"Family doctors are also people": a qualitative analysis of how family physicians managed competing personal and professional responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Family physicians (FPs) fill an essential role in public health emergencies yet have frequently been neglected in pandemic response plans. This exclusion harms FPs in their clinical roles and has unintended consequences in the management of concurrent personal responsibilities, many of which were amplified by the pandemic. The objective of our study was to explore the experiences of FPs during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand how they managed their competing professional and personal priorities. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with FPs from four Canadian regions between October 2020 and June 2021. Employing a maximum variation sampling approach, we recruited participants until we achieved saturation. Interviews explored FPs' personal and professional roles and responsibilities during the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers that they encountered, and any gender-related experiences. Transcribed interviews were thematically analysed. RESULTS: We interviewed 68 FPs during the pandemic and identified four overarching themes in participants' discussion of their personal experiences: personal caregiving responsibilities, COVID-19 risk navigation to protect family members, personal health concerns, and available and desired personal supports for FPs to manage their competing responsibilities. While FPs expressed a variety of ways in which their personal experiences made their professional responsibilities more complicated, rarely did that affect the extent to which they participated in the pandemic response. CONCLUSIONS: For FPs to contribute fully to a pandemic response, they must be factored into pandemic plans. Failure to appreciate their unique role and circumstances often leaves FPs feeling unsupported in both their professional and personal lives. Comprehensive planning in anticipation of future pandemics must consider FPs' varied responsibilities, health concerns, and necessary precautions. Having adequate personal and practice supports in place will facilitate the essential role of FPs in responding to a pandemic crisis while continuing to support their patients' primary care needs.

Practice- and System-Based Interventions to Reduce COVID-19 Transmission in Primary Care Settings: A Qualitative Study.

Using qualitative interviews with 68 family physicians (FPs) in Canada, we describe practice- and system-based approaches that were used to mitigate COVID-19 exposure in primary care settings across Canada to ensure the continuation of primary care delivery. Participants described how they applied infection prevention and control procedures (risk assessment, hand hygiene, control of environment, administrative control, personal protective equipment) and relied on centralized services that directed patients with COVID-19 to settings outside of primary care, such as testing centres. The multi-layered approach mitigated the risk of COVID-19 exposure while also conserving resources, preserving capacity and supporting supply chains.

Development and validation of a rurality index for healthcare research in Japan: a modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVES: Rural-urban healthcare disparities exist globally. Various countries have used a rurality index for evaluating the disparities. Although Japan has many remote islands and rural areas, no rurality index exists. This study aimed to develop and validate a Rurality Index for Japan (RIJ) for healthcare research. DESIGN: We employed a modified Delphi method to determine the factors of the RIJ and assessed the validity. The study developed an Expert Panel including healthcare professionals and a patient who had expertise in rural healthcare. SETTING: The panel members were recruited from across Japan including remote islands, mountain areas and heavy snow areas. The panel recruited survey participants whom the panel considered to have expertise. PARTICIPANTS: The initial survey recruited 100 people, including rural healthcare providers, local government staff and residents. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Factors to include in the RIJ were identified by the Expert Panel and survey participants. We also conducted an exploratory factor analysis on the selected factors to determine the factor structure. Convergent validity was examined by calculating the correlation between the index for physician distribution and the RIJ. Criterion-related validity was assessed by calculating the correlation with average life expectancy. RESULTS: The response rate of the final survey round was 84.8%. From the Delphi surveys, four factors were selected for the RIJ: population density, direct distance to the nearest hospital, remote islands and whether weather influences access to the nearest hospital. We employed the factor loadings as the weight of each factor. The average RIJ of every zip code was 50.5. The correlation coefficient with the index for physician distribution was -0.45 (p<0.001), and the correlation coefficients with the life expectancies of men and women were -0.35 (p<0.001) and -0.12 (p<0.001), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study developed the RIJ using a modified Delphi method. The index showed good validity.

