Cited by 27Interprofessional Education and CollaborationHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutNursing Roles and Practices

Primary Care 2.0: A Prospective Evaluation of a Novel Model of Advanced Team Care With Expanded Medical Assistant Support

Open access
Shaw, Jonathan G., Winget, Marcy, Brown-Johnson, Cati, Seay-Morrison, Timothy, Garvert, Donn W., Levine, Marcie, Safaeinili, Nadia, Mahoney, Megan R.·2021·The Annals of Family Medicine

Abstract

PURPOSE Assess effectiveness of Primary Care 2.0: a team-based model that incorporates increased medical assistant (MA) to primary care physician (PCP) ratio, integration of advanced practice clinicians, expanded MA roles, and extended the interprofessional team. METHODS Prospective, quasi-experimental evaluation of staff/clinician team development and wellness survey data, comparing Primary Care 2.0 to conventional clinics within our academic health care system. We surveyed before the model launch and every 6-9 months up to 24 months post implementation. Secondary outcomes (cost, quality metrics, patient satisfaction) were assessed via routinely collected operational data. RESULTS Team development significantly increased in the Primary Care 2.0 clinic, sustained across all 3 post implementation time points (+12.2, +8.5, + 10.1 respectively, vs baseline, on the 100-point Team Development Measure) relative to the comparison clinics. Among wellness domains, only “control of work” approached significant gains (+0.5 on a 5-point Likert scale, P = .05), but was not sustained. Burnout did not have statistically significant relative changes; the Primary Care 2.0 site showed a temporal trend of improvement at 9 and 15 months. Reversal of this trend at 2 years corresponded to contextual changes, specifically, reduced MA to PCP staffing ratio. Adjusted models confirmed an inverse relationship between team development and burnout (P <.0001). Secondary outcomes generally remained stable between intervention and comparison clinics with suggestion of labor cost savings. CONCLUSIONS The Primary Care 2.0 model of enhanced team-based primary care demonstrates team development is a plausible key to protect against burnout, but is not sufficient alone. The results reinforce that transformation to team-based care cannot be a 1-time effort and institutional commitment is integral.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1370/afm.2714

Cites

25 of 25 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?

  • Interventions that fostered collegiality or respect through daily team huddles or formal recognition programs were unlikely to be effective.

    “interventions that fostered collegiality or respect through daily team huddles13 or formal recognition programs were unlikely to be effective.14-17”
  • Strategies to reduce documentation burden, including team documentation, automatic speech recognition technologies, and 2021 E&M coding changes have been implemented with variable impact.

    “Strategies to reduce documentation burden, including team documentation, 9-13 automatic speech recognition technologies, 14 and 2021 E&M coding changes 15 have been implemented with variable impact.16”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shaw, J. G., Winget, M., Brown-Johnson, C., Seay-Morrison, T., Garvert, D. W., Levine, M., Safaeinili, N., & Mahoney, M. R.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Venue
The Annals of Family Medicine
Published
2021-09
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
411-418
ISSN
  • 1544-1709 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-1717
OpenAlex
W3199758658
Cited by
27
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
FWCI
4.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Annals of Family Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (T32HS022241)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Nursing Roles and Practices
Keywords
team-based primary care, medical assistants, advanced practitioners, multidisciplinary team, physician burnout, team development, clinician well-being, staffing ratios, labor cost reduction, patient satisfaction
MeSH terms
Burnout, Professional, Humans, Patient Care Team, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Patient Satisfaction, 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