Medical student and trainee doctor views on the 'good' doctor: Deriving implications for training from a Q-methods study.

PURPOSE: In context of changing patient demographics, this study explores what doctors and medical students believe being a 'good' doctor means and identifies implications for training. METHOD: Using Q-methodology, a purposive sample of 58 UK medical students and trainees sorted 40 responses to the prompt 'Being a "good" doctor means….' Participants explained their array choices in a post-sort questionnaire. Factor-groups, consensus and distinguishing statements were identified using Principal Components Analysis in R. RESULTS: Three factor-groups best described shared and divergent perspectives, accounting for 61.64% of variance. The largest, 'patient-centred generalist' group valued patient wellbeing and empowerment, compassion and complex needs. They prioritised knowledge breadth and understanding other specialties. The 'efficient working doctors' group valued good work-life balance, pay and did not seek challenge. Some believed these made a stressful career sustainable. The 'specialist' group valued skills mastery, expertise, depth of knowledge and leadership. Participant-groups were distributed across these factor-groups, all agreeing early specialisation should be avoided. CONCLUSIONS: The largest factor-group's perceptions of holistic, patient-centred care align with Royal Colleges' curricula adaptions to equip doctors with generalist skills to manage multi-morbid patients. However, curriculum designers should acknowledge implications of generalist approaches for doctors' formulation of professional identities.

Enhancing the quality and safety of care through training generalist doctors: a longitudinal, mixed-methods study of a UK broad-based training programme.

OBJECTIVE: Changing patient demographics make it ever more challenging to maintain the quality and safety of care. One approach to addressing this is the development of training for generalist doctors who can take a more holistic approach to care. The purpose of the work we report here is to consider whether a broad-based training programme prepares doctors for a changing health service. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We adopted a longitudinal, mixed-methods approach, collecting questionnaire data from trainees on the broad-based training (BBT) programme in England (baseline n=62) and comparator trainees in the same regions (baseline n=90). We held 15 focus groups with BBT trainees and one-to-one telephone interviews with trainees post-BBT (n=21) and their Educational Supervisors (n=9). RESULTS: From questionnaire data, compared with comparator groups, BBT trainees were significantly more confident that their training would result in: wider perspectives, understanding specialty complementarity, ability to apply learning across specialties, manage complex patients and provide patient-focused care. Data from interviews and focus groups provided evidence of positive consequences for patient care from BBT trainees' ability to apply knowledge from other specialties. Specifically, insights from BBT enabled trainees to tailor referrals and consider patients' psychological as well as physical needs, thus adopting a more holistic approach to care. Unintended consequences were revealed in focus groups where BBT trainees expressed feelings of isolation. However, when we explored this sentiment on questionnaire surveys, we found that at least as many in the comparator groups sometimes felt isolated. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners with an understanding of care across specialty boundaries can enhance patient care and reduce risks from poor inter-specialty communication. Internationally, there is growing recognition of the place of generalism in medical practice and the need to take a more person-centred approach. Broad-based approaches to training support the development of generalist doctors, which is well-suited to a changing health service.