[Attrition and poor performance in general practice training: age, competence and knowledge play a role]. / Uitval en stagnatie in de opleiding tot huisarts. Leeftijd, competenties en kennis spelen een rol.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate which determinants are related to poor performance and forced attrition in the first year residency in general practice (GP). DESIGN: Observational retrospective cohort study. METHOD: We collected data relating to personal characteristics such as age, sex and clinical experience from residents who started the GP training in Utrecht, the Netherlands, in the period March 2005-August 2007. We also collected competence scores from the domains 'medical expertise', 'doctor-patient communication' and 'professionalism', as well as scores on a national GP knowledge test. The outcome measures were 'poor performance' and 'forced attrition'. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyse correlations between personal characteristics, competence scores on the 3 domains and knowledge scores in the first trimester on the one hand and poor performance or forced attrition on the other. RESULTS: 215 residents started the GP training. In the first trimester a quarter of the residents had an insufficient score in 1 or more of the domains. Competence scores were mutually correlated, but did not correlate with the knowledge score. 18 residents showed poor performance and 3 were forced to stop their training. Poor performance and forced attrition were correlated with age (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 1.1; 95% CI: 1.0-1.3), insufficient knowledge (adjusted OR: 8.9; 3.0-26.3) and medical expertise (adjusted OR: 2.1; 1.1-4.0) at the beginning of the training. CONCLUSION: Age, insufficient knowledge of general practice, and insufficient competence in the domain of 'medical expertise' at the beginning of the training are risk factors for poor performance by residents and attrition from their GP training.

Impact of various questionnaires on the prevalence of erectile dysfunction. The ENIGMA-study.

The prevalence estimates of erectile dysfunction (ED) vary considerably across studies. These differences may be attributed to used definitions of ED. Quantitative data on the effect of different definitions of ED on the prevalence are lacking, because precise information on the used definition and questionnaire is often absent. Aim of this study was to quantify the effect of using different questionnaires for ED on the prevalence estimates. In all, 5721 mail surveys on sexual problems and ED were sent to all men (aged >18 y) in 12 general practices in the middle of the Netherlands of which 2117 were completed. The questionnaire contained Enigma (WHO), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), Cologne Erectile Inventory (KEED) and one question (Boxmeer, Krimpen). The prevalence of ED based on the various questionnaires and the effect of these questionnaires on risk factor relationships was compared. IIEF gave the highest age specific and overall ED prevalence, KEED the lowest. The difference in prevalence was 16.8%. The agreement (kappa coefficient) between the various ED definitions varied from 0.52 (IIEF & KEED) to 0.95 (Enigma & Boxmeer). The number of risk factor relations were similar for the Dutch studies, reduced for the IIEF and KEED. This study provides evidence that differences in questionnaires to assess ED have a considerable effect on the (age specific) prevalence estimates and little on the risk factor relations. The number of questions of the survey appears not to be responsible for differences in the prevalence of ED and risk factor relations, however they affect the response rate. Uniform use is strongly recommended, since a 'golden standard' for ED assessment (by questionnaire) is lacking. A short questionnaire with one or two questions is recommended for example the one from the Boxmeer-study. These data may be used to adjust (age-specific) prevalence rates comparing ED prevalence in the open population across studies.

Erectile dysfunction in primary care: prevalence and patient characteristics. The ENIGMA study.

The availability of adequate treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) triggers studies into the prevalence of ED in the general population. Yet, previous studies showed different prevalence estimates partly due to differences in patient selection, in (unclear) definitions of ED and in assessment. ENIGMA has been designed to study the prevalence of ED in the general population of The Netherlands, using the WHO definition with a description of the way of assessment. In all, 5721 mail surveys were sent to all men, aged 18 y and older in 12 general practices in The Netherlands. A total of 5601 were included in the study and 2117 (38%) were completed. A total of 38% of the men reported to have ever had some kind of erectile problem. The prevalence of ED was 17% (6% mild, 4% moderate and 7% complete). Age, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, penile disorders, irradiation in the pelvic region, relational problems, fear for failure, surmenage, medication use and regular consumption of alcohol were independently related to ED. Men with ED were less content with their (sexual) life and had less confidence in sexual performance. Presence of ED was negatively related to affected happiness in life. ED is commonly found in men and is related to age, medication, comorbidity and lifestyle factors. Men with ED perceive a lower quality of (sex)life. Doctors should be aware of the presence of ED and its consequences in patients.

