Professional independence in general practice

The first association one gets when thinking about independence in is that independence is good. We all want to be independent and free. For me, coming form Slovenia, this feeling is perhaps even deeper. Slovenia regained its independence after a thousand years of being ruled by Germans, Austrians, Italians, Hungarians and Serbs. Nevertheless, we have always cherished the fact that we are different and have tried hard to maintain our independence as much as possible. What is interesting is that even though it took us a thousand years to reach independence, we are now trying very hard to join the European union. We are trading our independence for a value of belonging to EU. And the feelings of pride that we are achieving its standards are comparable to the feelings of pride when we became independent from Yugoslavia. This is a strange contradiction. When I lecture about independence to medical students, I do that in a context of family as a unit of care. I try to describe family as a system and how it develops over time and the problems it faces during various stages. I can not do that without addressing the systems theory, which is very useful in describing complex systems.peer-reviewe

Twenty-five years of the international Bled course for teachers of family medicine in Europe: glancing back and looking forward

The international Bled course for teacher training has played a central role in faculty development in family medicine for the past 25 years. The course was originally designed to promote faculty development for family medicine teachers in the new academic discipline of family medicine in Slovenia in 1990 and to introduce new topics into the family medicine curriculum. In this background paper, we perform a SCOT analysis (strengths, challenges, opportunities, and threats) of the current course, evaluating participant feedback and reviewing past topics and their impact on local and international teaching programmes. We also review the place of the course in the context of other teacher-training programmes in family medicine in Europe. We found that the structure and learning aims of the Bled course have remained stable over 25 years. It provides a safe, well-structured learning environment for the participants even though the course topic is different every year. The course has had a significant impact on curriculum development and teacher training in Slovenia as well as in many other countries in Europe and beyond. Because of the positive impact of the course and the high degree of satisfaction of the participants and course directors, it seems worthwhile to continue this endeavour. New directions for the course will depend on the learning needs of the participants and the evolving medical curricula in the countries they represent.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

What factors affect patients' recall of general practitioners' advice?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In order for patients to adhere to advice, provided by family doctors, they must be able to recall it afterwards. However, several studies have shown that most patients do not fully understand or memorize it. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of demographic characteristics, education, amount of given advice and the time between consultations on recalled advice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective survey, lasting 30 months, was conducted in an urban family practice in Slovenia. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors for poorer recall.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>250 patients (87.7% response rate) received at least one and up to four pieces of advice (2.4 ± 0.8). A follow-up consultation took place at 47.4 ± 35.2 days. The determinants of better recall were high school (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.15-0.99, p = 0.049) and college education (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.10-1.00, p = 0.050), while worse recall was determined by number of given instructions three or four (OR 26.1, 95% CI 3.15-215.24, p = 0.002; OR 56.8, 95% CI 5.91-546.12, p < 0.001, respectively) and re-test interval: 15-30 days (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.06-10.13, p = 0.040), 31-60 days (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.28-8.07, p = 0.013) and more than 60 days (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.05-6.02, p = 0.038).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Education was an important determinant factor and warrants further study. Patients should be given no more than one or two instructions in a consultation. When more is needed, the follow-up should be within the next 14 days, and would be of a greater benefit to higher educated patients.</p

Offline eLearning for undergraduates in health professions: A systematic review of the impact on knowledge, skills, attitudes and satisfaction

