and discriminant validity. Br J Gen Pract. 1996;46:26–31.PubMedPubMedCentral
58.
Gasquet I, Villeminot S, Estaquio C, Durieux P, Ravaud P, Falissard B. Construction of a questionnaire measuring outpatients' opinion of quality of hospital consultation departments. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;4(2):43.CrossRef
59.
Latter S, Maben J, Myall M, Courtenay M, Young A, Dunn N. An evaluation of extended formulary independent nurse prescribing. Final Report: Policy Research Programme Department of Health & University of Southampton; 2005.
60.
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen MF, Parkin D, Bonsel G, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
61.
Courtenay M, Carey N, Stenner K. Evaluation of Nurse Independent Supplementary Prescribing in the UK: Interim Report: University of Surrey; 2010.CrossRef
62.
63.
64.
Britten N, Jenkins L, Barber N, Bradley C, Stevenson F. Developing a measure for the appropriateness of prescribing in general practice. Qual Safety Health Care. 2003;12:246–50.CrossRef
65.
Courtenay M, Carey N. The completeness of prescriptions issued to dermatology patients by nurse prescribers. Nurse Prescribing. 2008;6(9):391–6.CrossRef
66.
Carey N, Stenner K, Courtenay M. Prescription writing for patients with diabetes: compliance with good practice. Nurse Prescribing. 2009;7(10):464–8.CrossRef
67.
BMA. British National Formulary. London: BMA, & Royal Pharmaceutical Society; 2015.
68.
Courtenay M, Carey N, Stenner K. Nurse prescriber-patient consultations: a case study in dermatology. J Adv Nurs. 2009;65(6):1207–17.PubMedCrossRef
69.
70.
Courtenay M, Carey N, Stenner K, Gage H, Williams P. A comparison of prescribing and non-prescribing nurses in the management of people with diabetes. J Adv Nurs. 2015;71(12):2950–64.PubMedCrossRef
71.
Baker R. Development of a questionnaire to assess patients’ satisfaction with consultations in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1990;40:487–90.PubMedPubMedCentral
72.
Baker R, Whitfield M. Measuring patient satisfaction: a test of construct validity. Q Healthcare. 1992;1:104–9.CrossRef
73.
74.
Devlin N, Shah K, Feng Y, Mulhern B, van Hout B. Valuing Health-Related Quality of Life: An EQ-5D-5L Value Set for England: Research Paper 16/01. London: Office of Health Economics Research; 2016.
75.
DH. Extending the practice of allied health professionals in the NHS. Briefing paper. London: NHS Service Delivery and Organisation: Research and Development; 2006.
76.
DH. Equity and excellence:l Liberating the NHS. London: DH; 2010.
77.
78.
79.
80.
Stokes-Lampard H. Primary care: workforce pressures. London: The Nuffield Trust; 2017.
81.
82.
83.
DH. The NHS Long Term Plan. London: Department of Health; 2019.
84.
85.
DH and Department for Communities and Local Government. Better Care Fund: Policy Framework: DH, 2014.
86.
DH. The Musculoskeletal framework: Report: 270211. London: Department of Health; 2006.
87.
Gilburt H. Supporting integration through new roles and working across boundaries. The Kings Fund; 2016.
88.
89.
Metadata
Title
A comparative case study of prescribing and non-prescribing physiotherapists and podiatrists
Authors
Nicola Carey
Judith Edwards
Simon Otter
Heather Gage
Peter Williams
Molly Courtenay
Ann Moore
Karen Stenner
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05918-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Health Services Research 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research article

Structure evaluation of the implementation of geriatric models in primary care: a multiple-case study of models involving advanced geriatric nurses in five municipalities in Norway

correspondence

Fighting healthcare rocketing costs with value-based medicine: the case of stroke management

Research article

What works, why and how? A scoping review and logic model of rural clinical placements for allied health students

Research article

Experiences with health care and health-related quality of life of patients with hematologic malignancies in Mexico

Study protocol

Using point-of-care C-reactive protein to guide antibiotic prescribing for lower respiratory tract infections in elderly nursing home residents (UPCARE): study design of a cluster randomized controlled trial

Research article

Time-to-completed-imaging, survival and function in patients with spinal epidural abscess: Description of a series of 34 patients, 2015–2018