Purpose Healthcare policymakers and managers struggle to engage private physicians, who tend to view themselves as independent of the system, in new models of primary care. The purpose of this paper is to examine this issue through a social identity lens. Design/methodology/approach Through in-depth interviews with 33 decision-makers and 31 fee-for-service family physicians, supplemented by document review and participant observation, the authors studied a Canadian province’s early efforts to engage physicians in primary care renewal initiatives. Findings Recognizing that the existing physician–system relationship was generally distant, decision-makers invested effort in relationship-building. However, decision-makers’ rhetoric, as well as the design of their flagship initiative, evinced an attempt to proceed directly from interpersonal relationship-building to the establishment of formal intergroup partnership, with no intervening phase of supporting physicians’ group identity and empowering them to assume equal partnership. The invitation to partnership did not resonate with most physicians: many viewed it as an inauthentic offer from an out-group (“bureaucrats”) with discordant values; others interpreted partnership as a mere transactional exchange. Such perceptions posed barriers to physician participation in renewal activities. Practical implications The pursuit of a premature degree of intergroup closeness can be counterproductive, heightening physician resistance. Originality/value This study revealed that even a relatively subtle misalignment between a particular social identity management strategy and its intergroup context can have highly problematic ramifications. Findings advance the literature on social identity management and may facilitate the development of more effective engagement strategies.
The analysis from this study suggests that the tool can be used as a part of a multistage process to introduce quality control mechanisms to help raise standards for CME/CPD. It is imperative to develop a cost-effective standardized training protocol that can be implemented at all sites to maximize the reliability of the tool.
Context: Medical schools of geographically large nations have expanded into rural areas to facilitate the development of a sustainable rural pipeline of physicians.Preceptor, or clinical teacher, recruitment at these sites has been an ongoing challenge. However, residents-as-teachers (RaT) curricula have not been modified to support the development of rural teachers. This study aimed to compare teaching opportunities between rural and urban family medicine residents and to identify mechanisms underlying potential differences. Methods:Year-1 and Year-2 family medicine residents at seven Canadian institutions participated in a mixed-methods study utilising a quantitative survey and a qualitative interview. Rural and urban residents rated the quantity and types of teaching opportunities available during their training, from which a chi-squared analysis was completed. Volunteer respondents participated in a structured interview, from which a thematic analysis was performed.Results: Rural family medicine residents had fewer opportunities to teach compared to their urban colleagues. This discrepancy was seen across multiple domains, including informal opportunities when on family medicine rotations, χ 2 (4, n = 242) = 45.26, P < .000, Bonferroni's adjusted P < .000. Thematic analysis centred around determining factors influencing teaching opportunities and identified that the academic context, personal factors and programme factors were key dimensions. Within these dimensions, the number of medical students, a desire to be an educator and administrative support were cited as influences on teaching opportunities. Conclusions:The lack of teaching opportunities for rural trainees is attributable to a combination of practical and organisational factors revealed through thematic analysis.If rural graduates are not comfortable balancing the demands of service and teaching, this could compound the already prevalent issue of rural preceptor recruitment. It is essential to develop a rural-focused RaT curriculum to close this gap and produce competent educators who are ready to inspire generations of rural physicians.
BackgroundThe Manitoba Physician Achievement Review (MPAR) is a 360-degree feedback assessment that physicians undergo every 7 years to retain licensure. Deliberate reflection on feedback has been demonstrated to encourage practice change. The MPAR Reflection Exercise (RE), a peer-assisted debriefing tool, was developed whereby the physician selects a peer with whom to review and reflect on feedback, committing to change. This qualitative study explores how physicians who had undergone the MPAR used the RE, what areas of change are identified and committed to, and what they perceived as the role of reflection in the MPAR process.MethodsThe MPAR RE was piloted out to a cohort of MPAR-reviewed physicians. Thematic analysis was conducted on completed exercises (n = 61). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals (n = 6) who completed the MPAR RE until saturation was reached.ResultsPhysicians reviewed feedback with a range of peers, including colleagues, staff, and spouses. Many physicians were surprised by feedback, both positive and negative, but interviewees found the RE useful in processing feedback. Areas where physicians committed to change were diverse, covering all CanMEDS roles. Most physicians identified themselves as being successful in implementing change, though time, habit, and structures were cited as barriers.ConclusionsPeer-assisted debriefing can assist reflection of multisource feedback. It is easy to implement, is not resource-intensive, and feedback implies that it is effective at promoting change. Participants, with the aid of peers, identified areas for change, developed approaches for change, and largely thought themselves successful at implementing changes. Areas of change included all seven CanMEDS roles.
Background In March 2020, Canada implemented restrictions to curb viral transmission of COVID-19, which resulted in abrupt disruptions to conventional (in-person) clinical care. To retain continuity of care the delivery of primary care services shifted to virtual care. This study examined the nature of virtual visits, characterizing the use and users of virtual care in primary care settings from March 14/20 to June 30/20 of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Retrospective cohort study of primary care providers in Manitoba, Canada that participate in the Manitoba Primary Care Research Network (MaPCReN) and offered ≥ 1 virtual care visit between 03/14/20 and 06/30/20 representing 142,616 patients. Tariff codes from billing records determined the visit type (clinic visit, virtual care). Between 03/14/20, and 06/30/20, we assessed each visit for a follow-up visit between the same patient and provider for the same diagnosis code. Patient (sex, age, comorbidities, visit frequency, prescriptions) and provider (sex, age, clinic location, provider type, remuneration, country of graduation, return visit rate) characteristics describe the study population by visit type. Generalized estimating equation models describe factors associated with virtual care. Results There were 146,372 visits provided by 154 primary care providers between 03/14/20 and 06/30/20, of which 33.6% were virtual care. Female patients (OR 1.16, CI 1.09–1.22), patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities (OR 1.71, CI 1.44–2.02), and patients with ≥ 10 prescriptions (OR 2.71, 2.2–1.53) had higher odds of receiving at least one virtual care visit compared to male patients, patients with no comorbidities and patients with no prescriptions. There was no significant difference between the number of follow-up visits that were provided as a clinic visit compared to a virtual care visit (8.7% vs. 5.8%) (p = 0.6496). Conclusion Early in the pandemic restrictions, approximately one-third of visits were virtual. Virtual care was utilized by patients with more comorbidities and prescriptions, suggesting that patients with chronic disease requiring ongoing care utilized virtual care. Virtual care as a primary care visit type continues to evolve. Ongoing provision of virtual care can enhance quality, patient-centered care moving forward.
Background: Although competency in written communication is a core skill, written communication is seldom the focus of formal instruction in medical education. The objective of this intervention was to implement a selfassessment strategy to assist learners in improving their letter writing skills and then to evaluate its feasibility, reliability and potential educational value.Methods: Eight first-year family medicine residents from two teaching sites completing a six month family medicine rotation used a self-assessment process which included a self-study module and an assessment tool for letters. Each resident applied the self-assessment tool to eight to ten consecutive consult/referral request letters. Participants submitted initial and redrafted letters for independent rating.Results: Analysis of the content, style and global ratings of the initial 77 draft letters showed multiple deficiencies in the content of their letters. It was confirmed that by using the self-assessment tool, residents were able to reliably assess the quality of their letters. Residents' assessments and those of the expert closely correlated (Pearson correlation 0.861, p < 0.0001). Over the course of the study the residents' overall performance improved and the difference in total scores between the initial drafts and the rewritten letters narrowed. Conclusion:A self-assessment process of written communication significantly improves the quality and completeness of routine consult/referral request letters.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.