Dataset Information

Students' intentions to practice primary care are associated with their motives to become doctors: a longitudinal study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Medical schools can contribute to the insufficient primary care physician workforce by influencing students' career preferences. Primary care career choice evolves between matriculation and graduation and is influenced by several individual and contextual factors. This study explored the longitudinal dynamics of primary care career intentions and the association of students' motives for becoming doctors with these intentions in a cohort of undergraduate medical students followed over a four-year period.

Methods

The sample consisted of medical students from two classes recruited into a cohort study during their first academic year, and who completed a yearly survey over a four-year period from their third (end of pre-clinical curriculum) to their sixth (before graduation) academic year. Main outcome measures were students' motives for becoming doctors (ten motives rated on a 6-point scale) and career intentions (categorized into primary care, non-primary care, and undecided). Population-level flows of career intentions were investigated descriptively. Changes in the rating of motives over time were analyzed using Wilcoxon tests. Two generalized linear mixed models were used to estimate which motives were associated with primary care career intentions.

Results

The sample included 217 students (60% females). Career intentions mainly evolved during clinical training, with smaller changes at the end of pre-clinical training. The proportion of students intending to practice primary care increased over time from 12.8% (year 3) to 24% (year 6). Caring for patients was the most highly rated motive for becoming a doctor. The importance of the motives cure diseases, saving lives, and vocation decreased over time. Primary care career intentions were positively associated with the motives altruism and private practice, and negatively associated with the motives prestige, academic interest and cure diseases.

Conclusion

Our study indicates that career intentions are not fixed and change mainly during clinical training, supporting the influence of clinical experiences on career-related choices. The impact of students' motives on primary care career choice suggests strategies to increase the attractivity of this career, such as reinforcing students' altruistic values and increasing the academic recognition of primary care.

SUBMITTER: Pfarrwaller E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8750802 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Care gaps in asthma may be highly prevalent but are poorly characterised. We sought to prospectively measure adherence to key evidence-based adult asthma practices in primary care, and predictors of these behaviours. DESIGN:One-year prospective cohort study employing an electronic chart audit. SETTING:Three family health teams (two academic, one community-based) in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS:884 patients (72.1% female; 46.0±17.5 years old) (4199 total visits; 4.8±4.8 visits/patient) assigned to 23 physicians (65% female; practising for 10.0±8.6 years). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was the proportion of visits during which practitioners assessed asthma control according to symptom-based criteria. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of: patients who had asthma control assessed at least once; visits during which a controller medication was initiated or escalated; and patients who received a written asthma action plan. Behavioural predictors were established a priori and tested in a multivariable model. RESULTS:Primary outcome: Providers assessed asthma control in 4.9% of visits and 15.4% of patients. Factors influencing assessment included clinic site (p=0.019) and presenting symptom, with providers assessing control more often during visits for asthma symptoms (35.0%) or any respiratory symptoms (18.8%) relative to other visits (1.6%) (p<0.01). SECONDARY OUTCOMES:Providers escalated controller therapy in 3.3% of visits and 15.4% of patients. Factors influencing escalation included clinic site, presenting symptom and prior objective asthma diagnosis. Escalation occurred more frequently during visits for asthma symptoms (21.0%) or any respiratory symptoms (11.9%) relative to other visits (1.5%) (p<0.01) and in patients without a prior objective asthma diagnosis (3.5%) relative to those with (1.3%) (p=0.025). No asthma action plans were delivered. CONCLUSIONS:Major gaps in evidence-based asthma practice exist in primary care. Targeted knowledge translation interventions are required to address these gaps, and can be tailored by leveraging the identified behavioural predictors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01070095; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundTemporary doctors, known as locums, are a key component of the medical workforce in the NHS but evidence on differences in quality and safety between locum and permanent doctors is limited. We aimed to examine differences in the clinical practice, and prescribing safety for locum and permanent doctors working in primary care in England.MethodsWe accessed electronic health care records (EHRs) for 3.5 million patients from the CPRD GOLD database with linkage to Hospital Episode Statistics from 1st April 2010 to 31st March 2022. We used multi-level mixed effects logistic regression to compare consultations with locum and permanent GPs for several patient outcomes including general practice revisits; prescribing of antibiotics; strong opioids; hypnotics; A&E visits; emergency hospital admissions; admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions; test ordering; referrals; and prescribing safety indicators while controlling for patient and practice characteristics.ResultsConsultations with locum GPs were 22% more likely to involve a prescription for an antibiotic (OR = 1.22 (1.21 to 1.22)), 8% more likely to involve a prescription for a strong opioid (OR = 1.08 (1.06 to 1.09)), 4% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit on the same day (OR = 1.04 (1.01 to 1.08)) and 5% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit within 1 to 7 days (OR = 1.05 (1.02 to 1.08)). Consultations with a locum were 12% less likely to lead to a practice revisit within 7 days (OR = 0.88 (0.87 to 0.88)), 4% less likely to involve a prescription for a hypnotic (OR = 0.96 (0.94 to 0.98)), 15% less likely to involve a referral (OR = 0.85 (0.84 to 0.86)) and 19% less likely to involve a test (OR = 0.81 (0.80 to 0.82)). We found no evidence that emergency admissions, ACSC admissions and eight out of the eleven prescribing safety indicators were different if patients were seen by a locum or a permanent GP.ConclusionsDespite existing concerns, the clinical practice and performance of locum GPs did not appear to be systematically different from that of permanent GPs. The practice and performance of both locum and permanent GPs is likely shaped by the organisational setting and systems within which they work.

Project description:BackgroundIncreasingly, consultations in health care settings are conducted remotely using a range of communication technologies. Email allows for 2-way text-based communication, occurring asynchronously. Studies have explored the content and nature of email consultations to understand the use, structure, and function of email consultations. Most previous content analyses of email consultations in primary care settings have been conducted in North America, and these have shown that concerns and assumptions about how email consultations work have not been realized. There has not been a UK-based content analysis of email consultations.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore and delineate the content of consultations conducted via email in English general practice by conducting a content analysis of email consultations between general practitioners (GPs) and patients.MethodsWe conducted a content analysis of anonymized email consultations between GPs and patients in 2 general practices in the United Kingdom. We examined the descriptive elements of the correspondence to ascertain when the emails were sent, the number of emails in an email consultation, and the nature of the content. We used a normative approach to analyze the content of the email consultations to explore the use and function of email consultation.ResultsWe obtained 100 email consultations from 85 patients, which totaled 262 individual emails. Most email users were older than 40 years, and over half of the users were male. The email consultations were mostly short and completed in a few days. Emails were mostly sent and received during the day. The emails were mostly clinical in content rather than administrative and covered a wide range of clinical presentations. There were 3 key themes to the use and function of the email consultations: the role of the GP and email consultation, the transactional nature of an email consultation, and the operationalization of an email consultation.ConclusionsMost cases where emails are used to have a consultation with a patient in general practice have a shorter consultation, are clinical in nature, and are resolved quickly. GPs approach email consultations using key elements similar to that of the face-to-face consultation; however, using email consultations has the potential to alter the role of the GP, leading them to engage in more administrative tasks than usual. Email consultations were not a replacement for face-to-face consultations.