Cited by 121Nursing Roles and PracticesPrimary Care and Health OutcomesHealthcare Policy and Management

Outcomes of primary care delivery by nurse practitioners: Utilization, cost, and quality of care

Open access
Liu, Chuan‐Fen, Hebert, Paul L., Douglas, Jamie H., Neely, Emily L., Sulc, Christine A., Reddy, Ashok, Sales, Anne E., Wong, Edwin S.·2020·Health Services Research

Abstract

Objective: To examine whether nurse practitioner (NP)‐assigned patients exhibited differences in utilization, costs, and clinical outcomes compared to medical doctor (MD)‐assigned patients. Data Sources: Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative data capturing characteristics, outcomes, and provider assignments of 806 434 VA patients assigned to an MD primary care provider (PCP) who left VA practice between 2010 and 2012. Study Design: We applied a difference‐in‐difference approach comparing outcomes between patients reassigned to MD and NP PCPs, respectively. We examined measures of outpatient (primary care, specialty care, and mental health) and inpatient (total and ambulatory care sensitive hospitalizations) utilization, costs (outpatient, inpatient and total), and clinical outcomes (control of hemoglobin A1c, LDL, and blood pressure) in the year following reassignment. Principal Findings: Compared to MD‐assigned patients, NP‐assigned patients were less likely to use primary care and specialty care services and incurred fewer total and ambulatory care sensitive hospitalizations. Differences in costs, clinical outcomes, and receipt of diagnostic tests between groups were not statistically significant. Conclusions: Patients reassigned to NPs experienced similar outcomes and incurred less utilization at comparable cost relative to MD patients. NPs may offer a cost‐effective approach to addressing anticipated shortages of primary care physicians.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1475-6773.13246

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, C., Hebert, P. L., Douglas, J. H., Neely, E. L., Sulc, C. A., Reddy, A., Sales, A. E., & Wong, E. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • VA Puget Sound Health Care System (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Hebert, Paul L.
Venue
Health Services Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-01-13
Volume
55
Issue
2
Pages
178-189
ISSN
  • 0017-9124 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-6773
OpenAlex
W3000032401
Cited by
121
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5
FWCI
14.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Health Services Research and Development (CDA 13‐024, IIR14‐054)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Nursing Roles and Practices
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
Keywords
nurse practitioners, primary care, physician shortage, health care utilization, health care costs, quality of care, avoidable hospitalizations, glycemic control, blood pressure control, lipid control, veterans, Veterans Affairs health care, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adult, Delivery of Health Care, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Military Medicine, Nurse Practitioners, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Primary Health Care, Quality of Health Care, United States, Physicians, Primary Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review