GP speciality training in areas of deprivation: factors influencing engagement. A qualitative study.
Family medicine
General practice
Inequalities
Postgraduate education
Primary care
Socioeconomic factors
Journal
BJGP open
ISSN: 2398-3795
Titre abrégé: BJGP Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101713531
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
09
11
2018
accepted:
17
12
2018
entrez:
2
8
2019
pubmed:
2
8
2019
medline:
2
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
GP training practices are less likely to be situated in areas of deprivation; little is known about GP views of postgraduate training in such areas. To explore the views of GPs working in deprived areas about GP speciality training (GPST). Qualitative in-depth interviews with GPs working in practices in deprived areas in Scotland. Ten in-depth interviews were conducted with GPs in training and non-training practices, to explore views on training. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim, and inductive thematic analysis was undertaken. The importance of producing 'well-rounded' GPs who are able to work in a variety of environments was highlighted. Trainees need exposure to the specific challenges of deprived contexts (such as early multimorbidity, child protection, and addiction) and the benefit of this for trainees was thought to be invaluable. GPs identified many perceived barriers and benefits to training, some generic but some - such as inspiring the next generation (benefit) or overwhelming workload (barrier) - may be more relevant in areas of high deprivation. Overwhelming workload was the main reason for not becoming a training practice, though some would consider it if supported to develop a training culture. All the GPs, including non-trainers, were involved in optional activities which were felt to be important for resilience. GPs in areas of deprivation highlighted specific skills that could be gained by undertaking at least a part placement in deprived areas, with different skills likely to be gained from affluent areas. National education bodies should consider GP training rotations ensure a variety of training environments.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
GP training practices are less likely to be situated in areas of deprivation; little is known about GP views of postgraduate training in such areas.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To explore the views of GPs working in deprived areas about GP speciality training (GPST).
DESIGN & SETTING
METHODS
Qualitative in-depth interviews with GPs working in practices in deprived areas in Scotland.
METHOD
METHODS
Ten in-depth interviews were conducted with GPs in training and non-training practices, to explore views on training. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim, and inductive thematic analysis was undertaken.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The importance of producing 'well-rounded' GPs who are able to work in a variety of environments was highlighted. Trainees need exposure to the specific challenges of deprived contexts (such as early multimorbidity, child protection, and addiction) and the benefit of this for trainees was thought to be invaluable. GPs identified many perceived barriers and benefits to training, some generic but some - such as inspiring the next generation (benefit) or overwhelming workload (barrier) - may be more relevant in areas of high deprivation. Overwhelming workload was the main reason for not becoming a training practice, though some would consider it if supported to develop a training culture. All the GPs, including non-trainers, were involved in optional activities which were felt to be important for resilience.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
GPs in areas of deprivation highlighted specific skills that could be gained by undertaking at least a part placement in deprived areas, with different skills likely to be gained from affluent areas. National education bodies should consider GP training rotations ensure a variety of training environments.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31366675
pii: bjgpopen19X101644
doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen19X101644
pmc: PMC6662869
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019, The Authors.
Références
BMJ. 1999 Oct 30;319(7218):1168-71
pubmed: 10541508
Aust J Rural Health. 2006 Oct;14(5):173-7
pubmed: 17032291
Fam Med. 2008 Apr;40(4):271-6
pubmed: 18382840
Acad Med. 2008 Nov;83(11):1064-70
pubmed: 18971659
Chronic Illn. 2011 Mar;7(1):45-59
pubmed: 20974642
Br J Gen Pract. 2010 Nov;60(580):797-8
pubmed: 21062544
Br J Gen Pract. 2010 Nov;60(580):846-8
pubmed: 21062550
Med Educ. 2011 Jul;45(7):722-30
pubmed: 21649705
Lancet. 2012 Jul 7;380(9836):37-43
pubmed: 22579043
BMJ. 2012 Jun 19;344:e4152
pubmed: 22718915
PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e45846
pubmed: 23029272
Educ Prim Care. 2013 Feb;24(2):97-104
pubmed: 23498576
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013 Jul;18(3):151-9
pubmed: 23864419
Clin Teach. 2014 Apr;11(2):124-30
pubmed: 24629250
Br J Gen Pract. 2014 Jul;64(624):e440-7
pubmed: 24982497
Educ Prim Care. 2014 Jul;25(4):211-20
pubmed: 25198715
Aust Fam Physician. 2014 Nov;43(11):808-12
pubmed: 25393471
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Oct 29;15:190
pubmed: 26511843
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Jan 13;16:11
pubmed: 26759058
Rural Remote Health. 2016 Jan-Mar;16(1):3550
pubmed: 26765331
Educ Prim Care. 2016 Mar;27(2):106-13
pubmed: 27005838
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Jan;67(654):e10-e19
pubmed: 27872085
Educ Prim Care. 2016 Nov;27(6):462-470
pubmed: 27998257
J R Coll Gen Pract. 1985 Jul;35(276):330-2
pubmed: 4032364
Lancet. 1971 Feb 27;1(7696):405-12
pubmed: 4100731
BMJ. 1996 Jan 13;312(7023):97-101
pubmed: 8555940