چکیده (انگلیسی):

Background:The study aimed to explore the views of general practitioners (GPs), nurses and physiotherapists
towards extending the role of sickness certification beyond the medical profession in primary care.
Methods:Fifteen GPs, seven nurses and six physiotherapists were selected to achieve varied respondent
characteristics including sex, geographical location, service duration and post-graduate specialist training.
Constant-comparative qualitative analysis of data from 28 semi-structured telephone interviews was undertaken.
Results:The majority of respondents supported the extended role concept; however members of each professional
group also rejected the notion. Respondents employed four different legitimacy claims to justify their views and
define their occupational boundaries in relation to sickness certification practice. Condition-specific legitimacy, the
ability to adopt a holistic approach to sickness certification, system efficiency and control-related arguments were
used to different degrees by each occupation. Practical suggestions for the extension of the sickness certification
role beyond the medical profession are underpinned by the sociological theory of professional identity.
Conclusions:Extending the authority to certify sickness absence beyond the medical profession is not simply a
matter of addressing practical and organisational obstacles. There is also a need to consider the impact on, and
preferences of, the specific occupations and their respective boundary claims. This paper explores the implications
of extending the sick certification role beyond general practice. We conclude that the main policy challenge of
such a move is to a) persuade GPs to relinquish this role (or to share it with other professions), and b) to
understand the‘boundary work’ involved.