Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChilvers, R
dc.contributor.authorRichards, SH
dc.contributor.authorFletcher, E
dc.contributor.authorAylward, A
dc.contributor.authorDean, S
dc.contributor.authorSalisbury, C
dc.contributor.authorCampbell, J
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-03T08:41:09Z
dc.date.issued2019-09-12
dc.description.abstractBackground: The United Kingdom (UK) is experiencing a GP workforce retention crisis. Research has focused on investigating why GPs intend to quit, but less is known about the acceptability and effectiveness of policies and strategies to improve GP retention. Using evidence from research and key stakeholder organisations, we generated a set of potential policies and strategies aimed at maximising GP retention and tested their appropriateness for implementation by systematically consulting with GPs. Methods: 28 GP Partners and GPs working in national stakeholder organisations from South West England and London were purposively sampled, and asked to take part in a RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method panel. Panellists were asked to read an evidence briefing summary, and then complete an online survey on two occasions. During each round, participants rated the appropriateness of policies and strategies aimed at improving GP retention using a nine point scale (1 ‘extremely inappropriate’ to 9 ‘extremely appropriate’). Fifty-four potential policies and strategies (equating to 100 statements) were tested, focusing on factors influencing job satisfaction (e.g. well-being, workload, incentives and remuneration, flexible working, human resources systems). Ratings were analysed for panel consensus and categorised based on appropriateness (‘appropriate’, ‘uncertain’, ‘inappropriate’). Results: 12/28 GPs approached agreed to take part, 9/28 completed two rounds of the online survey between February and June 2018. Panellists identified 24/54 policy and strategy areas (41/100 statements) as ‘appropriate’. Examples included providing GP practices ‘at risk’ of experiencing GP shortages with a toolkit for managing recruitment and retention, and interventions to facilitate peer support to enhance health and wellbeing, or support portfolio careers. Strategies to limit GP workload, and manage patient demand were also endorsed.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR)en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 20, article 130
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12875-019-1020-x
dc.identifier.grantnumber13/93/10en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/38516
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherBMCen_GB
dc.rightsThe Author(s). 2019 Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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.
dc.subjectprimary care physiciansen_GB
dc.subjecthealth workforceen_GB
dc.subjectwork engagementen_GB
dc.subjectjob descriptionen_GB
dc.subjectstaff developmenten_GB
dc.subjectpersonnel turnoveren_GB
dc.subjecthealth care reformen_GB
dc.subjectconsensus methoden_GB
dc.titleIdentifying policies and strategies for general practitioner retention in direct patient care in the United Kingdom: a RAND/UCLA appropriateness method panel studyen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2019-09-03T08:41:09Z
dc.identifier.issn1471-2296
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from BMC via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.descriptionAvailability of data and materials: Study data are stored in a secure repository at the University of Exeter Medical School. Although not publically available, requests to access the dataset will be considered, and sent to the Chief Investigator Professor John Campbell.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalBMC Family Practiceen_GB
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-08-30
exeter.funder::National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)en_GB
rioxxterms.versionAMen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-08-30
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2019-09-02T17:21:37Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2019-09-19T11:09:00Z
refterms.panelAen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

The Author(s). 2019 Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as The Author(s). 2019 Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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.