Training, status and migration of general practitioners / family physicians within Europe

The survey intended to explore and identify the training background and status of general practitioners/ family physicians (GPs) in member countries within EURACT (European Academy of Teachers in General Practice/Family Medicine), and to gain an overview of processes involved when GP-trained doctors migrate to work in another member country. A questionnaire, with closed and open-ended questions, was sent to representatives of all 39 EURACT-member countries in 2009. The main outcome measures were the training background and status of GPs in public/private settings in each country and the requirements of additional training and testing when migrating to another country. Forty-one completed questionnaires were received from 31 (79%) of the EURACT countries. The data indicate that specialist training for General Practice/ Family Medicine (GP/FM) is well established throughout and generally required for appointment to public career posts. The data also indicate that European Uniontrained GPs can move freely to most countries with usually no tests of medical knowledge or language proficiency. Orientation to the healthcare system in the destination country is usually not provided. work in public/private GP/FM posts in many European countries, although new appointments to public posts RESEARCH ARTICLE Training, status and migration of General Practitioners/Family Physicians within Europe in nearly all countries require specialist GP training. It was not possible to identify a uniform or agreed approach applied by employing agencies to confirm the medical competence and language skills of migrant doctors and to provide them with orientation to healthcare systems. In the high-context dependent discipline of GP/FM this is of concern.peer-reviewe

Gatekeeping and referrals to cardiologists: General practitioners' views on interactive communications

Objective. Referrals to specialists have not been compulsory in Iceland since 1984. In 2006, referrals were again required for patients to receive reimbursement for part of the cost of appointments with cardiologists. The aim of this study was to explore GPs’ attitudes to the referral system and possible professional gain by interactive communications. Design. Cross-sectional questionnaire survey. Setting, subjects, and main outcome measures. This is part of a larger study in 2007 on referrals from GPs to cardiologists. A questionnaire was sent to all working GPs in Iceland (n = 201 and responsible for 307 000 inhabitants) regarding the referral process, reasons for referrals, how often a response letter was received, and GPs’ attitudes to the referral system. Responses from doctors working in rural areas were compared with those working in Reykjavik and nearby urban areas. Results. The response rate was 63% (126 answers). The mean age of participants was 51; 89% were GP specialists and 60% worked in Reykjavik and nearby urban areas. Almost all respondents (98%) thought that report letters from cardiologists were helpful; 64% (95% confidence interval 53–73) thought that the recently introduced referral system did increase useful information that was beneficial to their patients. There was a statistically significant difference between colleagues working in rural areas and those working in Reykjavik and nearby urban areas regarding several aspects of the referral process. Conclusion. A referral system increases the flow of information and mutual communications between general practitioners and specialists to the benefit of the patients. The geographical location of the health care centre may be of importance regarding the value of the referrals