Future Primary Care Research Articles

US Graduate Medical Education, 2004-2005

Over the last decade, the primary care specialties have experienced an ebb and flow in popularity. A description of the future primary care workforce may inform planning for the health care needs of our population. To describe characteristics of physicians training in primary care specialties over the past 9 years and to monitor trends in the characteristics of the entire residency population. Descriptive survey study of the National GME Census, conducted by the American Medical Association and Association of American Medical Colleges, which jointly surveyed 8246 allopathic graduate medical education (GME) programs during the academic year 2004-2005 about active, transferred, and graduated residents, as well as about program characteristics. Program directors confirmed the status of 97.3% of active residents. The accompanying program survey was completed by 7163 (87%) of the program directors. General trends in the numbers and characteristics of all residents, fellows, and training programs, with specific trends for residents and fellows training in the primary care specialties and subspecialties over the past 9 years. The census counted 101 291 physicians-in-training during the 2004-2005 academic year, the largest number ever recorded by this survey. The number of osteopathic medical school graduates (DOs) in allopathic GME decreased from 5838 in 2003-2004 to 5675, following many years of annual increases. The number of residents in primary care specialties reached a peak in the mid 1990s. The number of family medicine residents who are graduates of US allopathic medical schools (USMDs) has fallen from 8232 (77.6%) in 1998-1999 to 4848 (51.7%) in 2004-2005. The number of primary care residents who are graduates of foreign medical schools and US citizens (USIMGs) nearly doubled between 1995-1996 (n = 1768) and 2004-2005 (n = 3304). The number of USIMGs training in internal medicine or pediatrics subspecialties increased by 45.7% between 1995-1996 (n = 622) and 2004-2005 (n = 906). The number of pediatric subspecialty fellows grew 55.7%, mostly because of the near doubling of USMDs, from 813 to 1617. More than half of primary care residents are women (52.5%). All primary care specialties and subspecialties experienced gains in the proportion of female residents, with the greatest in obstetrics/gynecology, which increased by 28.7% (57.9% in 1995-1996 vs 74.5% in 2004-2005). An increasing proportion of physicians are pursuing subspecialty training, while the number in primary care specialties has leveled off. Trends in GME suggest that the primary care medical workforce of the future will include more women, more IMGs, and more DOs.

Closing the gap between internal medicine training and practice: Recommendations from recent graduates

Closing the gap between internal medicine training and practice: Recommendations from recent graduates

The Future of Primary Care

The Future of Primary Care

A fragile future for primary care nursing?

Government plans for health services rely on a vibrant population of qualified nurses prepared to take on new roles and work differently to deliver the improvement and expansion of NHS services. Much depends on an increase in new nurses, improved nurse retention and a continuing flow of nurse returners. Indeed, there is growing evidence that low nurse staff levels are associated with poorer care outcomes such as increased mortality rates, higher cross-infection and other infection rates, and more staff errors (Buchan and Seccombe, 2004).

The Future of Primary Care

The Future of Primary Care

Book Review The Future of Primary Care Edited by Jonathan Showstack, Arlyss Anderson Rothman, and Susan B. Hassmiller. 328 pp. San Francisco, Jossey–Bass, 2004. $50. 0-7879-7243-6

Book Review The Future of Primary Care Edited by Jonathan Showstack, Arlyss Anderson Rothman, and Susan B. Hassmiller. 328 pp. San Francisco, Jossey–Bass, 2004. $50. 0-7879-7243-6

Primary care pediatrics: 2004 and beyond.

Changes in medicine domestically and globally are transforming primary care in the United States. Many have suggested that primary care is in crisis or at least at a crossroads in the United States. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently devoted much of one issue to this topic.1 Primary care for children and adolescents, however, was not addressed specifically. This article focuses on pediatrics and identifies potential roles and new models for primary care pediatrics. The Institute of Medicine has defined primary care as “the provision of integrated, accessible health care services by clinicians who are accountable for addressing a large majority of personal health care needs, developing a sustained partnership with patients, and practicing in the context of family and community.”2 Starfield3 has defined 4 attributes of primary care including first-contact care, longitudinality, comprehensiveness, and coordination. September 11, 2001, the anthrax scare, and emerging threats such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) have brought a new focus on the importance of individual-level contacts in addressing population-level threats. Before these world events, however, primary care pediatrics was already grappling with its identity and responding to significant changes in medical systems, science, and family needs. The pace and scope of these changes are such that primary care pediatricians of the future will not be performing the same role as today. Historically, American medicine has tended to be reactive rather than proactive in defining its roles in society. However, dynamic change demands collective reflection; it is time to be proactive in assessing the needs of patients, exploring potential roles as health care providers, and developing the mechanisms to redefine the primary care pediatrician of the future. Projecting future trends requires reflection on the history of the profession of preventive pediatrics. In the 1800s, few physicians in the United States routinely … Address correspondence to Tina L. Cheng, MD, MPH, Johns Hopkins University Department of Pediatrics, 600 N Wolfe St, Park 392, Baltimore, MD 21287. E-mail: tcheng2{at}jhmi.edu

Correction: The Future of Primary Care

Correction: The Future of Primary Care

Specialist physicians providing primary care services in Colorado.

