Higher quality primary care is associated with good self-rated health status.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the association between primary care quality and self-rated health status. METHODS: A cross-sectional study using the Korean primary care assessment tool (K-PCAT). The K-PCAT is a validated tool based on the definition of primary care in Korea, consisting of 5 domains and 21 items providing a total primary care quality score. Data were collected from patients of family physicians working at nine private clinics as their usual source of care. The main outcome measure was self-rated health status. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 531 study participants. Bivariate analysis of socio-demographic variables of patients, who participated in this study as primary care quality assessors, revealed that those with high self-ratings of health tended to have higher household incomes and more frequent exercise. Those with high self-ratings of health had higher total primary care scores than those with low self-ratings of health, as determined through bivariate analysis (P < 0.01). After being adjusted for age, sex, the number of diseases being treated, education years, household income, smoking status, alcohol intake and the frequency of regular exercise, the total primary care score was found to be positively associated with good health. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care quality, as assessed by the K-PCAT, was positively associated with good self-rated health status.

The effect of videotaping students' interviews with patients for interview skill education.

BACKGROUND: The importance of communication between patients and physicians has been proven in many previous studies. The authors analyzed the effect of interview skill education through videotapes which recorded students' interviews with real patients in the outpatient department of family medicine. METHODS: This study was conducted with all students who chose the elective course of family medicine and one randomly selected student every week from an 'infectious internal medicine' class at Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital during the period from December 2008 to March 2011. All students performed a preliminary examination of a new patient at the outpatient department of family medicine. All consultations were videotaped. Feedback to the student was given on the same day by viewing the videotape together. After feedback, all students performed another preliminary examination of one new patient at the department of family medicine the same week. Three family medicine residents scored all videotapes using 10-item interview skill checklists. Many parts of the checklists were modified using the Arizona Clinical Interview Rating Scales. RESULTS: Thirty-three students participated. Of 10 items, nine showed increased scores after feedback. There was a significant change in four items after feedback: 'type of question' (before 2.36 ± 0.60, after 2.73 ± 0.72), 'timeline' (before 2.82 ± 0.68, after 3.18 ± 0.73), 'positive verbal reinforcement' (before 2.24 ± 0.56, after 2.61 ± 0.90), and the total score (before 21.70 ± 2.62, after 23.39 ± 3.13) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Giving feedback to medical school students on medical interview skills using videotapes of students' preliminary consultations with real patients in outpatient settings, was effective in improving the interview areas of 'type of question,' 'timeline,' 'positive verbal reinforcement,' and the total interview scores.

Patients' Assessment of Community Primary and Non-primary Care Physicians in Seoul City of South Korea.

BACKGROUND: It is important to know the current level of primary care performance in order to evaluate and plan for desirable health policy. We tried to compare patient's assessment of primary (family physician, general practitioner, internist, pediatrician, and general surgeon) and non-primary (the other specialties) care physicians. METHODS: Study subjects were physicians of primary care clinics in Seoul. The study subject evaluators were Seoul citizens who were selected by a list-assisted random digit dialing sampling method and who had visited their primary care clinic on six or more occasions over a period of more than 6 months as a usual source of care. The modified version of the Korean Primary Care Assessment Tool was used for the evaluation of primary care performance. The data were collected with the aid of a computer-assisted telephone interview system from June 29 to July 22, 2009. RESULTS: The data on 260 individuals were used for analysis. The mean scores of primary and non-primary care physician group were respectively 1.19 and 0.85 in the comprehensiveness domain, 1.00 and 0.83 in the coordination domain, 1.54 and 1.31 in the family/community orientation, and 1.24 and 0.99 as an average of 3 domains above. The scores in the comprehensiveness domain and the average of 3 domains were significantly higher in the primary than in the nonprimary care physician group. CONCLUSION: Primary care physicians showed superior performance compared to non-primary care physicians in comprehensiveness domain and in the average of comprehensiveness, coordination, and family/community orientation domains.