Natural history of abdominal pain in family practice: Longitudinal study of electronic medical record data in southwestern Ontario.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the frequency, natural history, and outcomes of 3 subtypes of abdominal pain (general abdominal pain, epigastric pain, localized abdominal pain) among patients visiting Canadian family practices. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with a 4-year longitudinal analysis. SETTING: Southwestern Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1790 eligible patients with International Classification of Primary Care codes for abdominal pain from 18 family physicians in 8 group practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The symptom pathways, the length of an episode, and the number of visits. RESULTS: Abdominal pain accounted for 2.4% of the 15,149 patient visits and involved 14.0% of the 1790 eligible patients. The frequencies of each of the 3 subtypes were as follows: localized abdominal pain, 89 patients, 1.0% of visits, and 5.0% of patients; general abdominal pain, 79 patients, 0.8% of visits, and 4.4% of patients; and epigastric pain, 65 patients, 0.7% of visits, and 3.6% of patients. Those with epigastric pain received more medications, and patients with localized abdominal pain underwent more investigations. Three longitudinal outcome pathways were identified. Pathway 1, in which the symptom remains at the end of the visit with no diagnosis, was the most common among patients with all subtypes of abdominal symptoms at 52.8%, 54.4%, and 50.8% for localized, general, and epigastric pain, respectively, and the symptom episodes were relatively short. Less than 15% of patients followed pathway 2, in which a diagnosis is made and the symptom persists, and yet the episodes were long with 8.75 to 16.80 months' mean duration and 2.70 to 4.00 mean number of visits. Pathway 3, in which a diagnosis is made and there are no further visits for that symptom, occurred approximately one-third of the time, with about 1 visit over about 2 months. Prior chronic conditions were common across all 3 subtypes of abdominal pain ranging from 72.2% to 80.0%. Psychological symptoms consistently occurred at a rate of approximately one-third. CONCLUSION: The 3 subtypes of abdominal pain differed in clinically important ways. The most frequent pathway was that the symptom remained with no diagnosis, suggesting a need for clinical approaches and education programs for care of symptoms themselves, not merely in the service of coming to a diagnosis. The importance of prior chronic conditions and psychological conditions was highlighted by the results.

"There's nothing like a good crisis for innovation": a qualitative study of family physicians' experiences with virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Prior to the pandemic, Canada lagged behind other Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in the uptake of virtual care. The onset of COVID-19, however, resulted in a near-universal shift to virtual primary care to minimise exposure risks. As jurisdictions enter a pandemic recovery phase, the balance between virtual and in-person visits is reverting, though it is unlikely to return to pre-pandemic levels. Our objective was to explore Canadian family physicians' perspectives on the rapid move to virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform both future pandemic planning for primary care and the optimal integration of virtual care into the broader primary care context beyond the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 68 family physicians from four regions in Canada between October 2020 and June 2021. We used a purposeful, maximum variation sampling approach, continuing recruitment in each region until we reached saturation. Interviews with family physicians explored their roles and experiences during the pandemic, and the facilitators and barriers they encountered in continuing to support their patients through the pandemic. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed for recurrent themes. RESULTS: We identified three prominent themes throughout participants' reflections on implementing virtual care: implementation and evolution of virtual modalities during the pandemic; facilitators and barriers to implementing virtual care; and virtual care in the future. While some family physicians had prior experience conducting remote assessments, most had to implement and adapt to virtual care abruptly as provinces limited in-person visits to essential and urgent care. As the pandemic progressed, initial forays into video-based consultations were frequently replaced by phone-based visits, while physicians also rebalanced the ratio of virtual to in-person visits. Medical record systems with integrated capacity for virtual visits, billing codes, supportive clinic teams, and longitudinal relationships with patients were facilitators in this rapid transition for family physicians, while the absence of these factors often posed barriers. CONCLUSION: Despite varied experiences and preferences related to virtual primary care, physicians felt that virtual visits should continue to be available beyond the pandemic but require clearer regulation and guidelines for its appropriate future use.

