Table 5 Optimization of health services, community development, and professional satisfaction with the development of an SPLS

Optimization of health services

• 78.5% considered that SP would benefit their health care unit;

• 72.3% considered that SP could reduce the number of unscheduled appointments;

• 80.0% considered that SP could benefit the relationship between HP and patients.

• During the training program, participants highlighted SP as a care quality improvement since it is better suited to address patients’ non-clinical care needs than traditional approaches.

• HP’ Focus Group:

○ For the health care unit, the benefits identified were: increasing the options/tools offered to patients, restoring the lack of psychologists, and improving mental health support. The possibility to articulate with the city council and community would also benefit patients and the community;

○ Reducting the affluence to the health services of people who only need to socialize, could reduce the overload of HP.

Community development

• 87.7% agreed that SP would benefit the local community in terms of social cohesion.

• Training program participants considered SP a very interesting approach that could benefit community health and development.

• Patient interview:

○ Organizations were identified to be involved in creating a partnership network, such as sports grounds, gyms, and urban gardens, although, regarding the latter, the interviewee raised doubts about the patient’s acceptance;

○ The patient suggested articulating with the City Council, Hospital Management, or Regional Health Administration.

• Community Provider Interview:

○ Institutional benefits interpretation, enhancement, and promotion of the history and patrimony of the county; promotion of museum spaces, cultural education, and the creation of new audiences; contribution to the museum’s mission creating experiences of attraction and curiosity; provision of new knowledge through memories, identities, and territories.

Professional satisfaction

• 82.1% admitted that SP would improve their effectiveness.

• Motives for greater professional satisfaction with SP:

○ Being capable to better attend to patient non-clinical needs;

○ Diversify their daily health care activity;

○ Deepen their relationship with community providers.

• HP Focus Group:

○ Identified motivations to participate in the project: social aspects, namely working with people in the community; the pleasure of working with the target population’s age group; the opportunity to respond to the patients’ social isolation; the possibility to prescribe more than medication; and the belief in the SP potential.

○ Added value for HP: the improvement of the relationship with the patient; the increased perception of competence; and the consequent professional achievement, for providing better health care.