4 research outputs found
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
Assessment of General Practitioners' Performance in Daily Practice: The EURACT Performance Agenda of General Practice/Family Medicine
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