Family physicians' responses to personal protective equipment shortages in four regions in Canada: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite well-documented increased demands and shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) during previous disease outbreaks, health systems in Canada were poorly prepared to meet the need for PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the primary care sector, PPE shortages impacted the delivery of health services and contributed to increased workload, fear, and anxiety among primary care providers. This study examines family physicians' (FPs) response to PPE shortages during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to inform future pandemic planning. METHODS: As part of a multiple case study, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with FPs across four regions in Canada. During the interviews, FPs were asked to describe the pandemic-related roles they performed over different stages of the pandemic, facilitators and barriers they experienced in performing these roles, and potential roles they could have filled. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was employed to identify recurring themes. For the current study, we examined themes related to PPE. RESULTS: A total of 68 FPs were interviewed across the four regions. Four overarching themes were identified: 1) factors associated with good PPE access, 2) managing PPE shortages, 3) impact of PPE shortages on practice and providers, and 4) symbolism of PPE in primary care. There was a wide discrepancy in access to PPE both within and across regions, and integration with hospital or regional health authorities often resulted in better access than community-based practices. When PPE was limited, FPs described rationing and reusing these resources in an effort to conserve, which often resulted in anxiety and personal safety concerns. Many FPs expressed that PPE shortages had come to symbolize neglect and a lack of concern for the primary care sector in the pandemic response. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic response, hospital-centric plans and a lack of prioritization for primary care led to shortages of PPE for family physicians. This study highlights the need to consider primary care in PPE conservation and allocation strategies and to examine the influence of the underlying organization of primary care on PPE distribution during the pandemic.

The roles of family physicians during a pandemic.

Family physicians play important roles throughout all stages of a pandemic response; however, actionable descriptions outlining these roles are absent from current pandemic plans. Using a multiple case study design, we conducted a document analysis and interviewed 68 family physicians in four Canadian regions. We identified roles performed by family physicians in five distinct stages of pandemic response: pre-pandemic, phased closure and re-opening, acute care crisis, vaccination, and pandemic recovery. In addition to adopting public health guidance to ensure continued access to primary care services, family physicians were often expected to operationalize public health roles (eg, staffing assessment centres), modulate access to secondary/tertiary services, help provide surge capacity in acute care facilities, and enhance supports and outreach to vulnerable populations. Future pandemic plans should include family physicians in planning, explicitly incorporate family physician roles, and ensure needed resources are available to allow for an effective primary care response.

Focused practice in family medicine: Quantitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with having a focused practice among a sample of family medicine graduates in Canada and to assess the characteristics of FPs with focused practices and the range of services provided by these FPs in relation to the full scope of office-based care. DESIGN: Secondary analyses of cross-sectional data from the 2013-2014 Western Family Medicine Resident Follow-Up Survey. SETTING: Western University in London, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: Western University family medicine residency graduates who completed the program between 1985 and 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physician and practice characteristics and the clinical services that survey participants provide. RESULTS: Completion of postgraduate third-year (PGY3) training was associated with having a focused practice. Focused practice FPs were more likely to be remunerated by fee-for-service, alternative payment plans, or alternative funding plans compared with non-focused practice FPs, who were more likely to participate in group payment models. Focused practice FPs appeared to be a heterogeneous group who were distinguished by being either an office-based focused practice FP (OBFFP) or a non-office-based focused practice FP (NOBFFP). Office-based focused practice FPs were less likely than NOBFFPs to have completed PGY3 training and more likely to work under a fee-for-service or group payment model. Further, the OBFFP group offered a greater variety of primary care services than the NOBFFP group, but offered less variety than non-focused practice FPs. CONCLUSION: Completion of PGY3 training and payment through certain remuneration models were both associated with focused practice. Important differences exist between OBFFPs and NOBFFPs. The overall service provision of focused practice FPs was centred on specialized areas, especially among those practising in non-office-based settings. Novel findings from this study provide insights for family medicine education, work force planning, and policy making in the Canadian health system.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening in an academic family practice: Short-term impact of guideline changes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening rates in the 6 months before and after the introduction of updated Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) guidelines to determine effects on practice patterns, as well as to determine whether certain patient characteristics impact AAA screening rates. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Academic family health centre in London, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: Male patients between the ages of 65 and 80. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Screening rates for AAA before and after the guideline update were compared using the normal approximation of the binomial distribution. Analysis of demographic characteristic effects on screening rates was completed with the Fisher exact test. Number of visits to the clinic with a primary care provider within the study period and imaging type were collected. RESULTS: Of the 266 patients included in the study, 160 patients were eligible for screening at the start of the study period, 6 months before publication of the CTFPHC AAA guideline. Individuals eligible for screening visited the clinic an average (SD) of 2.44 (1.82) times in the 6 months before and 2.66 (1.99) times in the 6 months after. Overall, 69 individuals had AAA screening completed and 9 had a discussion of AAA screening without any imaging, for a total uptake rate of 88.5% for those who had screening recommended. The overall imaging rate was 48.9%. There was no statistically significant difference in screening rates between the time periods (P=.337) among those eligible for screening. For demographic characteristics for risk stratification, 7 individuals had a documented family history, of whom 5 had imaging of their abdominal aorta performed, plus 1 additional individual who had screening recommended but not completed. This was not statistically significant relative to the total population (P=.0598). Positive smoking status (active or ex-smoker) was more common, with 135 individuals having a relevant smoking history. Approximately half of these current and former smokers (68 individuals [50.4%]) had any sort of abdominal aortic imaging performed or recommended, which was not statistically significantly different compared with non-smokers (62 of 126 imaging performed or recommended, 49.2%; P=.9016). CONCLUSION: Screening practices did not change appreciably with the introduction of the CTFPHC AAA screening guidelines. Further research is needed to improve AAA screening rates. It is worth exploring electronic medical record-based reminders, nursing staff involvement in screening, screening programs via public health, and point-of-care ultrasound screening in a primary care setting.

