BackgroundIn Germany, there is a shortage of young physicians in several specialties, the situation of general practitioners (GP) being especially precarious. The factors influencing the career choice of German medical students are poorly understood. This study aims to identify factors influencing medical students' specialty choice laying a special focus on general practice.MethodsThe study was designed as a cross-sectional survey. In 2010, students at the five medical schools in the federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany) filled out an online-questionnaire. On 27 items with 5-point Likert scales, the students rated the importance of specified individual and occupational aspects. Furthermore, students were asked to assign their intended medical specialty.Results1,299 students participated in the survey. Thereof, 1,114 students stated a current choice for a specialty, with 708 students choosing a career in one of the following 6 specialties: internal medicine, surgery, gynaecology and obstetrics, paediatrics, anaesthetics and general practice. Overall, individual aspects ('Personal ambition', 'Future perspective', 'Work-life balance') were rated as more important than occupational aspects (i.e. 'Variety in job', 'Job-related ambition') for career choice. For students favouring a career as a GP individual aspects and the factor 'Patient orientation' among the occupational aspects were significantly more important and 'Job-related ambition' less important compared to students with other specialty choices.ConclusionsThis study confirms that future GPs differ from students intending to choose other specialties particularly in terms of patient-orientation and individual aspects such as personal ambition, future perspective and work-life balance. Improving job-conditions in terms of family compatibility and work-life balance could help to increase the attractiveness of general practice. Due to the shortage of GPs those factors should be made explicit at an early stage at medical school to increase the number of aspirants for general practice.

The SES6G is a reliable and valid instrument to assess patients' self-efficacy for managing chronic diseases. It may enhance further research in German-speaking countries and appears to be a valuable measure for clinical practice.

With respect to the Two-Factor Theory of job satisfaction both components, intrinsic and extrinsic, are essential for dentists but the presence of intrinsic motivating factors like the opportunity to use abilities has most positive impact on job satisfaction. The findings of this study will be helpful for further activities to improve the working conditions of dentists and to ensure quality of care.

BackgroundPrimary care teams' job satisfaction is an important issue in quality of care. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the job satisfaction of general practitioners (GPs) and non-physician staff and to explore the elements that may impact on overall job satisfaction for GPs and non-physician staff separately.MethodsThe study was based on data from the European Practice Assessment and used an observational design. Job satisfaction was measured with the 10-items Warr-Cook-Wall questionnaire with 7-point-Likert scales. Job satisfaction of GPs and non-physician staff was compared and impact on overall job satisfaction was analysed with stepwise linear regression analyses for both samples separately.ResultsThe study population consisted of 2878 non-physician staff (mean age: 38 years) and 676 GPs (mean age: 50 years). The actual mean working time per week of GPs was 50.0 hours and of practice staff 26.0 hours. Both were satisfied with colleagues and fellow workers (mean = 5.99 and mean = 6.18 respectively) and mostly dissatisfied with their income (mean = 4.40 and mean = 4.79 respectively). For GPs the opportunity to use their abilities (β = 0.638) and for non-physician staff recognition for their work (β = 0.691) showed the highest scores of explained variance (R2 = 0.406 and R2 = 0.477 respectively) regarding overall job satisfaction.ConclusionsNon-physician staff evaluate their job satisfaction higher than GPs except recognition for work. Job satisfaction of members of primary care teams is important because poor satisfaction is associated with suboptimal healthcare delivery, poor clinical outcomes and higher turnover of staff.

BackgroundPrevious research has shown a correlation between physician job satisfaction and patient satisfaction with quality of care, but the connection between job satisfaction of other primary care team members and patient satisfaction is yet unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether there is an association between patient satisfaction and job satisfaction of the members of patient care teams.DesignThe study was based on data from the European Practice Assessment and used an observational design.Setting676 primary care practices in Germany.Participants47 168 patients, 676 general practitioners (practice principals), 305 physician colleagues (trainees and permanently employed physicians) and 3011 non-physician practice members (nurses, secretaries).Main outcome measuresPatient evaluation was measured using the 23-item EUROPEP questionnaire. Job satisfaction was measured using the 10-item Warr–Cook–Wall job satisfaction scale and further items relating to practice structure. Bivariate correlations were applied in which factors of patient satisfaction and practice structure were compared with physicians and non-physicians satisfaction.ResultsPatient satisfaction correlates positively with the general job satisfaction of the non-physician (r=0.25, p<0.01) and no significant correlation was found for the general job satisfaction of practice principals and physician colleagues. Patients' satisfaction with the practice organisation correlates positively with the general job satisfaction of the non-physicians (r=0.30, p<0.01) and their view of practice structure (r=0.29, p<0.01).ConclusionsThe correlation between non-physician team member satisfaction and patient satisfaction was higher than the correlation between satisfaction of physicians and patients. Patients seem to be sensitive to aspects of practice structure.

No abstract

Prioritizing initiatives to maintain high levels of, or to improve the job satisfaction of practice assistants, is important for recruitment and retention. It will also help to improve working conditions for both practice assistants and GPs and create an environment to provide better quality care.

BackgroundThere is a research gap concerning the evaluation of the oral healthcare of refugees. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the oral health of refugees and to estimate the costs of oral care.MethodsThe study was conceptualized as a pilot study. The study participants were refugees who lived either in collective living quarters or at a reception center in a region of the federal state of Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. The cross-sectional design was complemented by dental screening. Data were collected from August 2016 until July 2017. The basic condition of the teeth was evaluated using a convenience sample by a single dentist. The assessment of caries was carried out visually in accordance with the International Caries Detection and Assessment System from code 3 and higher. The DMF-T (decayed, (D), missing, (M), filled (F), teeth (T)) index was calculated. The costs of oral care were analyzed for conservative treatment (filling or extraction) and for prosthetic treatment (missing teeth) in the form of a bridge or crown.ResultsThe dental screening was attended by 102 refugees, with a mean age of 28 years. A total of 49% of the study sample suffered from toothache, and the DMF-T index had a mean of 6.89. For 92% of the study sample, treatment was indicated, and a cost estimate of the treatment could be calculated. The average cost of conservative treatment was estimated to be 205.86 EUR, and the average cost of prosthetic treatment was estimated to be 588.0 EUR. The oral healthcare costs of the different treatment procedures were higher for refugees that presented with toothache than for those without toothache, with the exception of prosthetic treatment procedures.ConclusionsThere is a lack of population-based data that survey the oral health status of refugees. Therefore, the current study presents an initial overview regarding the oral health status and the potential costs of oral healthcare of refugees.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12903-018-0535-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.