Simulated patients in assessing consultation skills of trainees in general practice vocational training: a validity study.

Although simulated patients are increasingly used in medical education, little research has been carried out on their validity. Validity in this case defines the relationship between performance with a simulated patient and performance with a real patient. One of the objectives of this study was to determine the validity of the use of simulated patients in assessing the consultation skills of trainees in vocational training at the Department of General Practice, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands. A check-list with a rating scale was used to assess the consultation skills of trainees at the department with simulated patients as well as in their training practices with real patients. The simulated and the selected practice cases were patients with complex multi-conditional problems like low back pain, headache and chest pain. The consultation skills were subdivided into four groups: the patient-centered approach, the non-somatic approach, communication skills and interpersonal skills. The measurement of skills, in particular of consultation skills, is very difficult. A description is given of the way the research group solved this problem. The analysis was performed by determining the sensitivity and predictive value of the assessment of a simulated encounter with a routine practice encounter. A difference existed in the assessed level of consultation skills in the simulated encounter compared to the level in the training practice. In simulation the level of consultation skills was higher than in day-to-day practice. This difference can reflect the difference between competence and performance. Competence is defined as what a doctor is capable of doing and performance as what a doctor actually does in day-to-day practice.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The association between peer consultations and three aspects of clinical competence.

The relationship between the clinical competence of general practitioners and the degree of peer consultation about diagnostic and therapeutic problems was studied. Three aspects of clinical competence are discerned: attention paid to somatic aspects, patient-orientation and risk of unnecessary harm of the management. Clinical competence has been measured by a written simulation of patient-doctor encounters using five patients and assessment procedures in a study with a correlational design. For this study 49 subjects were selected from a population of 184 GPs who completed their vocational training in general practice at the University of Utrecht between 1975 and 1980. They were selected from those who consult their colleagues frequently and systematically about a variety of patients' problems and from those who do so little or not at all. The 49 subjects did not differ from the remainder in several relevant aspects such as practice setting, subscription to medical journals, etc. The 49 GPs are relatively consistent in the quality of attention they pay to somatic aspects. The consistency with regard to the two other aspects is rather low, especially regarding the risk of unnecessary harm. Attention paid to somatic aspects is connected with patient orientation. The latter is also connected with risk of unnecessary harm, but the former is not. The three aspects are more or less separate aspects of clinical competence. Peer consultation has a direct relationship with quality of attention paid to somatic aspects; GPs who do not consult among peers anyway display a lower quality of attention to somatic aspects in comparison to those who do so.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Do peer consultations improve quality of care in general practice?

The present study relates to three aspects of quality of care in general practice: attention paid to somatic aspects, patient orientation and risk of unnecessary harm. Quality of care had been measured by (a) a written simulation of patient-doctor encounters, which includes five patients and (b) rating procedures. The study has been carried out in two steps. Firstly several aspects of peer consultation have been investigated in a group of 184 doctors (response rate: 83%), who had their vocational training in the department of General Practice of the University of Utrecht. One third of the GPs consulted colleagues frequently and continued to do so for long periods, dealing systematically with a variety of problems, one third did so infrequently or unsystematically, and one third did little or no consulting at all. A relationship was found between the type of practice and consulting behaviour: 20% of those who practice alone never consulted peers, whereas those in group practices and health centres are accustomed to do so regularly. Secondly, 49 doctors were selected from the 184 mentioned above. The 49 did not differ from the remainder in several relevant aspects such as practice setting, subscription to medical journals, etc. Peer consultation seems to have a direct relationship with the quality of attention paid to somatic aspects; GPs who do not consult among peers in any way display a lower quality of attention to somatic aspects in comparison to the others. In this study these GPs are all solo physicians.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)