Article Figures & Data
Tables
- Table 1.
Demographic characteristics of residents who responded to the T1 and T2 surveys (aggregate data from 6 family medicine residency programs)
CHARACTERISTIC T1, N (%) T2, N (%) Age, y • < 25 52 (15.2) 0 (0.0) • 25–29 176 (51.6) 160 (49.2) • 30–34 60 (17.6) 110 (33.8) • 35–39 23 (6.7) 31 (9.5) • ≥ 40 13 (3.8) 18 (5.5) • No response 17 (5.0) 6 (1.8) Marital status • Single 194 (56.9) 131 (40.3) • Married 98 (28.7) 120 (36.9) • Common law 45 (13.2) 59 (18.2) • Divorced 4 (1.2) 8 (2.5) • Prefer not to answer 0 (0.0) 5 (1.5) • No response 0 (0.0) 2 (0.6) Children • Yes or expecting 54 (15.8) 82 (25.2) • No 285 (83.6) 238 (73.2) • Prefer not to answer 2 (0.6) 3 (0.9) • No response 0 (0.0) 2 (0.6) Sex • Female 210 (61.6) 199 (61.2) • Male 119 (34.9) 122 (37.5) • Prefer not to answer 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) • No response 12 (3.5) 3 (0.9) Childhood environment • Inner city 0 (0.0) 17 (5.2) • Urban or suburban 222 (65.1) 195 (60.0) • Small town 46 (13.5) 44 (13.5) • Rural 42 (12.3) 34 (10.5) • Remote or isolated 6 (1.8) 5 (1.5) • Mixture of environments 22 (6.5) 23 (7.1) • No response 3 (0.9) 7 (2.2) Place of medical school graduation • Canadian medical graduate 276 (80.9) 271 (83.4) • International medical graduate 55 (16.1) 51 (15.7) • No response 10 (2.9) 3 (0.9) Total 341 (100.0) 325 (100.0) “AFTER COMPLETING YOUR RESIDENCY, HOW LIKELY ARE YOU TO PRACTISE IN THE FOLLOWING FM PRACTICE TYPES?” DATA COLLECTION PERIOD CI P VALUE χ2 P VALUE T1, % T2, % Comprehensive care delivered in 1 clinical setting (eg, office) (N for T1 = 336, N for T2 = 316) • Not at all likely or somewhat unlikely 25.6 35.8 NS < .001 • Neutral 31.8 8.5 < .01 • Somewhat likely or highly likely 42.6 55.7 NS Comprehensive care provided across multiple clinical settings (eg, hospital, long-term care facility, office)
(N for T1 = 340, N for T2 = 319)• Not at all likely or somewhat unlikely 5.6 15.0 < .01 < .001 • Neutral 24.7 6.3 < .01 • Somewhat likely or highly likely 69.7 78.7 NS Comprehensive care that includes special interests (eg, sports medicine, emergency medicine, palliative care)
(N for T2 = 312)• Not at all likely or somewhat unlikely NA 14.7 NA NA • Neutral NA 14.4 NA • Somewhat likely or highly likely NA 70.8 NA Focused practice with a commitment to ≥ 1 specific clinical areas (eg, sports medicine, maternity care, emergency medicine, palliative care, hospital medicine) (N for T2 = 314) • Not at all likely or somewhat unlikely NA 49.4 NA NA • Neutral NA 14.0 NA • Somewhat likely or highly likely NA 36.6 NA FM—family medicine, NA—not asked in T1, NS—not significant.
- Table 3.
Changes from entry to exit (T1 to T2) in residents’ intentions to practise in domains outside the ambulatory clinical setting: The 7 family medicine clinical domains outside of ambulatory care are palliative or end-of-life care, care in long-term care facilities, intrapartum care, care in emergency departments, in-hospital clinical procedures, hospital care, and care in the home.
“IN YOUR FUTURE PRACTICE AS A FAMILY PHYSICIAN, HOW LIKELY ARE YOU TO PROVIDE CARE IN EACH OF THE FOLLOWING DOMAINS, PRACTICE SETTINGS, AND SPECIFIC POPULATIONS IN THE FIRST 3 YEARS?” T1, N (%) T2, N (%) Care across the life cycle only 16 (5.8) 15 (5.6) Care across the life cycle plus 1 domain 35 (12.8) 36 (13.3) Care across the life cycle plus 2 domains 63 (23.0) 45 (16.7) Care across the life cycle plus 3 domains 66 (24.1) 49 (18.1) Care across the life cycle plus 4 domains 50 (18.2) 49 (18.1) Care across the life cycle plus 5 domains 25 (9.1) 32 (11.9) Care across the life cycle plus 6 domains 13 (4.7) 21 (7.8) Care across the life cycle plus 7 domains 6 (2.2) 23 (8.5) Total 274 (100.0) 270 (100.0) - Table 4.
Change in the number of domains outside the ambulatory clinical setting residents report they are likely to include in their future practices
NO. OF DOMAINS OUTSIDE AMBULATORY CLINICAL SETTING T1, N (%) T2, N (%) P VALUE* Care across the life cycle plus 0 to 3 domains 180 (65.7) 145 (53.7) .005 Care across the life cycle plus 4 to 7 domains 94 (34.3) 125 (46.3) ↵* Fisher exact test.
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Informing family physician payment reform in Canada: protocol for a cross-provincial, multimethod study
- Trends colliding: Aging comprehensive family physicians and the growing complexity of their patients
- Collision de tendances: Vieillissement des medecins de famille en soins complets et complexite grandissante de leurs patients
- Characteristics of family physicians with additional training or focused practices in caring for older adults: Population-based retrospective cohort study
- Soins primaires pour tous: Le Canada peut sinspirer de pays semblables ayant un niveau eleve de continuite relationnelle entre patientele et centres de soins primaires
- Primary care for all: lessons for Canada from peer countries with high primary care attachment
- Impact of early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic on family medicine residency training: Analysis of survey data
- Resident and early-career family physicians focused practice choices in Canada: a qualitative study
- Alternative payment models: A path forward
- Modes de remuneration alternatifs: Une voie a suivre
- Family physician perspectives on primary care reform priorities: a cross-sectional survey
- Entre les lignes, hors du cadre : la valeur ajoutee dun medecin generaliste: Conference Dr Ian McWhinney 2019
- Outside the lines: the added value of a generalist practitioner: Dr Ian McWhinney Lecture, 2019
- Regional differences in where and how family medicine residents intend to practise: a cross-sectional survey analysis