Comparing GPs according to their model of practice: are multiprofessional group practices associated with more favourable working conditions?

Abstract

In the generalized context of general practitioner shortages and transitions towards team-based primary care, we investigated how the different practising models relate to general practitioners’ labour supply. More precisely, we analysed the association between practice models—solo, groups of general practitioners, and multiprofessional groups—and their reported labour supply and level of satisfaction with work-life balance. We used a French cross-sectional survey from 2018 that surveyed a representative national sample of 3,032 self-employed general practitioners about their working conditions. We found that the model of practice was significantly associated with differences in physician labour supply at the intensive margin and that group practice appeared to be positively associated with general practitioners’ reported satisfaction with work-life balance. In terms of weekly working time, only practice in groups of general practitioners was associated with a significantly lower labour supply. However, general practitioners in groups–whether groups of general practitioners or multiprofessional groups–reported more annual leave and seemed more willing to diversify their activity by devoting more time to secondary activities, including salaried activities. Consistently, general practitioners working in groups were also more likely than solo practitioners to report being satisfied with their work-life balance. Although group practice, whether multiprofessionnal or not, seems to be well suited to meeting the new aspirations of general practitioners, those working in multiprofessional groups are associated with a higher level of weekly work supply, which might justify special attention from the public authorities.