Virtual family physician care during COVID-19: a mixed methods study using health administrative data and qualitative interviews.

BACKGROUND: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid shift in primary health care from predominantly in-person to high volumes of virtual care. The pandemic afforded the opportunity to conduct a deep regional examination of virtual care by family physicians in London and Middlesex County, Ontario, Canada that would inform the foundation for virtual care in our region post-pandemic. OBJECTIVES: (1) to determine volumes of in-person and virtual family physicians visits and characteristics of the family physicians and patients using them during the early COVID-19 pandemic; (2) to determine how virtual visit volumes changed over the pandemic, compared to in-person; and (3) to explore family physicians' experience in virtual visit adoption and implementation. METHODS: We conducted a concurrent mixed-methods study of family physicians from March to October 2020. The quantitative component examined mean weekly number of total, in-person and virtual visits using health administrative data. Differences in outcomes according to physician and practice characteristics for pandemic periods were compared to pre-pandemic. The qualitative study employed Constructivist Grounded Theory, conducting semi-structured family physicians interviews; analyzing data iteratively using constant comparative analysis. We mapped themes from the qualitative analysis to quantitative findings. RESULTS: Initial volumes of patients decreased, driven by fewer in-person visits. Virtual visit volumes increased dramatically; family physicians described using telephone almost entirely. Rural family physicians reported video connectivity issues. By early second wave, total family physician visit volume returned to pre-pandemic volumes. In-person visits increased substantially; family physicians reported this happened because previously scarce personal protective equipment became available. Patients seen during the pandemic were older, sicker, and more materially deprived. CONCLUSION: These results can inform the future of virtual family physician care including the importance of continued virtual care compensation, the need for equitable family physician payment models, and the need to attend to equity for vulnerable patients. Given the move to virtual care was primarily a move to telephone care, the modality of care delivery that is acceptable to both family physicians and their patients must be considered.

Family physician leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic: roles, functions and key supports.

PURPOSE: Strong leadership in primary care is necessary to coordinate an effective pandemic response; however, descriptions of leadership roles for family physicians are absent from previous pandemic plans. This study aims to describe the leadership roles and functions family physicians played during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada and identify supports and barriers to formalizing these roles in future pandemic plans. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This study conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with family physicians across four regions in Canada as part of a multiple case study. During the interviews, participants were asked about their roles during each pandemic stage and the facilitators and barriers they experienced. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was used to identify recurring themes. FINDINGS: Sixty-eight family physicians completed interviews. Three key functions of family physician leadership during the pandemic were identified: conveying knowledge, developing and adapting protocols for primary care practices and advocacy. Each function involved curating and synthesizing information, tailoring communications based on individual needs and building upon established relationships. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Findings demonstrate the need for future pandemic plans to incorporate formal family physician leadership appointments, as well as supports such as training, communication aides and compensation to allow family physicians to enact these key roles. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique opportunity to examine the leadership roles of family physicians, which have been largely overlooked in past pandemic plans. This study's findings highlight the importance of these roles toward delivering an effective and coordinated pandemic response with uninterrupted and safe access to primary care.

