Table 2.
Characteristics of included studies with primary care professionals (PCP)
| Author | Location | Participants | Design | Theory | Method | Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allison et al. [74] | UK (England) | 26 general practice staff (9 GPs; 13 PNs; 3 practice managers; 1 receptionist) who had participated in an intervention (m = 5; f = 23) | Qualitative | None | Semi-structured interviews | Modified framework analysis |
| Bilardi et al. [51] | Australia | 43 GPs; intervention group n = 20 (m = 9; f = 11); control group n = 23 (m = 11; f = 12); age range = < 35–55+ years | Quantitative | None | Questionnaire following pilot cluster RCT | Descriptive (percentages) and mixed-effects logistic regression |
| Bilardi et al. [52] | Australia | 14 GPs (m = 6; f = 8) Age: 31–40 years = 4; 41–50 years = 4; 51–60 years = 6 |
Quantitative | None | Questionnaire following pilot RCT; interviewer-administered, open ended | Test for equality in proportion and thematic analysis |
| Calamai et al. [53] | UK | 55 GPs and PNs (m = 13; f = 42) | Quantitative | None | Questionnaire | Descriptives: frequencies |
| Freeman et al. [54] | UK (England) | 156 healthcare staff from 25 practices (72 GPs; 46 PNs; 8 practice managers; 23 administrators and receptionists; others) | Qualitative | None | Focus groups | Stepwise framework analytical approach (inductive) |
| Hocking et al. [55] | Australia | GPs (n = 21 interview; n = 225 questionnaires); mean age = 49.8 years | Mixed: qualitative and quantitative | None | Semi-structured interviews and postal questionnaire | Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics |
| Khan et al. [56] | Australia | 409 GPs (m = 233; f = 176) | Quantitative | None | Questionnaire (paper, postal) | Correlation analysis, logistic regression |
| Lorch et al. [60] | Australia | 556 GPs (m = 338; f = 218) and 118 PNs (m = 2; f = 116) from 143 clinics; age range = 30–59 years | Quantitative | None | Questionnaire (paper) | Descriptives, regression |
| Lorch et al. [57] | Australia | 72 PNs (m = 1; f = 71) | Quantitative | None | Questionnaire | Chi-squared paired t test |
| Lorch et al. [58] | Australia | 44 GPs (m = 27; f = 16) | Qualitative | None | Semi-structured interviews | Thematically using content analysis |
| Lorch et al. [59] | Australia | 23 PNs (m = 1; f = 22); age range = 30–59 years | Qualitative | None | Semi-structured interviews | Thematically using content analysis |
| Lorimer et al. [61] | UK (Scotland) | 18 GPs and 8 PNs | Qualitative | None | Semi-structured interviews (telephone) | Framework analysis with thematic coding |
| Ma and Clarke [62] | UK (England) | 4 consultants in sexual and reproductive health, 1 consultant in public health, 1 chlamydia screening coordinator, 3 GPs and 3 PNs | Qualitative | None | Semi-structured interviews | Variation of thematic analysis |
| McKernon and Azariah [63] | New Zealand | 76 staff participating in pilot trial: 5 receptionists, 5 clinical assistants, 24 nurses, 31 doctors, 10 practice managers (who were also doctors), and 4 operations managers | Quantitative | None | Questionnaire | Descriptives |
| McNulty et al. [64] | UK (England) | 12 focus groups of GPs, PNs, practice managers, midwives, and district nurses (total n not reported) | Qualitative | None | Focus groups | Modified grounded theory approach utilising the constant comparative method |
| McNulty et al. [65] | UK (England) | General practice staff (GPs, PNs) from high/low testing rates and rural/urban areas (total n not reported) | Qualitative | None | Focus groups | Thematic analysis using constant comparative method |
| McNulty et al. [66] | UK (England) | Focus groups: 72 GPs, 46 PNs, 23 receptionists and administrators, 8 practice managers, 7 other staff. Interviews: 5 GPs, 3 nurses, 1 receptionist, 2health care assistants, 1 manager. |
Qualitative | Theory of Planned Behaviour | Semi-structured interviews (12) and focus groups (25) | Stepwise framework analytical approach |
| McNulty et al. [67] | UK (England) | 9 chlamydia screening co-ordinators from areas with significant screening in general practice | Qualitative | None | Semi-structured interviews (telephone) | Interpretative phenomenological thematic approach |
| McNulty et al. [75] | UK (England), Estonia, Sweden, France | 45general practice staff, 18 stakeholders, 13 trainers (England 25, Estonia 15, France 23; Sweden 13) | Qualitative | Theory of Planned Behaviour | Semi-structured interviews | Thematic analysis |
| Merritt et al. [68] | Australia | 10 GPs from 6 practices | Uncontrolled before and after trial | None | Meetings every 2 month during intervention | Descriptive statistics |
| Perkins et al. [69] | UK (England) | 13 GPs; 14 PNs; 15 practice receptionists; 11 practice managers | Qualitative | None | Semi-structured interviews | Open-coding method |
| Ricketts et al. [70] | UK (England) | 29 general practice staff: 9 GPs; 13 PNs; 7 receptionists; from 8 high and low 7 screening intervention practices | Qualitative (evaluation of intervention) | Normalisation Process Theory | Semi-structured interviews | Thematic analysis (within a Normalisation Process Theory Framework) |
| Robertson and Williams [71] | UK (Wales) | PNs (7 qualitative; 33 quantitative) | Mixed: qualitative and quantitative | None | Semi-structured interviews and questionnaire | Descriptive statistics |
| Senok et al. [72] | UK (Scotland) | 13 GP’s, PNs and administrative staff | Feasibility study for a RCT and qualitative | None | In-depth interviews | Thematic analysis |
| Wallace et al. [73] | UK (England) | General practice staff 12 interviews; 5 GPs; 3 PNs; 1 practice manager; 3 receptionists. 55 questionnaires (m = 5; f = 50); 18 GPS; 26 PNs; 9 receptionists; 1 practice manager; 1 research nurse |
Mixed: qualitative and quantitative | Theory of Planned Behaviour | Questionnaire (paper = 52; online = 3) | Quantitative: frequencies, t tests, chi-square tests Qualitative: thematic analysis |
f female, GP general practitioner, m male, PN practice nurse, RCT randomised controlled trial