Storylines of family medicine XI: professional identity formation-nurturing one's own story.

Storylines of Family Medicine is a 12-part series of thematically linked mini-essays with accompanying illustrations that explore the many dimensions of family medicine, as interpreted by individual family physicians and medical educators in the USA and elsewhere around the world. In 'XI: professional identity formation-nurturing one's own story', authors address the following themes: 'The social construction of professional identity', 'On becoming a family physician', 'What's on the test?-professionalism for family physicians', 'The ugly doc-ling', 'Teachers-the essence of who we are', 'Family medicine research-it starts in the clinic', 'Socially accountability in medical education', 'Personal philosophy and how to find it' and 'Teaching and learning with Storylines of Family Medicine'. May these essays encourage readers to find their own creative spark in medicine.

The Time Is Now: A Plan to Redesign Family Medicine Residency Education.

A new graduate medical education program in family medicine is urgently needed now. We propose an innovative plan to develop community-based, community-owned family medicine residency programs. The plan is founded on five guiding principles in which residencies will (1) transition to independent, community-owned organizations; (2) sustain comprehensiveness and generalism; (3) emphasize collaborative learning and interprofessional education; (4) develop local educators with national guidance; and (5) share resources, responsibilities, and learning. We describe actionable steps to begin the process of transforming residencies and strengthening primary care. As community-based and locally-run organizations, residencies will gain self-determination in how time is allocated, budgets are spent, and teams function. Building on the momentum of the National Academy of Medicine's 2021 primary care implementation plan and recommendations by family medicine organization leaders, we propose a Decade of Family Medicine Residency Transformation. We encourage individuals and organizations spanning disciplines, health care systems, and communities, to join forces to reimagine and recreate the preparation of outstanding personal physicians dedicated to individual and community health and well-being.

General Practitioners in US Medical Practice Compared With Family Physicians.

PURPOSE: General practitioners (GPs) are part of the US physician workforce, but little is known about who they are, what they do, and how they differ from family physicians (FPs). We describe self-identified GPs and compare them with board-certified FPs. METHODS: Analysis of data on 102,604 Doctor of Medicine and Doctor of Osteopathy physicians in direct patient care in the United States in 2016, who identify themselves as GPs or FPs. The study used linking databases (American Medical Association Masterfile, American Board of Family Medicine [ABFM], Area Health Resource File, Medicare Public Use File) to examine personal, professional, and practice characteristics. RESULTS: Of the physicians identified, 6,661 self-designated as GPs and 95,943 self-designated as FPs. Of the self-designated GPs, 116 had been ABFM certified and were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 102,488 physicians, those who self-designated as GPs but were never ABFM certified constituted the GP group (n = 6,545, 6%). Self-designated FPs that were ABFM certified made up the FP group (n = 79,449, 78%). The remaining self-designated FPs not ABFM certified constituted the uncertified group (n = 16,494, 16%). GPs differed from FPs in every characteristic examined. Compared with FPs, GPs are more likely to be older, male, Doctors of Osteopathy, graduates of non-US medical schools, and have no family medicine residency training. GPs practice location is similar to FPs, but GPs are less likely to participate in Medicare or to work in hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: GPs in the United States are a varied group that differ from FPs. Researchers, educators, and policy makers should not lump GPs together with FPs in data collection, analysis, and reporting.

Loneliness in Primary Care Patients: A Prevalence Study.

PURPOSE: Loneliness has important health consequences. Little is known, however, about loneliness in primary care patient populations. This study describes the prevalence of loneliness in patients presenting for primary care and associations with self-reported demographic factors, health care utilization, and health-related quality of life. METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional surveys of adults presenting for routine care to outpatient primary care practices in 2 diverse practice-based research networks. The 3-item University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale was utilized to determine loneliness. RESULTS: The prevalence of loneliness was 20% (246/1,235). Loneliness prevalence was inversely associated with age (P <.01) and less likely in those who were married (P <.01) or employed (P <.01). Loneliness was more common in those with lower health status (P <.01), including when adjusting for employment and relationship status (odds ratio [OR] = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07). Primary care visits (OR = 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.10), urgent care/emergency department visits (OR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.12-1.38), and hospitalizations (OR = 1.15; 95% CI, 1.01-1.31) were associated with loneliness status. There was no significant difference in rates of loneliness between sexes (P = .08), racial categories (P = .57), or rural and urban respondents (P = .42). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that loneliness is common in primary care patients and is associated with adverse health consequences including poorer health status and greater health care utilization. Further work is needed to understand the value of screening for and using interventions to treat loneliness in primary care.

Geographic Characteristics of Loneliness in Primary Care.

Loneliness is associated with poor health outcomes, and there is growing attention on loneliness as a social determinant of health. Our study sought to determine the associations between community factors and loneliness. The Three-Item Loneliness Scale and zip codes of residence were collected in primary care practices in Colorado and Virginia. Living in zip codes with higher unemployment, poor access to health care, lower income, higher proportions of blacks, and poor transportation was associated with higher mean loneliness scores. Future studies that examine interventions addressing loneliness may be more effective if they consider social context and community characteristics.

Professional Loneliness and the Loss of the Doctors' Dining Room.

Historically, family physicians moved among all the venues of medical care- office, hospital, community-and were a part of a connected professional community. That connected community was sustained in great part through informal gatherings of clinicians in hospitals, clinics, and professional organizations. The current fragmentation of medicine into narrowly defined, boundaried workspaces and job descriptions, as well as the increasing size of practices has negatively affected the professional culture in which physicians work. These structural changes have led to an increasing sense of professional loneliness that not only threatens the quality of clinical care by replacing personal discussions about patients but also poses risks to physician personal and professional wellbeing.