RESUMO
Although the current low workforce availability of care of the elderly (COE) physicians, geriatric medicine specialists, and geriatric psychiatrists is undeniable, the ongoing demographic shift means this situation will only worsen. This evolving crisis is outlined clearly in the article "Updated Inventory and Projected Requirements for Specialist Physicians in Geriatrics" by Basu et al. found in this issue of the Canadian Geriatrics Journal.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The predicted growth of Canadians aged 65+ and the resultant rise in the demand for specialized geriatric services (SGS) requires physician resource planning. We updated the 2011 Canadian Geriatrics Society physician resource inventory and created projections for 2025 and 2030. METHODS: The number and full-time equivalents (FTEs) of geriatricians and Care of the Elderly (COE) physicians working in SGS were determined. FTE counts for 2025 and 2030 were estimated by accounting for retirements and trainees. A ratio of 1.25/10,000 population 65+ was used to predict physician resource requirements. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2019 the number of geriatricians and COE physicians increased from 276 (235.8 FTEs) and 128 (89.9 FTEs), respectively, to 376 (319.6 FTEs) and 354 (115.5 FTEs). This increase did not keep pace with the 65+ population growth. The current gap between supply and need is expected to increase. DISCUSSION: The physician supply gap is projected to widen in 2025 and 2030. Increased recruitment and interdisciplinary team-based care, supported by enhanced funding models, and full integration of COE physicians in SGS could reduce this increasing gap. In contrast to pediatrician supply in Canada, the specialist physician resources available to the population 65+ reflect a disparity.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: With Canada's senior population increasing, there is greater demand for family physicians with enhanced skills in Care of the Elderly (COE). The College of Family Physicians Canada (CFPC) has introduced Certificates of Added Competence (CACs), one being in COE. Our objective is to summarize the process used to determine the Priority Topics for the assessment of competence in COE. METHODS: A modified Delphi technique was used, with online surveys and face-to-face meetings. The Working Group (WG) of six physicians acted as the nominal group, and a larger group of randomly selected practitioners from across Canada acted as the Validation Group (VG). The WG, and then the VG, completed electronic write-in surveys that asked them to identify the Priority Topics. Responses were compiled, coded, and tabulated to identify the topics and to calculate the frequencies of their selection. The WG used face-to-face meetings and iterative discussion to decide on the final topic names. RESULTS: The correlation between the initial Priority Topic list identified by the VG and that identified by the WG is 0.6793. The final list has 18 Priority Topics. CONCLUSION: Defining the required competencies is a first step to establishing national standards in COE.