全科医生专业培训:以社会立法为基础的支助的发展-数据驱动的介绍。

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES GMS Journal for Medical Education Pub Date : 2024-11-15 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3205/zma001707
Simon Rass, Charlotte Weber, Bernhard Gibis
{"title":"全科医生专业培训:以社会立法为基础的支助的发展-数据驱动的介绍。","authors":"Simon Rass, Charlotte Weber, Bernhard Gibis","doi":"10.3205/zma001707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Comprehensive provision of general healthcare (i.e. primary care) within the populace is contingent on there being enough general practitioners (GPs) in proximity to patients. It is no longer the case that vacated allocated positions for primary-care physicians are being filled in all regions. Support for specialist training in general medical practice is one of the measures intended to ensure provision of GP services. This analytical project aims to make a data-driven contribution to gauging the impact of such support on primary care in Germany, while also delivering pointers for further research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>On the basis of routinely collected data, the history of such support was examined in detail for all practice-based, statutory health insurance (SHI)-accredited GPs during the period 2016-2022. In the analysis, GPs were broken down by whether they took up full-time or part-time roles, self-employed or salaried roles, and roles in a practice or in an ambulatory healthcare centre (MVZ).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the period under review, the proportion of those who have both recently commenced work as SHI-accredited GPs and had previously used support for their specialist training, increased from 57% to 81%. The total number of new GPs (headcount) rose from 1,590 to 1,955. Results indicate that those who had availed themselves of this support take up self-employed and full-time roles more often than those who had not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both take-up of support for specialist training, and the number of new GPs, increased markedly during the period under review. The data does not indicate any causal links. However, these results could form a jumping-off point for further research (in general) into support for specialist training, and (in particular) into how this may impact these individuals' subsequent work roles.</p>","PeriodicalId":45850,"journal":{"name":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","volume":"41 5","pages":"Doc52"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656181/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Specialist training in general practice: Developments in social-legislation-based support - a data-driven introduction.\",\"authors\":\"Simon Rass, Charlotte Weber, Bernhard Gibis\",\"doi\":\"10.3205/zma001707\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Comprehensive provision of general healthcare (i.e. primary care) within the populace is contingent on there being enough general practitioners (GPs) in proximity to patients. It is no longer the case that vacated allocated positions for primary-care physicians are being filled in all regions. Support for specialist training in general medical practice is one of the measures intended to ensure provision of GP services. This analytical project aims to make a data-driven contribution to gauging the impact of such support on primary care in Germany, while also delivering pointers for further research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>On the basis of routinely collected data, the history of such support was examined in detail for all practice-based, statutory health insurance (SHI)-accredited GPs during the period 2016-2022. In the analysis, GPs were broken down by whether they took up full-time or part-time roles, self-employed or salaried roles, and roles in a practice or in an ambulatory healthcare centre (MVZ).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the period under review, the proportion of those who have both recently commenced work as SHI-accredited GPs and had previously used support for their specialist training, increased from 57% to 81%. The total number of new GPs (headcount) rose from 1,590 to 1,955. Results indicate that those who had availed themselves of this support take up self-employed and full-time roles more often than those who had not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both take-up of support for specialist training, and the number of new GPs, increased markedly during the period under review. The data does not indicate any causal links. However, these results could form a jumping-off point for further research (in general) into support for specialist training, and (in particular) into how this may impact these individuals' subsequent work roles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"GMS Journal for Medical Education\",\"volume\":\"41 5\",\"pages\":\"Doc52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656181/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"GMS Journal for Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001707\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001707","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

