Objective: This study aims to evaluate the impact of a primary care nurse-practitioner-led clinic model piloted in British Columbia (Canada) on patients' health and care experience. Design: The study relies on a quasi-experimental longitudinal design based on a pre-and-post survey of patients receiving care in NP-Led clinics. The pre-rostering survey (T0) was focused on patients' health status and care experiences preceding being rostered to the NP clinic. One year later, patients were asked to complete a similar survey (T1) focused on the care experiences with the NP clinic. Setting: To solve recurring problems related to poor primary care accessibility, British Columbia opened four pilot NP-led clinics in 2020. Each clinic has the equivalent of approximately six full-time NPs, four other clinicians plus support staff. Clinics are located in four cities ranging from core urban to peri rural. Participants: Recruitment was conducted by the clinic's clerical staff or by their care provider. A total of 437 usable T0 surveys and 254 matched and usable T1 surveys were collected. Primary outcome measures: The survey instrument was focused on five core dimensions of patients' primary care experience (accessibility, continuity, comprehensiveness, responsiveness, and outcomes of care) as well as on the SF-12 Short-form Health Survey. Results: Scores for all dimensions of patients' primary care experience increased significantly: Accessibility (T0=5.9, T1=7.9, p<0.000), Continuity (T0=5.5, T1=8.8, p<0.000), Comprehensiveness (T0=5.6, T1=8.4, p<0.000), Responsiveness (T0=7.2, T1=9.5, p<0.000), Outcomes of care (T0=5.0, T1=8.3, p<0.000). SF-12 Physical health T-scores also rose significantly (T0=44.8, T1=47.6, p<0.000) but no changes we found in the mental health T scores (T0=45.8, T1=46.3 p=0.709). Conclusions: Our results suggest that the NP-Led primary care model studied here likely constitutes an effective approach to improve primary care accessibility and quality.

The authors report no competing interests. Katherine Bertoni is a locum practitioner in one of the clinics in which the study took place.

This work was supported, in part, by the non-profit Nurses and Nurse Practitioners of British Columbia (NNPBC) association

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study was approved by the University of Victoria Human Research Ethics Board (#20-0324)

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

The nature of the data and conditions set by the University of Victoria Human Research Ethics Board prevent the sharing of the raw data.