Cargando…

Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor

BACKGROUND: Rising numbers of patients with multiple-conditions and complex care needs mean that it is increasingly important for doctors from different specialty areas to work together, alongside other members of the multi-disciplinary team, to provide patient centred care. However, intra-professio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Muddiman, E., Bullock, A. D., Hampton, J. M., Allery, L., MacDonald, J., Webb, K. L., Pugsley, L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6377780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30770777
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1493-2
_version_ 1783395816420933632
author Muddiman, E.
Bullock, A. D.
Hampton, J. M.
Allery, L.
MacDonald, J.
Webb, K. L.
Pugsley, L.
author_facet Muddiman, E.
Bullock, A. D.
Hampton, J. M.
Allery, L.
MacDonald, J.
Webb, K. L.
Pugsley, L.
author_sort Muddiman, E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rising numbers of patients with multiple-conditions and complex care needs mean that it is increasingly important for doctors from different specialty areas to work together, alongside other members of the multi-disciplinary team, to provide patient centred care. However, intra-professional boundaries and silos within the medical profession may challenge holistic approaches to patient care. METHODS: We used Q methodology to examine how postgraduate trainees (n = 38) on a range of different specialty programmes in England and Wales could be grouped based on their rankings of 40 statements about ‘being a good doctor’. Themes covered in the Q-set include: generalism (breadth) and specialism (depth), interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinary team working, patient-centredness, and managing complex care needs. RESULTS: A by-person factor analysis enabled us to map distinct perspectives within our participant group (P-set). Despite high levels of overall commonality, three groups of trainees emerged, each with a clear perspective on being a good doctor. We describe the first group as ‘generalists’: team-players with a collegial and patient-centred approach to their role. The second group of ‘general specialists’ aspired to be specialists but with a generalist and patient-centred approach to care within their specialty area. Both these two groups can be contrasted to those in the third ‘specialist’ group, who had a more singular focus on how their specialty can help the patient. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst distinct, the priorities and values of trainees in this study share some important aspects. The results of our Q-sort analysis suggest that it may be helpful to understand the relationship between generalism and specialism as less of a dichotomy and more of a continuum that transcends primary and secondary care settings. A nuanced understanding of trainee views on being a good doctor, across different specialties, may help us to bridge gaps and foster interdisciplinary working.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6377780
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63777802019-02-27 Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor Muddiman, E. Bullock, A. D. Hampton, J. M. Allery, L. MacDonald, J. Webb, K. L. Pugsley, L. BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Rising numbers of patients with multiple-conditions and complex care needs mean that it is increasingly important for doctors from different specialty areas to work together, alongside other members of the multi-disciplinary team, to provide patient centred care. However, intra-professional boundaries and silos within the medical profession may challenge holistic approaches to patient care. METHODS: We used Q methodology to examine how postgraduate trainees (n = 38) on a range of different specialty programmes in England and Wales could be grouped based on their rankings of 40 statements about ‘being a good doctor’. Themes covered in the Q-set include: generalism (breadth) and specialism (depth), interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinary team working, patient-centredness, and managing complex care needs. RESULTS: A by-person factor analysis enabled us to map distinct perspectives within our participant group (P-set). Despite high levels of overall commonality, three groups of trainees emerged, each with a clear perspective on being a good doctor. We describe the first group as ‘generalists’: team-players with a collegial and patient-centred approach to their role. The second group of ‘general specialists’ aspired to be specialists but with a generalist and patient-centred approach to care within their specialty area. Both these two groups can be contrasted to those in the third ‘specialist’ group, who had a more singular focus on how their specialty can help the patient. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst distinct, the priorities and values of trainees in this study share some important aspects. The results of our Q-sort analysis suggest that it may be helpful to understand the relationship between generalism and specialism as less of a dichotomy and more of a continuum that transcends primary and secondary care settings. A nuanced understanding of trainee views on being a good doctor, across different specialties, may help us to bridge gaps and foster interdisciplinary working. BioMed Central 2019-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6377780/ /pubmed/30770777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1493-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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
Muddiman, E.
Bullock, A. D.
Hampton, J. M.
Allery, L.
MacDonald, J.
Webb, K. L.
Pugsley, L.
Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor
title Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor
title_full Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor
title_fullStr Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor
title_full_unstemmed Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor
title_short Disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using Q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor
title_sort disciplinary boundaries and integrating care: using q-methodology to understand trainee views on being a good doctor
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6377780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30770777
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1493-2
work_keys_str_mv AT muddimane disciplinaryboundariesandintegratingcareusingqmethodologytounderstandtraineeviewsonbeingagooddoctor
AT bullockad disciplinaryboundariesandintegratingcareusingqmethodologytounderstandtraineeviewsonbeingagooddoctor
AT hamptonjm disciplinaryboundariesandintegratingcareusingqmethodologytounderstandtraineeviewsonbeingagooddoctor
AT alleryl disciplinaryboundariesandintegratingcareusingqmethodologytounderstandtraineeviewsonbeingagooddoctor
AT macdonaldj disciplinaryboundariesandintegratingcareusingqmethodologytounderstandtraineeviewsonbeingagooddoctor
AT webbkl disciplinaryboundariesandintegratingcareusingqmethodologytounderstandtraineeviewsonbeingagooddoctor
AT pugsleyl disciplinaryboundariesandintegratingcareusingqmethodologytounderstandtraineeviewsonbeingagooddoctor