Primary care transformation in Scotland: a comparison two cross-sectional national surveys of general practitioners' views in 2018 and 2023.

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Eddie Donaghy, Kieran Sweeney, Lauren Ng, Holly Haines, Alexandra Thompson, David Henderson, Harry H X Wang, Andrew Thompson, Bruce Guthrie, Stewart W Mercer
{"title":"Primary care transformation in Scotland: a comparison two cross-sectional national surveys of general practitioners' views in 2018 and 2023.","authors":"Eddie Donaghy, Kieran Sweeney, Lauren Ng, Holly Haines, Alexandra Thompson, David Henderson, Harry H X Wang, Andrew Thompson, Bruce Guthrie, Stewart W Mercer","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 2018 Scottish GP contract established GP Clusters and multidisciplinary team (MDT) expansion. Qualitative studies have suggested sub-optimal progress.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To quantify progress since the introduction of the new contract.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Cross-sectional postal survey of all qualified GPs in Scotland in 2023 Methods: Comparison of GPs working lives, career intentions and views on the new contract with a similar survey conducted in 2018.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1378/4529 (30%) GPs responded to the survey compared to 2465/4371 (56%) in 2018. Job satisfaction and negative job attributes were similar in both surveys. Both positive job attributes (p=0.011) and job pressures (p=0.004) increased but the changes were small (effect sizes < 0.15). Significantly more GPs were planning to reduce hours (p<0.001) and leave direct patient care (p=0.008) in 2023 than 2018. Quality leads views on Cluster working were unchanged, with 70-80% reporting insufficient support. Cluster knowledge and engagement was unchanged but there were small increases in knowledge of quality improvement. More than half felt that MDT expansion was insufficient to reduce their workload. Significantly more practices were trying to recruit GPs, and GPs reported worsening NHS services, higher workload, and lower practice sustainability in 2023. Only 5% of GPs in the 2023 survey thought that the new contract had improved the care of patients with complex needs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>GPs report few improvements in working life five years after the new contract was introduced, and are responding by planning to reduce their hours or leave direct patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0500","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The 2018 Scottish GP contract established GP Clusters and multidisciplinary team (MDT) expansion. Qualitative studies have suggested sub-optimal progress.

Aim: To quantify progress since the introduction of the new contract.

Design and setting: Cross-sectional postal survey of all qualified GPs in Scotland in 2023 Methods: Comparison of GPs working lives, career intentions and views on the new contract with a similar survey conducted in 2018.

Results: 1378/4529 (30%) GPs responded to the survey compared to 2465/4371 (56%) in 2018. Job satisfaction and negative job attributes were similar in both surveys. Both positive job attributes (p=0.011) and job pressures (p=0.004) increased but the changes were small (effect sizes < 0.15). Significantly more GPs were planning to reduce hours (p<0.001) and leave direct patient care (p=0.008) in 2023 than 2018. Quality leads views on Cluster working were unchanged, with 70-80% reporting insufficient support. Cluster knowledge and engagement was unchanged but there were small increases in knowledge of quality improvement. More than half felt that MDT expansion was insufficient to reduce their workload. Significantly more practices were trying to recruit GPs, and GPs reported worsening NHS services, higher workload, and lower practice sustainability in 2023. Only 5% of GPs in the 2023 survey thought that the new contract had improved the care of patients with complex needs.

Conclusions: GPs report few improvements in working life five years after the new contract was introduced, and are responding by planning to reduce their hours or leave direct patient care.

苏格兰的初级保健转型:比较2018年和2023年全科医生观点的两次横断面全国调查。
背景:2018年苏格兰全科医生合同建立了GP集群和多学科团队(MDT)扩展。定性研究表明,进展并不理想。目的:量化新合同实施以来的进展。设计与设置:2023年对苏格兰所有合格的全科医生进行横断面邮政调查方法:将全科医生的工作生活、职业意向和对新合同的看法与2018年进行的类似调查进行比较。结果:1378/4529(30%)名全科医生回应了调查,而2018年为2465/4371(56%)名。在这两项调查中,工作满意度和消极工作属性相似。积极的工作属性(p=0.011)和工作压力(p=0.004)都增加了,但变化很小(效应值< 0.15)。更多的全科医生计划减少工作时间(结论:全科医生报告说,在新合同实施五年后,他们的工作寿命几乎没有改善,他们的回应是计划减少工作时间或离开直接照顾病人的岗位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信