There is general consensus that the size of the US physician workforce now exceeds the health care needs of the American public. There is a greater proportion of specialists than primary care physicians, a specialty mix different from that of most other developed countries. The Colorado Board of Medical Examiners sent a one-page questionnaire to all physicians licensed to practice in the state. It contained the question: "How many hours in the last week did you provide primary care services, defined as either preventive care, routine physical exams, or treatment of common ailments?" The responses of physicians who reported non-primary-care medical specialties were analyzed with respect to their personal and practice characteristics. Just under half (46.5%) of the 2745 specialist respondents reported having provided primary care services. As a group, however, 27.9% of specialist physicians' direct patient care time was devoted to primary care activities. The amount of primary care services being provided was greater among those not board-certified in their specialties, osteopathic physicians, and specialists spending less time in direct patient care. Additional evaluation is needed with a more comprehensive definition of primary care than used in this article, which includes important but difficult-to-measure elements, such as the integration of services, a sustained partnership with patients, and practice in the context of family and community. To the extent possible, this definition should not rely on physician self-definition of which examinations are routine and which ailments are common. However, the contribution of specialists should be considered in future primary care needs assessments, and specialists who experience low demand for their particular specialties may be especially inclined to provide primary care services.

A unique set of interactions: the MSU sustained partnership model of nurse practitioner primary care.

To present a unified conceptual model that identifies the integral processes of nurse practitioner (NP) care delivery and that integrates major structural influences and potential outcomes. The model is further characterized to delineate the unique and "value-added" nature of NP primary care and to describe how this nature may be correlated with specific clinical outcomes. Extensive review of the literature, relevant conceptual models, clinical experiences of th authors, and two sets of qualitative dat exploring differences between NP practice an other practices. The basis of NP primary care is the unique provider-client relationship that develops within the primary care setting. This relationship is oriented toward (a) helping client become empowered to more appropriately manage their own care in a way that will best meet their needs, (b) encouraging mutual deci sion making, (c) ensuring clients' continuity o care, and (d) providing a holistic approach to primary care. The major structural influences are NP role components, interdisciplinary practice relationships, budget resources and payer mix, and environmental characteristics. The potential outcomes are increased health promoting behaviors, improved utilization of care, higher client satisfaction levels, and improved health status. NPs can use this model to articulate the unique contribution of NP practice and its interrelationships within the broader primary care setting. Practicing NPs can use this framework to better understand the complexities of their current and future primary care practices. Faculty can utilize the concepts to help guide students' understanding of their prospective roles as advanced practice nurses. Finally, this conceptual framework can inform research about specific NP processes and related outcomes. A clearly delineated model that accurately depicts structures, processes, and outcomes relevant to NP primary care can strengthen NP education, distinguish NP practice, and advance evidenced-based research linking NP practice and outcomes.

The Future of Primary Care

The Future of Primary Care

The future of primary care.

In light of the proposed General Medical Services contract, nurses have the opportunity to take the lead in primary care as GPs become more specialised or even disappear altogether

Primary care at a crossroads.

In response to concerns about the future of primary care, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation sponsored a meeting in October 2001 in Glen Cove, New York, of 45 leaders in primary care and other health sectors. The purpose was to discuss the current and future challenges to primary care and to develop new and innovative ideas about how primary care might meet the needs of our current and future population. The premise of the meeting was that primary care is at a crossroads, which could lead to a new renaissance or a continued decline. Principles and ideas need to be identified to construct new primary care systems. As background for the meeting, 15 papers were written by experts in health care policy and primary care. Included in this supplement are revised versions of 4 of these papers, which present an overview of the current crisis, the implications of patients' views of primary care, the Chronic Illness Model as one possible solution, and a prediction of a tiering in the way primary care is delivered in the future. The final paper presents ideas and suggestions, based in part on the discussions at the meeting, about opportunities to move toward another renaissance of primary care.

Chronic illness management: what is the role of primary care?.

An estimated 99 million Americans live with a chronic illness. Meeting the needs of this population is one of the major challenges facing the U.S. health care system today and in the future. Dozens of studies, surveys, and audits have revealed that sizable proportions of chronically ill patients have not received effective therapy and do not have optimal disease control. The consistent findings of generally substandard care for many chronic conditions have spurred proposals that care be shifted to specialists or disease management programs. Published evidence to date does not indicate any clear superiority of these alternatives to primary care. The defining features of primary care (that is, continuity, coordination, and comprehensiveness) are well suited to care of chronic illness. A rapidly growing body of health services research points to the design of the care system, not the specialty of the physician, as the primary determinant of chronic care quality. The future of primary care in the United States may depend on its ability to successfully redesign care systems that can meet the needs of a growing population of chronically ill patients.

