ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Advanced Clinical Practitioners (ACPs) are a new role that have been established to address gaps and support the existing medical workforce in an effort to help reduce increasing pressures on NHS services. ACPs have the potential to practice at a similar level to mid-grade medical staff, for example independently undertaking assessments, requesting and interpreting investigations, and diagnosing and discharging patients. These roles have been shown to improve both service outcomes and quality of patient care. However, there is currently no widespread formalised standard of training within the UK resulting in variations in the training experiences and clinical capabilities of ACPs. We sought to explore the training experiences of ACPs as well as their views on role identity and future development of the role. METHODS: Five online focus groups were conducted between March and May 2021 with trainee and qualified advanced clinical practitioners working in a range of healthcare settings, in the North of England. The focus groups aimed to explore the experiences of undertaking ACP training including supervision, gaining competence, role identity and career progression. Thematic analysis of the focus group transcripts was performed, informed by grounded theory principles. RESULTS: Fourteen advanced clinical practitioners participated. Analysis revealed that training was influenced by internal and external perceptions of the role, often acting as barriers, with structural aspects being significant contributory factors. Key themes identified (1) clinical training lacked structure and support, negatively impacting progress, (2) existing knowledge and experience acted as both an enabler and inhibitor, with implications for confidence, (3) the role and responsibilities are poorly understood by both advanced clinical practitioners and the wider medical profession and (4) advanced clinical practitioners recognised the value and importance of the role but felt changes were necessary, to provide security and sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate structure and support are crucial throughout the training process to enable staff to have a smooth transition to advanced level, ensuring they obtain the necessary confidence and competence. Structural changes and knowledge brokering are essential, particularly in relation to role clarity and its responsibilities, sufficient allocated time to learn and practice, role accreditation and continuous appropriate supervision.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Excess winter deaths are a major public health concern in England and Wales, with an average of 20 000 deaths per year since 2010. Feeling cold at home during winter is associated with reporting poor general health; cold and damp homes have greater prevalence in lower socioeconomic groups. Overheating in the summer also has adverse health consequences. This study evaluates the association between indoor temperature and general health and the extent to which this is affected by socioeconomic and household factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: Secondary data of 74 736 individuals living in England that took part in the Health Survey for England (HSE) between 2003 and 2014. The HSE is an annual household survey which uses multilevel stratification to select a new, nationally representative sample each year. The study sample comprised adults who had a nurse visit; the analytical sample was adults who had observations for indoor temperature and self-rated health. RESULTS: Using both logistic and linear regression models to examine indoor temperature and health status, adjusting for socioeconomic and housing factors, the study found an association between poor health and higher indoor temperatures. Each one degree increase in indoor temperature was associated with a 1.4% (95% CI 0.5% to 2.3%) increase in the odds of poor health. After adjusting for income, education, employment type, household size and home ownership, the OR of poor health for each degree temperature rise increased by 19%, to a 1.7% (95% CI 0.7% to 2.6%) increase in odds of poor health with each degree temperature rise. CONCLUSION: People with worse self-reported health had higher indoor temperatures after adjusting for household factors. People with worse health may have chosen to maintain warmer environments or been advised to. However, other latent factors, such as housing type and energy performance could have an effect.
