Article Figures & Data
Tables
Characteristic HCA Interviewed HCA Not Interviewed HCA=health care assistants. Age, mean y 39.5 44.1 Female, % 100.0 100.0 Family status, % Not married 57.6 37.5 Married, living together 38.46 62.5 Not specified 3.85 0.0 Graduation, % Higher than secondary school 11.55 12.5 Secondary modern school 84.62 87.5 Not specified 3.8 0.0 HCA with completed apprenticeship, % 88.4 75.0 Time working in the current practice, mean y 10.4 8.7 Experience with psychiatric patients, % 15.3 37.5 HCAs working in the practice, mean No. 3.1 3.8 Weekly hours of work, % Full time 23.1 50.0 Part time 65.3 50.0 Not specified 11.4 0.0
Additional Files
The Article in Brief
Health Care Assistants in Primary Care Depression Management: Role Perception, Burdening Factors, and Disease Conception
Jochen Gensichen , and colleagues
Background With health care assistants (HCAs) playing an increasingly prominent role in primary care practices, researchers in Germany sought to understand how HCAs who provide case management for depressed patients felt about their new and expanded roles.
What This Study Found HCAs found their case management work personally and professionally enriching. They also, however, experienced limited capacity for the increased workload and the challenges that came with working with depressed patients.
Implications
- Before shifting depression case management to HCAs, practices should appropriately train future case managers for the job, clearly define case management tasks to prevent overburdening, acknowledge the increased workload associated with these tasks, and provide additional financial compensation for the new responsibilities.
Annals Journal Club:
Nov/Dec 2009
Medical Assistants' Role in Improving Preventive and Chronic Illness Care
The Annals of Family Medicine encourages readers to develop the learning community of those seeking to improve health care and health through enhanced primary care. You can participate by conducting a RADICAL journal club, and sharing the results of your discussions in the Annals online discussion for the featured articles. RADICAL is an acronym for: Read, Ask, Discuss, Inquire, Collaborate, Act, and Learn. The word radical also indicates the need to engage diverse participants in thinking critically about important issues affecting primary care, and then acting on those discussions.1How it Works
In each issue, the Annals selects an article or articles and provides discussion tips and questions. We encourage you to take a RADICAL approach to these materials and to post a summary of your conversation in our online discussion. (Open the article online and click on "TRACK Comments: Submit a response.") You can find discussion questions and more information online at: http://www.AnnFamMed.org/AJC/.
CURRENT SELECTION
Articles for Discussion
- Ferrer RL, Mody-Bailey P, Jaen CR, Gott S, Araujo S. A medical assistant-based program to promote health behaviors in primary care. Ann Fam Med. 2009; 7 (6):504-512.
- Gensichen JS, Jaeger C, Peitz M, et al. Health care assistants in primary care depression management: role perception, burdening factors, and disease conception. Ann Fam Med. 2009; 7 (6):513-519.
Discussion Tips
Of the 417,000 medical assistants active in the United States in 2006, 62% worked in physician offices.2 Similar roles exist in other countries. Duties vary but typically are limited to medical care support functions. These 2 articles are relevant to efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of team approaches to primary care by expanding the role of medical assistants. The articles present complementary but contrasting perspectives of chronic illness and preventive care, qualitative and quantitative methods, and US and German social and health care system contexts.Discussion Questions
- What questions are addressed by these articles? How do the questions fit with what already is known on this topic?
- What is the relevance of the research questions for the current economic, practice improvement, and health care system reform efforts?
- How strong are the study designs for answering the questions?
- To what degree can the findings be accounted for by:
- How participants were selected?
- How outcomes were measured?
- Confounding (false attribution of causality because 2 variables discovered to be associated actually are associated with a 3rd factor)?
- Researcher bias?
- Chance?
- What are the main findings?
- To what extent do the characteristics of the person performing the expanded role affect how well things work? What evidence do these articles give to support or refute your opinion?
- How comparable are the study populations to your practice? What is your judgment about the transportability of the findings?
- How (if at all) could these studies change your practice?
- What important researchable questions remain?
- What are the implications of the findings for practice improvement and health care reform?
References
- Stange KC, Miller WL, McLellan LA, et al. Annals journal club: It�s time to get RADICAL. Ann Fam Med. 2006;4(3):196-197. http://annfammed.org/cgi/content/full/4/3/196.
- Medical assistants. In: Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2008-09 Edition. Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos164.htm. Accessed Oct 14, 2009.
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Effectiveness of a complex intervention on Prioritising Multimedication in Multimorbidity (PRIMUM) in primary care: results of a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial
- Pilot study to test the feasibility of a trial design and complex intervention on PRIoritising MUltimedication in Multimorbidity in general practices (PRIMUMpilot)
- Delegating Responsibility from Clinicians to Nonprofessional Personnel: The Example of Hypertension Control
- Annals Journal Club: Medical Assistants' Role in Improving Preventive and Chronic Illness Care
- In This Issue: Multifaceted Research