Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
The College of Family Physicians of Canada
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums
  • My alerts
The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • RSS feeds
  • Follow cfp Template on Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
EditorialCommentary

Segmentation of family medicine

Nicholas Pimlott
Canadian Family Physician October 2018; 64 (10) 710;
Nicholas Pimlott
MD CCFP FCFP
Roles: SCIENTIFIC EDITOR
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading
Figure

The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking. It cannot be changed without changing our thinking.

Albert Einstein

Earlier this year the UK Nuffield Trust published a thought-provoking report entitled Divided We Fall. Getting the Best Out of General Practice.1 In the introduction the author, Dr Rebecca Rosen, states:

The prevailing narrative about general practice is of a broken, out-of-date, cottage industry that needs to be pulled into the 21st century. Repeated face-to-face consultation with a doctor is increasingly seen as the wrong approach to clinical need, with technology-enabled consultations with a variety of health professionals offering new options for assessment, review and treatment.1

At the heart of the report are the following questions: Is there a role for medical generalism in a highly functional health care system? Can the practice of medical generalism be embodied in the traditional GP? Should the work of the GP be “deconstructed” or “segmented” and shared among other providers (teams) to improve care? Or does segmentation reduce the value of traditional general practice? Finally, what needs to be done to secure medical generalism in the future?

In the past, the principles and practice of generalism were embodied in a single provider—the old-fashioned GP or FP who provided comprehensive care to patients, families, and communities from birth to death. In the past 3 generations, this “ideal” has been found both wanting and hard to sustain. Powerful social forces including urbanization, aging populations, medical advances, consumerism, changing patient expectations, and the rise of information technology have put tremendous pressure on the model of the old-fashioned FP.

In this issue we present a research study by Freeman et al that attests to a generational change in the comprehensiveness of care provided by FPs, with a decline over 3 generations of graduates of one residency program (page 750).2 This decline is almost certainly a reflection of these societal pressures, although their current study does not explore this.

One approach to addressing these pressures is to think of the work of the generalist in its parts and divide it accordingly among different members of a “generalist health team.” In the adult populations of high-income countries, for example, about half of all people are relatively healthy and might only require episodic, acute care for relatively simple concerns.1 For these patients, access is more important than continuity and they might benefit from seeing a nonphysician provider or from consultation mediated by technology. Deep knowledge of the person over time might not be important. At the other end of the spectrum are the roughly 1% to 2% of patients with complex medical needs for whom continuity and comprehensiveness are crucial.1 For these patients, face-to-face encounters with an FP, supported by other team members, are necessary and valuable. Among those in between are the roughly 25% of patients with medically unexplained symptoms1 who likely benefit most from what the old-fashioned FP has to offer—deep knowledge of the person developed over time—which would reduce the risk of overinvestigation and overtreatment, sparing patients potential harm.

A key distinction drawn in the Nuffield Trust report is between the task-based, transactional nature of rapid access primary care and the layered, context-specific nature of medical generalism. An integrated model of segmentation is presented in which rapid access services are combined with medical generalist care into a single organization or team in the hope of getting the best of both worlds.1 In many places in Canada, teams that look roughly like this exist, but not all are functioning optimally. Implementing effective team-based care is difficult, requiring time and resources to develop a clear vision and integrate processes across many different providers.3 When family health teams were created in Ontario a decade ago, the emphasis was on access to an FP; while teams were created with valuable nonphysician members including nurse practitioners, social workers, dietitians, and pharmacists, no “play book” was provided on how to make them function optimally. One positive finding in the study by Freeman et al was that FPs working in team settings reported that they were able to provide more comprehensive care.2

Whatever the future of generalist medical practice looks like, much will be lost if the personal physician4 is not at its core, and Green’s dystopian vision of family medicine and health care in the future will surely come to pass.5

Footnotes

  • Cet article se trouve aussi en français à la page 711.

  • Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Rosen R
    . Divided we fall. Getting the best out of general practice. London, UK: Nuffield Trust; 2018. Available from: www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/research/divided-we-fall-getting-the-best-out-of-general-practice. Accessed 2018 Aug 23.
  2. 2.↵
    1. Freeman TR,
    2. Boisvert L,
    3. Wong E,
    4. Wetmore S,
    5. Maddocks H
    . Comprehensive practice. Normative definition across 3 generations of alumni from a single family practice program, 1985 to 2012. Can Fam Physician 2018;64:750-9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Glendenning C
    . Breaking down barriers: integrating health and care services for older people in England. Health Policy 2003;65(2):139-51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Green LA
    . Will people have a personal physician anymore? Dr Ian McWhinney Lecture, 2017. Can Fam Physician 2017;63:909-12.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Green LA
    . The view from 2020: how family practice failed. Fam Med 2001;33(4):320-4.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Family Physician: 64 (10)
Canadian Family Physician
Vol. 64, Issue 10
1 Oct 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The College of Family Physicians of Canada.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Segmentation of family medicine
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The College of Family Physicians of Canada
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The College of Family Physicians of Canada web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Segmentation of family medicine
Nicholas Pimlott
Canadian Family Physician Oct 2018, 64 (10) 710;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Segmentation of family medicine
Nicholas Pimlott
Canadian Family Physician Oct 2018, 64 (10) 710;
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Comprehensive practice
  • La segmentation de la médecine familiale
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Pitfalls and pleasures of pick-and-mix careers: portfolio working and whole-person medicine in general practice
  • Help patients navigate the system
  • At home and away
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Commentary

  • Equipping family physicians to thrive
  • Will blended family physician payment models revive primary care in Canada?
  • Toward an identity and team-based practice rooted in transdisciplinarity
Show more Commentary

Editorial

  • Solving the family medicine crisis
  • Résoudre la crise en médecine familiale
  • Pride and learning in reverse
Show more Editorial

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Collections - English
  • Collections - Française

For Authors

  • Authors and Reviewers
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Permissions
  • Terms of Use

General Information

  • About CFP
  • About the CFPC
  • Advertisers
  • Careers & Locums
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Subscribers

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • RSS Feeds

Copyright © 2025 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Powered by HighWire