Cargando…

Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: As the medicine practiced in hospital settings has become more specialized, training in primary care is becoming increasingly essential for medical students, especially for future general practitioners (GPs). Only a few limited studies have investigated the representativeness of medical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Letrilliart, Laurent, Rigault-Fossier, Pauline, Fossier, Benoit, Kellou, Nadir, Paumier, Françoise, Bois, Christophe, Polazzi, Stéphanie, Schott, Anne-Marie, Zerbib, Yves
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4847255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27117188
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0649-6
_version_ 1782429177485459456
author Letrilliart, Laurent
Rigault-Fossier, Pauline
Fossier, Benoit
Kellou, Nadir
Paumier, Françoise
Bois, Christophe
Polazzi, Stéphanie
Schott, Anne-Marie
Zerbib, Yves
author_facet Letrilliart, Laurent
Rigault-Fossier, Pauline
Fossier, Benoit
Kellou, Nadir
Paumier, Françoise
Bois, Christophe
Polazzi, Stéphanie
Schott, Anne-Marie
Zerbib, Yves
author_sort Letrilliart, Laurent
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: As the medicine practiced in hospital settings has become more specialized, training in primary care is becoming increasingly essential for medical students, especially for future general practitioners (GPs). Only a few limited studies have investigated the representativeness of medical practices delivering this training. The aim of this study was to assess the representativeness of French GP trainers in terms of socio-demographics, patients and activities. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study covering all private GPs practicing in the Rhône-Alpes region of France in 2011. This population consisted of 4992 GPs, including 623 trainers and 4369 non-trainers, managing 8,198,684 individual patients. Data from 2011 to 2012 were provided by the Regional Health Care Insurance (RHCI). We compared GP trainers with non-trainers using the Pearson chi-square test for qualitative variables and the Student t-test for quantitative variables RESULTS: GP trainers do not differ from non-trainers for gender, but they tend to be younger, more frequently in mid-career, and more likely to practice in a rural area. Their patients are broadly representative of patients attending general practice for age (with the exception of a higher consultation rate for infants), but patients with medical fee exemption status relating to low income are underrepresented. GP trainers have a heavier workload in terms of office visits and on-call duties. They prescribe a higher proportion of generic drugs, perform more electrocardiograms and cervical smears, and fewer plaster casts. GP trainers show better performance in diabetes follow-up, and to a lesser extent for seasonal flu vaccination and mammograms. CONCLUSIONS: GPs and patients of training practices are globally representative, which is particularly critical in countries such as France, where the length of specialty training in a general practice setting is still limited to a few months. In addition, GP trainers tend to have better clinical performance, which conforms to their teaching modelling role and may encourage other GPs to become trainers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4847255
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48472552016-04-28 Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study Letrilliart, Laurent Rigault-Fossier, Pauline Fossier, Benoit Kellou, Nadir Paumier, Françoise Bois, Christophe Polazzi, Stéphanie Schott, Anne-Marie Zerbib, Yves BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: As the medicine practiced in hospital settings has become more specialized, training in primary care is becoming increasingly essential for medical students, especially for future general practitioners (GPs). Only a few limited studies have investigated the representativeness of medical practices delivering this training. The aim of this study was to assess the representativeness of French GP trainers in terms of socio-demographics, patients and activities. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study covering all private GPs practicing in the Rhône-Alpes region of France in 2011. This population consisted of 4992 GPs, including 623 trainers and 4369 non-trainers, managing 8,198,684 individual patients. Data from 2011 to 2012 were provided by the Regional Health Care Insurance (RHCI). We compared GP trainers with non-trainers using the Pearson chi-square test for qualitative variables and the Student t-test for quantitative variables RESULTS: GP trainers do not differ from non-trainers for gender, but they tend to be younger, more frequently in mid-career, and more likely to practice in a rural area. Their patients are broadly representative of patients attending general practice for age (with the exception of a higher consultation rate for infants), but patients with medical fee exemption status relating to low income are underrepresented. GP trainers have a heavier workload in terms of office visits and on-call duties. They prescribe a higher proportion of generic drugs, perform more electrocardiograms and cervical smears, and fewer plaster casts. GP trainers show better performance in diabetes follow-up, and to a lesser extent for seasonal flu vaccination and mammograms. CONCLUSIONS: GPs and patients of training practices are globally representative, which is particularly critical in countries such as France, where the length of specialty training in a general practice setting is still limited to a few months. In addition, GP trainers tend to have better clinical performance, which conforms to their teaching modelling role and may encourage other GPs to become trainers. BioMed Central 2016-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4847255/ /pubmed/27117188 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0649-6 Text en © Letrilliart et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Letrilliart, Laurent
Rigault-Fossier, Pauline
Fossier, Benoit
Kellou, Nadir
Paumier, Françoise
Bois, Christophe
Polazzi, Stéphanie
Schott, Anne-Marie
Zerbib, Yves
Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study
title Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study
title_full Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study
title_fullStr Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study
title_short Comparison of French training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study
title_sort comparison of french training and non-training general practices: a cross-sectional study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4847255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27117188
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0649-6
work_keys_str_mv AT letrilliartlaurent comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT rigaultfossierpauline comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT fossierbenoit comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT kellounadir comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT paumierfrancoise comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT boischristophe comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT polazzistephanie comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT schottannemarie comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy
AT zerbibyves comparisonoffrenchtrainingandnontraininggeneralpracticesacrosssectionalstudy