Primary care bonus payments and patient-reported access in urban Ontario: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Rurality strongly correlates with higher pay-for-performance access bonuses, despite higher emergency department use and fewer primary care services than in urban settings. We sought to evaluate the relation between patient-reported access to primary care and access bonus payments in urban settings. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, secondary data analysis using Ontario survey and health administrative data from 2013 to 2017. We used administrative data to calculate annual access bonuses for eligible urban family physicians. We linked this payment data to adult (≥ 16 yr) patient data from the Health Care Experiences Survey to examine the relation between access bonus achievement (in quintiles of the proportion of bonus achieved, from lowest [Q1, reference category] to highest [Q5]) and 4 patient-reported access outcomes. The average survey response rate to the patient survey during the study period was 51%. We stratified urban geography into large, medium and small settings. In a multilevel regression model, we adjusted for patient-, physician- and practice-level covariates. We tested linear trends, adjusted for clustering, for each outcome. RESULTS: We linked 18 893 respondents to 3940 physicians in 414 bonus-eligible practices. Physicians in small urban settings earned the highest proportion of their maximum potential access bonuses. Access bonus achievement was positively associated with telephone access (Q2 odds ratio [OR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.42; Q3 OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.10-1.63; Q4 OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.19-1.79; Q5 OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.50-2.33), after hours access (Q2 OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09-1.47; Q3 OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.23-1.74; Q4 OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.46-2.15; Q5 OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.52-2.32), wait time for care (Q2 OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85-1.20; Q3 OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.41; Q4 OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05-1.55; Q5 OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.32-2.00) and timeliness (Q2 OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.98-1.69; Q3 OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.94-1.77; Q4 OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16-2.13; Q5 OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.38-2.82). When stratified by geography, we observed several of these associations in large urban settings, but not in small urban settings. Trend tests were statistically significant for all 4 outcomes. INTERPRETATION: Although the access bonus correlated with access in larger urban settings, it did not in smaller settings, aligning with previous research questioning its utility in smaller geographies. The access bonus may benefit from a redesign that considers geography and patient experience.

Development of a primary care pandemic plan informed by in-depth policy analysis and interviews with family physicians across Canada during COVID-19: a qualitative case study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Given the recurrent risk of respiratory illness-based pandemics, and the important roles family physicians play during public health emergencies, the development of pandemic plans for primary care is imperative. Existing pandemic plans in Canada, however, do not adequately incorporate family physicians' roles and perspectives. This policy and planning oversight has become increasingly evident with the emergence of the novel coronavirus disease, COVID-19, pandemic. This study is designed to inform the development of pandemic plans for primary care through evidence from four provinces in Canada: British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Ontario. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will employ a multiple-case study of regions in four provinces. Each case consists of a mixed methods design which comprises: (1) a chronology of family physician roles in the COVID-19 pandemic response; (2) a provincial policy analysis; and (3) qualitative interviews with family physicians. Relevant policy and guidance documents will be identified through targeted, snowball and general search strategies. Additionally, these policy documents will be analysed to identify gaps and/or emphases in existing policies and policy responses. Interviews will explore family physicians' proposed, actual and potential roles during the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers they have encountered throughout and the influence of gender on their professional roles. Data will be thematically analysed using a content analysis framework, first at the regional level and then through cross-case analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for this study has been granted by the Research Ethics of British Columbia, the Health Research Ethics Board of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Nova Scotia Health Authority Research Ethics Board and the Western University Research Ethics Board. Findings will be disseminated via conferences and peer-reviewed publications. Evidence and lessons learnt will be used to develop tools for government ministries, public health units and family physicians for improved pandemic response plans for primary care.

