Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
3.
JAMA ; 314(22): 2364-72, 2015 Dec 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26647258

RESUMEN

IMPORTANCE: Narrowing of the scope of practice of US family physicians has been well documented. Proposed reasons include changing practice patterns as physicians age, employer restrictions, or generational choices. Determining components of care that remain integral to the practice of family medicine may be informed by assessing gaps between the intended scope of practice of residents and actual scope of practice of family physicians. OBJECTIVE: To compare intended scope of practice for American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) initial certifiers at residency completion with self-reported actual scope of practice of recertifying family physicians. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional data were collected from a practice demographic questionnaire completed by all individuals applying to take the ABFM Maintenance of Certification for Family Physicians examination. Initial certifiers reported intentions and recertifiers reported actual provision of specific clinical activities. All physicians who registered for the 2014 ABFM Maintenance of Certification for Family Physicians examination were included: 3038 initial certifiers and 10,846 recertifiers. EXPOSURES: Initially certifying physicians vs recertifying physicians. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The Scope of Practice for Primary Care score (scope score), a psychometric scale, was calculated for each physician and ranged from 0 to 30, with higher numbers equating to broader scope of practice. Recertifiers were categorized by decades in practice. RESULTS: The final sample included 13,884 family physicians and, because the questionnaire was a required component of the examination application, there was a 100% response rate. Mean scope score was significantly higher for initial certifier intended practice compared with recertifying physicians' reported actual practices (17.7 vs 15.5; difference, 2.2 [95% CI, 2.1-2.3]; P < .001). Compared with recertifiers, initial certifiers were more likely to report intending to provide all clinical services asked except pain management; this included obstetric care (23.7% vs 7.7%; difference, 16.0% [95% CI, 14.4%-17.6%]; P < .001), inpatient care (54.9% vs 33.5%; difference, 21.4% [95% CI, 19.4%-23.4%]; P < .001), and prenatal care (50.2% vs 9.9%; difference, 40.3 [95% CI, 38.5%-42.2%]; P < .001). Similar differences from initial certifiers were present when comparisons were limited to recertifiers in practice for only 1 to 10 years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study of family physicians taking ABFM examinations, graduating family medicine residents reported an intention to provide a broader scope of practice than that reported by current practitioners. This pattern suggests that these differences are not generational, but whether they are due to limited practice support, employer constraints, or other causes remains to be determined.


Asunto(s)
Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Intención , Internado y Residencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Certificación , Ahorro de Costo , Estudios Transversales , Empleo/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Médicos de Familia/estadística & datos numéricos , Psicometría , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Calidad de la Atención de Salud
6.
J Am Board Fam Med ; 32(6): 876-882, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31704756

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the degree to which the American Board of Family Medicine's certification examination is representative of family physician practice with regard to frequency of diagnoses encounter and the criticality of the diagnoses. METHODS: Data from 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey was used to assess the frequency of diagnoses encountered by family physicians nationally. These diagnoses were also rated by a panel of content experts for how critical it was to diagnose and treat the condition correctly and then assign the condition to 1 of the 16 content categories used on the American Board of Family Medicine examination. These ratings of frequency and criticality were used to create 7 different new schemas to compute percentages for the content categories. RESULTS: The content category percentages for the 7 different schemas correlated with the 2006 to 2016 test plan percentages from 0.50 to 0.90 with the frequency conditions being more highly correlated and the criticality conditions being less correlated. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the continued use of the current Family Medicine Certification Examination content specifications as being representative of current family medicine practice; however, small adjustments might be warranted to permit better representation of the criticality of the topics.


Asunto(s)
Certificación/normas , Competencia Clínica/legislación & jurisprudencia , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/legislación & jurisprudencia , Concesión de Licencias/normas , Médicos de Familia/legislación & jurisprudencia , Certificación/legislación & jurisprudencia , Competencia Clínica/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Concesión de Licencias/legislación & jurisprudencia , Médicos de Familia/estadística & datos numéricos , Consejos de Especialidades/legislación & jurisprudencia , Consejos de Especialidades/normas , Estados Unidos
7.
J Am Board Fam Med ; 31(1): 126-138, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29330247

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Family medicine is a specialty of breadth, providing comprehensive health care for the individual and the family that integrates the broad scope of clinical, social, and behavioral sciences. As such, the scope of practice (SOP) for family medicine is extensive; however, over time many family physicians narrow their SOP. We sought to provide a nationally representative description of the most common and the most critical diagnoses that family physicians see in their practice. METHODS: Data were extracted from the 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) to select all ICD-9 codes reported by family physicians. A panel of family physicians then reviewed 1893 ICD-9 codes to place each code into an American Board of Family Medicine Family Medicine Certification Examination test plan specifications (TPS) category and provide a rating for an Index of Harm (IoH). RESULTS: An analysis of all 1893 ICD-9 codes seen by family physicians in the 2012 NAMCS found that 198 ICD-9 codes could not be assigned a TPS category, leaving 1695 ICD-9 codes in the dataset. Top 10 lists of ICD-9 codes by TPS category were created for both frequency and IoH. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a nationally representative description of the most common diagnoses that family physicians are seeing in their practice and the criticality of these diagnoses. These results provide insight into the domain of the specialty of family medicine. Medical educators may use these results to better tailor education and training to practice.


Asunto(s)
Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Médicos de Familia/estadística & datos numéricos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Enfermedad Crítica , Análisis de Datos , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/tendencias , Humanos , Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades , Médicos de Familia/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA