High levels of work-related stress, burnout, job dissatisfaction, and poor health are common within the nursing profession. A comprehensive understanding of nurses’ psychosocial work environment is necessary to respond to complex patients’ needs. The aims of this study were threefold: (1) To retest and confirm two structural equation models exploring associations between practice environment and work characteristics as predictors of burnout (model 1) and engagement (model 2) as well as nurse-reported job outcome and quality of care; (2) To study staff nurses’ and nurse managers’ perceptions and experiences of staff nurses’ workload; (3) To explain and interpret the two models by using the qualitative study findings. This mixed method study is based on an explanatory sequential study design. We first performed a cross-sectional survey design in two large acute care university hospitals. Secondly, we conducted individual semi-structured interviews with staff nurses and nurse managers assigned to medical or surgical units in one of the study hospitals. Study data was collected between September 2014 and June 2015. Finally, qualitative study results assisted in explaining and interpreting the findings of the two models. The two models with burnout and engagement as mediating outcome variables fitted sufficiently to the data. Nurse-reported job outcomes and quality of care explained variances between 52 and 62%. Nurse management at the unit level and workload had a direct impact on outcome variables with explained variances between 23 and 36% and between 12 and 17%, respectively. Personal accomplishment and depersonalization had an explained variance on job outcomes of 23% and vigor of 20%. Burnout and engagement had a less relevant direct impact on quality of care (≤5%). The qualitative study revealed various themes such as organisation of daily practice and work conditions; interdisciplinary collaboration, communication and teamwork; staff nurse personal characteristics and competencies; patient centeredness, quality and patient safety. Respondents’ statements corresponded closely to the models’ associations. A deep understanding of various associations and impacts on studied outcome variables such as risk factors and protective factors was gained through the retested models and the interviews with the study participants. Besides the softer work characteristics — such as decision latitude, social capital and team cohesion — more insight and knowledge of the hard work characteristic workload is essential.

General Practice (GP) seems to be perceived as less attractive throughout Europe. Most of the policies on the subject focused on negative factors. An EGPRN research team from eight participating countries was created in order to clarify the positive factors involved in appeals and retention in GP throughout Europe. The objective was to explore the positive factors supporting the satisfaction of General Practitioners (GPs) in clinical practice throughout Europe. Qualitative study, employing face-to-face interviews and focus groups using a phenomenological approach. The setting was primary care in eight European countries: France, Belgium, Germany, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Finland, Poland and Israel. A thematic qualitative analysis was performed following the process described by Braun and Clarke. Codebooks were generated in each country. After translation and back translation of these codebooks, the team clarified and compared the codes and constructed one international codebook used for further coding. A purposive sample of 183 GPs, providing primary care to patients in their daily clinical practice, was interviewed across eight countries. The international codebook included 31 interpretative codes and six themes. Five positive themes were common among all the countries involved across Europe: the GP as a person, special skills needed in practice, doctor-patient relationship, freedom in the practice and supportive factors for work-life balance. One theme was not found in Poland or Slovenia: teaching and learning. This study identified positive factors which give GPs job satisfaction in their clinical practice. This description focused on the human needs of a GP. They need to have freedom to choose their working environment and to organize their practice to suit themselves. In addition, they need to have access to professional education so they can develop specific skills for General Practice, and also strengthen doctor-patient relationships. Stakeholders should consider these factors when seeking to increase the GP workforce.

Looking at what makes General Practitioners (GPs) happy in their profession, may be important in increasing the GP workforce in the future. The European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) created a research team (eight national groups) in order to clarify the factors involved in GP job satisfaction throughout Europe. The first step of this study was a literature review to explore how the satisfaction of GPs had been studied before. The research question was “Which factors are related to GP satisfaction in Clinical Practice?” Systematic literature review according to the PRISMA statement. The databases searched were Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane. All articles were identified, screened and included by two separate research teams, according to inclusion or exclusion criteria. Then, a qualitative appraisal was undertaken. Next, a thematic analysis process was undertaken to capture any issue relevant to the research question. The number of records screened was 458. One hundred four were eligible. Finally, 17 articles were included. The data revealed 13 subthemes, which were grouped into three major themes for GP satisfaction. First there were general profession-related themes, applicable to many professions. A second group of issues related specifically to a GP setting. Finally, a third group was related to professional life and personal issues. A number of factors leading to GP job satisfaction, exist in literature They should be used by policy makers within Europe to increase the GP workforce. The research team needs to undertake qualitative studies to confirm or enhance those results.

General practitioners (GPs) are considered to play a major role in detecting and managing substance abuse. However, little is known about how or why they decide to manage it. This study investigated the factors that influence GP behaviours with regard to the abuse of alcohol, illegal drugs, hypnotics, and tranquilisers among working Belgians.

Cardiovascular diseases are the world’s leading cause of mortality, with a high burden especially among vulnerable populations. Interventions for primary prevention need to be further implemented in community and primary health care settings. Context is critically important to understand potential implementation determinants. Therefore, we explored stakeholders’ views on the evidence-based SPICES program (EBSP); a multicomponent intervention for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, to inform its implementation. In this qualitative study, we conducted interviews and focus groups with 24 key stakeholders, 10 general practitioners, 9 practice nurses, and 13 lay community partners. We used adaptive framework analysis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided our data collection, analysis, and reporting. The EBSP was valued as an opportunity to improve risk awareness and health behavior, especially in vulnerable populations. Its relative advantage, evidence-based design, adaptability to the needs and resources of target communities, and the alignment with policy evolutions and local mission and vision, were seen as important facilitators for its implementation. Concerns remain around legal and structural characteristics and intervention complexity. Our results highlight context dimensions that need to be considered and tailored to primary care and community needs and capacities when planning EBSP implementation in real life settings.

Aim: Our aim was to evaluate the implementation process of a comprehensive cardiovascular disease prevention program in general practice, to enhance understanding of influencing factors to implementation success and sustainability, and to learn how to overcome barriers. Background: Cardiovascular disease and its risk factors are the world’s leading cause of mortality, yet can be prevented by addressing unhealthy lifestyle behavior. Nevertheless, the transition toward a prevention-oriented primary health care remains limited. A better understanding of factors facilitating or hindering implementation success and sustainability of prevention programs, and how barriers may be addressed, is needed. This work is part of Horizon 2020 project ‘SPICES’, which aims to implement validated preventive interventions in vulnerable populations. Methods: We conducted a qualitative process evaluation with participatory action research approach of implementation in five general practices. Data were collected through 38 semi-structured individual and small group interviews with seven physicians, 11 nurses, one manager and one nursing assistant, conducted before, during, and after the implementation period. We applied adaptive framework analysis guided by RE-AIM Qualitative Evaluation for Systematic Translation (RE-AIM QuEST) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Findings: Multiple facilitators and barriers affected reach of vulnerable target populations: adoption by primary health care providers, implementation and fidelity and intention to maintain the program into routine practice. In addition, our study revealed concrete actions, linked to implementation strategies, that can be undertaken to address identified barriers. Prioritization of prevention in general practice vision, ownership, and shared responsibility of all team members, compatibility with existing work processes and systems, expanding nurse’s roles and upskilling competence profiles, supportive financial and regulatory frameworks, and a strong community – health care link are crucial to increase implementation success and long-term maintenance of prevention programs. COVID-19 was a major barrier to the implementation. RE-AIM QuEST, CFIR, and participatory strategies are useful to guide implementation of prevention programs in primary health care.