In a Time of Need: A Grassroots Initiative in Response to PPE Shortage in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

SETTING: Primary care is the first line of defence in healthcare, particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In the London-Middlesex region of Ontario, a critical shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) was identified among primary care physicians (PCPs). INTERVENTION: With the help of the London-Middlesex Primary Care Alliance, volunteer administrators, physicians and medical students coordinated the acquisition and redistribution of community-donated PPE to PCPs across London-Middlesex. Our scope evolved to include PPE reusability and stewardship and PCP wellness. OUTCOME: Beginning on March 16, 2020, our initial four-week operation provided PPE to over 200 PCPs. We received 60 donations, including over 118,000 gloves, 13,700 masks, 700 wellness kits and reusable cloth masks and gowns. Each delivery included educational pamphlets, and our online PPE stewardship session was attended by over 30 physicians. IMPLICATIONS: In response to the PPE shortage in COVID-19, our efforts evolved into a complex adaptive system, supported by an organizational body with a pre-existing communication infrastructure, to great success. Our scope extended beyond simple PPE provision to PCPs. Furthermore, our initiative established a framework for a centralized response to PPE shortage in Ontario Health West.

Comprehensive practice: Normative definition across 3 generations of alumni from a single family practice program, 1985 to 2012.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the range of services and procedures offered by family physicians who define themselves as comprehensive practitioners and compare responses across 3 generations of alumni of a single family practice program. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Western University in London, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: All graduates of the family medicine program between 1985 and 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported provision of the following types of care: in-office care, in-hospital care, intrapartum obstetrics, housecalls, palliative care, after-hours care, nursing home care, minor surgery, emergency department care, sport medicine, and walk-in care. Sex, training site (urban or rural), size of community of practice, practice model, and satisfaction with practice were also reported. RESULTS: Participants practised in 7 provinces and 1 territory across Canada, but principally in Ontario. A small number were located in the United States. There was a decline in the number of services provided across 3 generations of graduates, with newer graduates providing fewer services than the older graduates. Significant decreases across the 3 groups were observed in provision of housecalls (P = .004), palliative care (P = .028), and nursing home care (P < .001). Non-significant changes were seen in provision of intrapartum obstetrics across the 3 alumni groups, with an initial decline and then increase in reported activity. Most respondents were in a family health organization or family health network practice model and those in such models reported offering significantly more services than those in family health group or salary models (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The normative definition of comprehensive care varies across 3 generations of graduates of this family medicine program, with newer physicians reporting fewer overall services and procedures than older graduates. Greater understanding of the forces (institutional, regulatory, economic, and personal) that determine the meaning of comprehensive primary care is necessary if this foundational element of family medicine is to be preserved.

Shifting tides in the emigration patterns of Canadian physicians to the United States: a cross-sectional secondary data analysis.

BACKGROUND: The relative ease of movement of physicians across the Canada/US border has led to what is sometimes referred to as a 'brain drain' and previous analysis estimated that the equivalent of two graduating classes from Canadian medical schools were leaving to practice in the US each year. Both countries fill gaps in physician supply with international medical graduates (IMGs) so the movement of Canadian trained physicians to the US has international ramifications. Medical school enrolments have been increased on both sides of the border, yet there continues to be concerns about adequacy of physician human resources. This analysis was undertaken to re-examine the issue of Canadian physician migration to the US. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the 2015 American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile to identify and locate any graduates of Canadian schools of medicine (CMGs) working in the United States in direct patient care. We reviewed annual reports of the Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS); the Canadian Post-MD Education Registry (CAPER); and the Canadian Collaborative Centre for Physician Resources (C3PR). RESULTS: Beginning in the early 1990s the number of CMGs locating in the U.S. reached an all-time high and then abruptly dropped off in 1995. CMGs are going to the US for post-graduate training in smaller numbers and, are less likely to remain than at any time since the 1970's. CONCLUSIONS: This four decade retrospective found considerable variation in the migration pattern of CMGs to the US. CMGs' decision to emigrate to the U.S. may be influenced by both 'push' and 'pull' factors. The relative strength of these factors changed and by 2004, more CMGs were returning from abroad than were leaving and the current outflow is negligible. This study supports the need for medical human resource planning to assume a long-term view taking into account national and international trends to avoid the rapid changes that were observed. These results are of importance to medical resource planning.