What influences on their professional development do general practice trainees report from their hospital placements? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical learning environment is important in GP specialty training and impacts professional development. Uniquely for GP trainees, about half of their training periods occur in a hospital environment, which is not their final workplace. There is still little understanding of how hospital-based training influences GP's professional development. OBJECTIVES: To seek the views of GP trainees on how their hospital experience contributes to their professional development as a GP. METHODS: This international and qualitative study seeks the views of GP trainees from Belgium, Ireland, Lithuania, and Slovenia. Semi-structured interviews were performed in the original languages. A joint thematic analysis in the English language resulted in key categories and themes. RESULTS: From the four themes identified, GP trainees were found to experience additional challenges on top of the service provision/education tensions, which are common to all hospital trainees. Despite these, the hospital rotation component of GP training is valued by trainees. A strong finding of our study is the need to ensure that learning from the hospital placements is placed firmly in the context of general practice, e.g. GP placements prior or parallel with the hospital placements, educational activities resourced by GPs during their hospital experience, encouraging hospital teachers to have greater awareness of the educational needs of GPs, including an awareness of their training curriculum. CONCLUSION: This novel study highlights how hospital placements for GP trainees could be enhanced. Further study could be broadened to recently qualified GPs, which may uncover new areas of interest.

Antibiotic prescription and clinical management of common infections among general practitioners in Latvia, Lithuania, and Sweden: a pilot survey with a simple protocol.

Comparative information on diagnosis-related antibiotic prescribing patterns are scarce from primary care within and between countries. To describe and compare antibiotic prescription and routine management of infections in primary care in Latvia (LV), Lithuania (LT) and two study sites in Sweden (SE), a cross-sectional observational study on patients who consulted due to sypmtoms compatible with infection was undetraken. Infection and treatment was detected and recorded by physicians only. Data was collected from altogether 8786 consecutive patients with infections in the three countries. Although the overall proportion of patients receiving an antibiotic prescription was similar in all three countries (LV and LT 42%, SE 38%), there were differences in the rate of prescription between the countries depending on the respective diagnoses. While penicillins dominated among prescriptions (LV 58%, LT 67%, SE 70%), phenoxymethylpenicillin was most commonly prescribed in Sweden (57% of all penicillins), while it was amoxicillin with or without clavulanic acid in Latvia (99%) and Lithuania (85%) respectively. Pivmecillinam and flucloxacillin, which accounted for 29% of penicillins in Sweden, were available neither in Latvia nor in Lithuania. The applied methodology was simple, and provided useful information on differences in treatment of common infections in ambulatory care in the absence of available computerized diagnosis-prescription data. Despite some limitations, the method can be used for assessment of intention to treat and compliance to treatment guidelines and benchmarking locally, nationally, or internationally, just as the point prevalence surveys (PPS) protocols have been used in hospitals all over Europe.