• Lindsey Banham and Jim Connelly.
• University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
• J Manag Med. 2002 Jan 1;16(4-5):259-70.

AbstractThis commentary surveys the current arguments for and against modifying the work of doctors and nurses by placing the main viewpoints - substitution and diversification - within the policy background, particularly that of the UK. We discuss the forces for modification: cost effectiveness, professional development, quality improvement and pragmatic management and how each provides a stand-point for evaluation of the issues. Policy makers and managers in the health sector should be aware of the rather fragmented evidence base for doctor-nurse substitution and should consider skill mix changes only when they are clear about: purpose, evidence base, acceptable risks, accountability and quality assurance. Doctor-nurse substitution is not necessarily cost effective, nor is it unfailingly a gain in nurse professionalism or in quality of care. Of the management perspectives available - advocacy, skepticism or pragmatism - the current evidence and policy base favours pragmatism over evaluations of the rightness or wrongness of a general policy.

16 keywords...

hide…