{"title":"Family Medicine Practice as Learning Environment: A Medical Student Evaluation in Switzerland.","authors":"Stefania Di Gangi, Oliver Senn, Andreas Plate","doi":"10.2147/AMEP.S492834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Improving the quality of teaching placements in family medicine practice (FMP) could help to address the shortage of primary care physicians. This study aims to investigate students' evaluations of first-exposure FMP placements, to identify clusters of FMPs that might need to improve their placement quality, and to analyze students' perceptions of the FMP as a learning environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The design was a cross-sectional survey study, including all fourth-year undergraduate medical students at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, who completed a mandatory placement in FMP during 2019-2022. The placements consisted of individual teaching and training in the same FMP for 8 half days within an academic year. The primary outcome was the student Likert scale rating of the 14 key questions as indicators of teaching placement quality. Based on these indicators, cluster analysis was used to identify groups of FMPs with the potential for quality improvement. A framework analysis was used to analyze the students' perceptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 713 students (response rate 81%) and 249 FMPs (median [interquartile range]: 2 [1,4] students per FMP) were included. Overall, 86% of the students were satisfied with the placement, and 95% reported that the placement gave them realistic insight into FMP work. A cluster of 25 (10%) FMPs that may improve placement quality was identified. Students most liked the opportunity to gain FMP skills, insight into FMP work, and establishment of patient relationships.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study described students' experiences with FMP and a method for teaching evaluation to identify FMPs that may benefit from interventions to improve their learning environment. This could upgrade the medical education offered and increase the interest in family medicine as a response to the shortage of primary care physicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":"15 ","pages":"1255-1270"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11669275/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S492834","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Improving the quality of teaching placements in family medicine practice (FMP) could help to address the shortage of primary care physicians. This study aims to investigate students' evaluations of first-exposure FMP placements, to identify clusters of FMPs that might need to improve their placement quality, and to analyze students' perceptions of the FMP as a learning environment.
Methods: The design was a cross-sectional survey study, including all fourth-year undergraduate medical students at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, who completed a mandatory placement in FMP during 2019-2022. The placements consisted of individual teaching and training in the same FMP for 8 half days within an academic year. The primary outcome was the student Likert scale rating of the 14 key questions as indicators of teaching placement quality. Based on these indicators, cluster analysis was used to identify groups of FMPs with the potential for quality improvement. A framework analysis was used to analyze the students' perceptions.
Results: A total of 713 students (response rate 81%) and 249 FMPs (median [interquartile range]: 2 [1,4] students per FMP) were included. Overall, 86% of the students were satisfied with the placement, and 95% reported that the placement gave them realistic insight into FMP work. A cluster of 25 (10%) FMPs that may improve placement quality was identified. Students most liked the opportunity to gain FMP skills, insight into FMP work, and establishment of patient relationships.
Conclusion: Our study described students' experiences with FMP and a method for teaching evaluation to identify FMPs that may benefit from interventions to improve their learning environment. This could upgrade the medical education offered and increase the interest in family medicine as a response to the shortage of primary care physicians.