The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

The work, workforce, technology and organisational implications of the ‘111’ single point of access telephone number for urgent (non-emergency) care: a mixed-methods case study

Turnbull, Joanne, Halford, Susan, Jones, Jeremy, May, Carl, Pope, Catherine, Prichard, Jane S. and Rowsell, A.C. (2014) The work, workforce, technology and organisational implications of the ‘111’ single point of access telephone number for urgent (non-emergency) care: a mixed-methods case study , Southampton, GB NIHR Journals Library 164pp. (HS&DR Journal Series, (doi:10.3310/hsdr02030) , Volume 2:3).

Record type: Monograph (Project Report)

Abstract

Background: NHS 111 represents a fundamental change in the way that urgent care is delivered. It is
underpinned by a computer decision support system (CDSS) and involves significant labour substitution,
in particular the greater use of non-clinical staff to deliver services.

Objective: To investigate four core features of health-care innovation and change in relation to the new
NHS 111 telephone-based service for 24/7 access to urgent care, namely the way in which work and
workforce are organised for this new service and how the technology and organisational context shape
the way in which services are delivered.
Design: Comparative mixed-methods case study of NHS 111 providers.

Settings: Five NHS 111 sites, characterised by differences in organisational size, form and ethos and in the
type of workforce employed and professional roles and skill mix.

Methods: The study combined ethnographic and survey methods. Non-participant observation was
conducted at NHS 111 call centres and their linked urgent care centre(s) (UCCs; a total of 356 hours).
Six focus groups were conducted with 47 call advisers, clinicians and organisational managers. An online
survey was administered to call centre and UCC staff (n = 745) to ask their views about NHS 111; trust in
NHS Pathways; and communication and information sharing (response rate: 41% for call centre staff,
35% for UCC staff).

Results: Clinical assessment by call advisers is characterised by high levels of communication (including
negotiation, communication and translation) and ‘emotion’ work, extending the work beyond simple
operation of a CDSS. At most sites clinical advisers supported call advisers in clinical assessment but also
played an important role in managing and sanctioning dispositions, notably emergency ambulance
dispositions. Clinicians at UCCs have experienced a loss of control over their everyday work, which is now
shaped by call centre workers. The Directory of Services, which provides information about locally available
services, is key to delivering an integrated urgent care system. Trust in the CDSS is higher amongst call
advisers than amongst clinical staff but there is widespread belief that the CDSS is risk averse. Staff often
develop workarounds to ‘make the technology work’. There is considerable variation in how NHS 111 is
organised and delivered, shaped by the organisational history and the professional culture of the
organisations involved. Some sites were driven more by rationing and systemising, pursuing the NHS 111
vision of ‘right care, right place, right time’, whereas others were driven more by an ethos of what they
perceived was a more patient-centred service.

Conclusions: NHS 111 is primarily founded on a network of different organisations providing different
aspects of the service. This network is primarily enabled through technological integration. Successful
integration also requires understanding and trusting relationships between different providers, which were
lacking in some sites. Underpinning NHS 111 with non-clinical workers offers significant opportunities for
workforce reconfiguration, but this is not a simple substitution of labour (i.e. non-clinical staff replacing
clinical staff). There is a significant organisational structure that is necessary to support and ‘keep in place’
both the CDSS itself and non-clinical workers using the CDSS.

Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

PDF FullReport-hsdr02030.pdf - Other
Download (4MB)

More information

Published date: 25 February 2014
Organisations: Faculty of Medicine

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 362600
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/362600
PURE UUID: c42a3869-9a6c-45a6-bd37-5036e8cce492
ORCID for Joanne Turnbull: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-5006-4438
ORCID for Carl May: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-0451-2690
ORCID for Catherine Pope: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8935-6702
ORCID for Jane S. Prichard: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-7455-2244

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 27 Feb 2014 12:33
Last modified: 18 Jul 2017 02:50

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Joanne Turnbull ORCID iD
Author: Susan Halford
Author: Jeremy Jones
Author: Carl May ORCID iD
Author: Catherine Pope ORCID iD
Author: A.C. Rowsell

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×