Towards a nurse-led primary care system

One of the reasons for the postponement of the announcement of the new General Medical Services (GMS) contract until late February is that the mandarins in Whitehall village wish to publish their “radical”White Paper on the future of primary care. Just how radical will the Whitehall folk dare to be, and how well-informed are their plans?

Debt and other influences on career choices among surgical and primary care residents in a community-based hospital system

Background: To evaluate debt and other factors that help formulate the career paths of future surgical and primary care physicians, a survey was undertaken. Methods: Surgical specialty (SS) and primary care (PC) residents were surveyed regarding demographics, factors influencing choice of specialty, methods of financing education, debt characteristics, and outlooks regarding future earnings and practice characteristics. Results: The clinical years of medical school and personalities of specialists and residents were important factors in career choices for both PC and SS. The length of residency, desirable lifestyle, and working hours were all more important to PC residents. Surgeons found intellectual challenge and procedure-based practice of greater importance. Although not highly regarded by either group, scholarship obligation and student loans had a significantly greater impact on specialty choice and practice plans for PC residents. At the completion of training, 55% of SS and 28% of PC residents anticipate owing more than $100,000. Debt was especially significant in specialty choice and practice plans for PC residents with debt over $100,000. Conclusions: Surgical residents are less concerned about personal sacrifices in their quest to become surgeons. It appears state funded scholarships are successful in attracting students to primary care. Both SS and PC residents have significant debt, although, SS residents have greater financial debt than primary care residents. However, the anticipation of indebtedness was a more significant factor in determination of career path for PC.

An evaluation of primary dental care practitioners in commissioning groups

Objectives To evaluate two total purchasing (TP) sites and ascertain whether general dental practitioners (GDPs) could be successfully included in the total purchasing model of health care commissioning. Another objective was to examine the role GDPs may play in future primary care commissioning groups and trusts.

The ability to successfully include primary dental care practitioners in commissioning groups.

To evaluate two total purchasing (TP) sites and ascertain whether general dental practitioners (GDPs) could be successfully included in the total purchasing model of health care commissioning. Another objective was to examine the role GDPs may play in future primary care commissioning groups and trusts. An observational cross-sectional study of two dental purchasing pilots in the North West Region. Two TP sites were studied, one in South Cheshire, the other East Lancashire. Each TP organisation had a dental subgroup which had a formal structure and was given an active role in dental healthcare service decision making. General dental practitioners' ability to manage dental health care provision in the selected sites and the suitability and effectiveness of the services managed by them. GDPs were willing and able to form cohesive primary care commissioning organisations but attitudes in secondary care prevented the implementation of their decisions. Structural, organisational and psychological changes would be necessary if GDP led purchasing were to be successfully implemented. Such changes are vital if GDPs and the dental profession are to have an effective role in the newly formed primary care groups and trusts.

Academic careers in general practice and primary care.

In the past 10 years, significant developments in general practice teaching and research have led to the considerable growth of academic general practice as a discipline. This paper reviews issues relating to these developments, particularly career pathways and training aspects. The need to extend these advances to the broadening arena of primary health care has given further impetus for the development of academic careers. General practice will need to work closely with secondary care, community health, and social services to develop primary health care in its broadest sense, and an evidence base, generated by relevant research and evaluation, must underpin all of this. Structural and funding changes to undergraduate education, postgraduate training and primary care research have created a range of opportunities for general practice clinicians to define career pathways, not formerly available, within multiprofessional and multidisciplinary departments and groups. Education for future general practice and primary care must underpin developments as much as a research base. Relevant masters' degrees and diplomas are now widely available, and extended vocational training and higher professional education will enable general practitioners in their formative years to consider academic opportunities.

Neuroscience education of undergraduate medical students. Part II: outcome improvement.

Because of political and economic pressures, primary care physicians are now charged with greater responsibility for the care of patients with disease processes definitively managed by neurosurgeons. The goal of this study was to establish the feasibility and efficacy of a neurosurgical curriculum designed to teach future primary care physicians about these diseases. A compact, seven-lecture curriculum was developed to teach 3rd-year medical students about degenerative spine disease, stroke, tumor- and hydrocephalus-related raised intracranial pressure, head and spine injury, and subarachnoid hemorrhage. This curriculum was given as part of a 6-week pilot course that included neurology, neurosurgery, ophthalmology, and rehabilitation medicine components. This course was administered to two groups of 18 medical students, and an examination was administered at the end of the pilot course. The same examination was administered to an additional 19 students immediately after their completion of the neurology course currently required. Students enrolled in the pilot neuroscience course performed significantly better (p<0.001) on the examination than those who had completed the standard neurology course. Striking improvements were noted in the recognition and management of head injury, hydrocephalus, and radiculopathy. Inclusion of a short neurosurgery-related curriculum in a combined neuroscience course significantly improved student performance on an examination focusing on the recognition and management of common neurosurgical disorders. Because primary care physicians are responsible for the initial recognition and management of these disorders, the knowledge gained may lead to improved patient care.