Background: The world is short of 7.2 million health–care workers and this figure is growing. The shortage of teachers is even greater, which limits traditional education modes. eLearning may help overcome this training need. Offline eLearning is useful in remote and resource–limited settings with poor internet access. To inform investments in offline eLearning, we need to establish its effectiveness in terms of gaining knowledge and skills, students’ satisfaction and attitudes towards eLearning. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of offline eLearning for students enrolled in undergraduate, health–related university degrees. We included randomised controlled trials that compared offline eLearning to traditional learning or an alternative eLearning method. We searched the major bibliographic databases in August 2013 to identify articles that focused primarily on students’ knowledge, skills, satisfaction and attitudes toward eLearning, and health economic information and adverse effects as secondary outcomes. We also searched reference lists of relevant studies. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies. We synthesized the findings using a thematic summary approach. Findings: Forty–nine studies, including 4955 students enrolled in undergraduate medical, dentistry, nursing, psychology, or physical therapy studies, met the inclusion criteria. Eleven of the 33 studies testing knowledge gains found significantly higher gains in the eLearning intervention groups compared to traditional learning, whereas 21 did not detect significant differences or found mixed results. One study did not test for differences. Eight studies detected significantly higher skill gains in the eLearning intervention groups, whilst the other 5 testing skill gains did not detect differences between groups. No study found offline eLearning as inferior. Generally no differences in attitudes or preference of eLearning over traditional learning were observed. No clear trends were found in the comparison of different modes of eLearning. Most of the studies were small and subject to several biases. Conclusions: Our results suggest that offline eLearning is equivalent and possibly superior to traditional learning regarding knowledge, skills, attitudes and satisfaction. Although a robust conclusion cannot be drawn due to variable quality of the evidence, these results justify further investment into offline eLearning to address the global health care workforce shortage

Family medicine in post-communist Europe needs a boost. Exploring the position of family medicine in healthcare systems of Central and Eastern Europe and Russia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The countries of Central and Eastern Europe have experienced a lot of changes at the end of the 20th century, including changes in the health care systems and especially in primary care. The aim of this paper is to systematically assess the position of family medicine in these countries, using the same methodology within all the countries.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A key informants survey in 11 Central and Eastern European countries and Russia using a questionnaire developed on the basis of systematic literature review.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Formally, family medicine is accepted as a specialty in all the countries, although the levels of its implementation vary across the countries and the differences are important. In most countries, solo practice is the most predominant organisational form of family medicine. Family medicine is just one of many medical specialties (e.g. paediatrics and gynaecology) in primary health care. Full introduction of family medicine was successful only in Estonia.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Some of the unification of the systems may have been the result of the EU request for adequate training that has pushed the policies towards higher standards of training for family medicine. The initial enthusiasm of implementing family medicine has decreased because there was no initiative that would support this movement. Internal and external stimuli might be needed to continue transition process.</p

The european primary care monitor: structure, process and outcome indicators

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Scientific research has provided evidence on benefits of well developed primary care systems. The relevance of some of this research for the European situation is limited.</p> <p>There is currently a lack of up to date comprehensive and comparable information on variation in development of primary care, and a lack of knowledge of structures and strategies conducive to strengthening primary care in Europe. The EC funded project Primary Health Care Activity Monitor for Europe (PHAMEU) aims to fill this gap by developing a Primary Care Monitoring System (PC Monitor) for application in 31 European countries. This article describes the development of the indicators of the PC Monitor, which will make it possible to create an alternative model for holistic analyses of primary care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic review of the primary care literature published between 2003 and July 2008 was carried out. This resulted in an overview of: (1) the dimensions of primary care and their relevance to outcomes at (primary) health system level; (2) essential features per dimension; (3) applied indicators to measure the features of primary care dimensions. The indicators were evaluated by the project team against criteria of relevance, precision, flexibility, and discriminating power. The resulting indicator set was evaluated on its suitability for Europe-wide comparison of primary care systems by a panel of primary care experts from various European countries (representing a variety of primary care systems).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The developed PC Monitor approaches primary care in Europe as a multidimensional concept. It describes the key dimensions of primary care systems at three levels: structure, process, and outcome level. On structure level, it includes indicators for governance, economic conditions, and workforce development. On process level, indicators describe access, comprehensiveness, continuity, and coordination of primary care services. On outcome level, indicators reflect the quality, and efficiency of primary care.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A standardized instrument for describing and comparing primary care systems has been developed based on scientific evidence and consensus among an international panel of experts, which will be tested to all configurations of primary care in Europe, intended for producing comparable information. Widespread use of the instrument has the potential to improve the understanding of primary care delivery in different national contexts and thus to create opportunities for better decision making.</p