Willingness, concerns, incentives and acceptable remuneration regarding an involvement in teaching undergraduates - a cross-sectional questionnaire survey among German GPs.
Curriculum
General practice
Preceptor recruitment
Preceptorship
Teaching
Undergraduate medical education
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Jan 2019
25 Jan 2019
Historique:
received:
06
03
2018
accepted:
28
12
2018
entrez:
27
1
2019
pubmed:
27
1
2019
medline:
9
5
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Worldwide, many undergraduate general practice curricula include community-based courses at general practitioners' (GPs') offices. Usually the academic general practice departments collaborate with networks of affiliated teaching practices. To successfully master the challenge of network development and extension, more information is needed about GPs' willingness to be involved in different teaching formats, important influencing factors, incentives, barriers, and the need for financial compensation. In this cross-sectional study a questionnaire survey was conducted among all GPs working in Leipzig and environs (German postal code area 04). In addition to descriptive statistics, group comparisons and logistic regression were performed to reveal differences between GPs with and without an interest in teaching. Response rate was 45.3% with 339 analyzable questionnaires. The average age was 52.0 years and 58.4% were women. Sixty-two participants stated that they were already involved in teaching undergraduates. Altogether 60.1% of all GPs and 53.5% among those who didn't teach yet were basically interested in being involved in undergraduate education. The interested GPs could imagine devoting on average 6.9 h per month to teaching activities. GPs interested in teaching were on average younger, were more actively involved in continuing education and professional associations, and more frequently had pre-existing teaching experiences. The willingness to teach differed substantially among teaching formats. GPs were more willing to teach at their own practices rather than at university venues and they preferred skills-oriented content. Comprehensive organization on the part of the university including long-term scheduling and available teaching materials was rated as most important to increase the attractiveness of teaching. Time restraints and decreased productivity were rated as the most important barriers. Interested GPs appreciated financial compensation, particularly for teaching at university venues, and demanded amounts of money corresponding to German GPs' hourly income. The GPs' interest in undergraduate teaching is generally high indicating a substantial pool of potential preceptors. Recruitment strategies should consider the collaboration with institutions involved in residency and continuing education as well as with professional associations. Comprehensive organization by the responsible department should be promoted and time restraints and decreased productivity should be overtly addressed and financially compensated.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Worldwide, many undergraduate general practice curricula include community-based courses at general practitioners' (GPs') offices. Usually the academic general practice departments collaborate with networks of affiliated teaching practices. To successfully master the challenge of network development and extension, more information is needed about GPs' willingness to be involved in different teaching formats, important influencing factors, incentives, barriers, and the need for financial compensation.
METHODS
METHODS
In this cross-sectional study a questionnaire survey was conducted among all GPs working in Leipzig and environs (German postal code area 04). In addition to descriptive statistics, group comparisons and logistic regression were performed to reveal differences between GPs with and without an interest in teaching.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Response rate was 45.3% with 339 analyzable questionnaires. The average age was 52.0 years and 58.4% were women. Sixty-two participants stated that they were already involved in teaching undergraduates. Altogether 60.1% of all GPs and 53.5% among those who didn't teach yet were basically interested in being involved in undergraduate education. The interested GPs could imagine devoting on average 6.9 h per month to teaching activities. GPs interested in teaching were on average younger, were more actively involved in continuing education and professional associations, and more frequently had pre-existing teaching experiences. The willingness to teach differed substantially among teaching formats. GPs were more willing to teach at their own practices rather than at university venues and they preferred skills-oriented content. Comprehensive organization on the part of the university including long-term scheduling and available teaching materials was rated as most important to increase the attractiveness of teaching. Time restraints and decreased productivity were rated as the most important barriers. Interested GPs appreciated financial compensation, particularly for teaching at university venues, and demanded amounts of money corresponding to German GPs' hourly income.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The GPs' interest in undergraduate teaching is generally high indicating a substantial pool of potential preceptors. Recruitment strategies should consider the collaboration with institutions involved in residency and continuing education as well as with professional associations. Comprehensive organization by the responsible department should be promoted and time restraints and decreased productivity should be overtly addressed and financially compensated.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30683085
doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1445-2
pii: 10.1186/s12909-018-1445-2
pmc: PMC6347773
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
33Références
BMJ. 1999 Oct 30;319(7218):1168-71
pubmed: 10541508
Med Educ. 2001 Aug;35(8):789-95
pubmed: 11489108
Med Educ. 2005 Feb;39(2):137-44
pubmed: 15679680
Med Teach. 2006 May;28(3):288-91
pubmed: 16753730
Med Teach. 2006 Sep;28(6):563-5
pubmed: 17074707
Eur J Gen Pract. 2007;13(4):248-51
pubmed: 18324511
Ger Med Sci. 2009 Apr 02;7:Doc02
pubmed: 19675742
Med Educ. 2011 Jul;45(7):722-30
pubmed: 21649705
Swiss Med Wkly. 2012 Mar 19;142:w13537
pubmed: 22430810
Acad Med. 2012 Jun;87(6):735-43
pubmed: 22534597
PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e45846
pubmed: 23029272
BMC Med Educ. 2013 Jun 07;13:83
pubmed: 23758778
BMC Med Educ. 2013 Dec 01;13:157
pubmed: 24289459
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2014 Jul;57(7):892-902
pubmed: 24950838
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2014 Aug 15;31(3):Doc26
pubmed: 25228928
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2014 Aug 15;31(3):Doc35
pubmed: 25228937
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2015 Jan 22;6:45-54
pubmed: 25653570
Fam Med. 2015 Jun;47(6):452-8
pubmed: 26039762
BMJ Open. 2015 Aug 04;5(8):e008265
pubmed: 26243553
Can Fam Physician. 2017 Mar;63(3):e177-e185
pubmed: 28292815
Acad Med. 2017 Aug;92(8):1168-1174
pubmed: 28353497
Ger Med Sci. 2017 Sep 25;15:Doc15
pubmed: 29051721
Fam Med. 2018 Feb;50(2):113-122
pubmed: 29432626
J Fam Pract. 1996 Mar;42(3):243-9
pubmed: 8636675
Br J Gen Pract. 1996 Aug;46(409):457-60
pubmed: 8949323
Fam Med. 1997 Feb;29(2):105-7
pubmed: 9048169
J Fam Pract. 1997 Dec;45(6):487-94
pubmed: 9420584
Br J Gen Pract. 1997 Oct;47(423):623-6
pubmed: 9474824
J Gen Intern Med. 1998 Jul;13(7):485-8
pubmed: 9686716