摘要

目的:在民众中全面提供一般保健(即初级保健)取决于是否有足够的全科医生(gp)靠近患者。现在已不再是所有地区的初级保健医生空缺职位都得到填补的情况了。支持一般医疗实践方面的专家培训是旨在确保提供全科医生服务的措施之一。该分析项目旨在以数据为导向,评估此类支持对德国初级保健的影响,同时为进一步研究提供指导。方法:在常规收集数据的基础上,详细调查2016-2022年期间所有以实践为基础的法定健康保险(SHI)认可的全科医生的此类支持历史。在分析中,全科医生按他们是全职还是兼职、自雇还是受薪、在诊所还是在流动医疗中心(MVZ)工作进行了分类。结果:在本报告所述期间,最近开始作为卫生认证全科医生工作并曾接受过专业培训支持的比例从57%增加到81%。新全科医生总数(员工总数)从1590人增至1955人。结果表明,那些利用这种支助的人比没有利用这种支助的人更多地从事自营职业和全职工作。结论:在本报告所述期间,对专科培训的支持和新全科医生的数量都显著增加。数据没有显示出任何因果关系。然而,这些结果可以为进一步的研究(一般来说)形成一个起点,以支持专业培训,特别是这将如何影响这些个人随后的工作角色。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Specialist training in general practice: Developments in social-legislation-based support - a data-driven introduction.

Aims: Comprehensive provision of general healthcare (i.e. primary care) within the populace is contingent on there being enough general practitioners (GPs) in proximity to patients. It is no longer the case that vacated allocated positions for primary-care physicians are being filled in all regions. Support for specialist training in general medical practice is one of the measures intended to ensure provision of GP services. This analytical project aims to make a data-driven contribution to gauging the impact of such support on primary care in Germany, while also delivering pointers for further research.

Methods: On the basis of routinely collected data, the history of such support was examined in detail for all practice-based, statutory health insurance (SHI)-accredited GPs during the period 2016-2022. In the analysis, GPs were broken down by whether they took up full-time or part-time roles, self-employed or salaried roles, and roles in a practice or in an ambulatory healthcare centre (MVZ).

Results: During the period under review, the proportion of those who have both recently commenced work as SHI-accredited GPs and had previously used support for their specialist training, increased from 57% to 81%. The total number of new GPs (headcount) rose from 1,590 to 1,955. Results indicate that those who had availed themselves of this support take up self-employed and full-time roles more often than those who had not.

Conclusions: Both take-up of support for specialist training, and the number of new GPs, increased markedly during the period under review. The data does not indicate any causal links. However, these results could form a jumping-off point for further research (in general) into support for specialist training, and (in particular) into how this may impact these individuals' subsequent work roles.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
GMS Journal for Medical Education
GMS Journal for Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
30
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: GMS Journal for Medical Education (GMS J Med Educ) – formerly GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung – publishes scientific articles on all aspects of undergraduate and graduate education in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, pharmacy and other health professions. Research and review articles, project reports, short communications as well as discussion papers and comments may be submitted. There is a special focus on empirical studies which are methodologically sound and lead to results that are relevant beyond the respective institution, profession or country. Please feel free to submit qualitative as well as quantitative studies. We especially welcome submissions by students. It is the mission of GMS Journal for Medical Education to contribute to furthering scientific knowledge in the German-speaking countries as well as internationally and thus to foster the improvement of teaching and learning and to build an evidence base for undergraduate and graduate education. To this end, the journal has set up an editorial board with international experts. All manuscripts submitted are subjected to a clearly structured peer review process. All articles are published bilingually in English and German and are available with unrestricted open access. Thus, GMS Journal for Medical Education is available to a broad international readership. GMS Journal for Medical Education is published as an unrestricted open access journal with at least four issues per year. In addition, special issues on current topics in medical education research are also published. Until 2015 the journal was published under its German name GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung. By changing its name to GMS Journal for Medical Education, we wish to underline our international mission.
期刊最新文献
Competency-based education - the reform of postgraduate medical training in Switzerland. Change in postgraduate medical education - how much didactic shaping is possible at all? A document analysis of the guideline regulations on specialty training 1992-2018 with a focus on surgery. Establishing an online training program for pediatric surgery residents during and after the COVID-19 pandemic - lessons learned. Design, development and implementation of a national faculty development program to promote CBME in graduate medical education in Switzerland. Designing structured postgraduate training programs using agile methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1