Abstract
Background: Though there are more family physicians in Canada than ever before, and residency programs are expanding, gaps in access to comprehensive care remain. This study aimed to describe and understand the role residency training experiences played in shaping practice choices, including the provision of comprehensive community-based care, among early career family physicians.
Methods: A secondary analysis of sixty-three (63) qualitative interviews was conducted on data from a larger mixed method study on practice patterns and choices of early career Canadian family physicians. We utilized Braun and Clarke’s six phases of reflexive thematic analysis on portions of transcripts concerning residency training experiences.
Results: Participants described positive residency training experiences that shaped practice choice with respect to preceptors and mentorship, experiences of longitudinal care, breadth of exposure, and preparedness for comprehensive clinical practice. Woven through these four domains were “points of tension” and “hidden truths”. Points of tension included: i) the promotion of an idealized professional identity and practice that was difficult to uphold, ii) lack of representation among faculty/preceptors with respect to age and gender, at some sites, and iii) frustration about the lack of opportunities for interprofessional collaborative practices that reflected training experiences. Hidden truths included: i) lack of preparation to run a business, ii) high administrative workload, iii) realities of payment models, and iv) the range of roles available for family physicians beyond the provision of comprehensive care.
Conclusions: Findings highlight opportunities for educational reform supporting the transition from residency to practice alongside the importance of addressing systemic factors beyond training which impact physicians’ choices regarding comprehensive care.
Publisher
The Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada
Reference53 articles.
1. Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Millbank Quarterly. 2005;83(3):457-502. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00409.x
2. Macinko J, Starfield B, Shi L. The contribution of primary care systems to health outcomes within Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, 1970–1998. Health Services Res. 2003;38:831-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.00149
3. Kringos D. The strength of primary care in Europe [thesis]. Utrecht (The Netherlands): Nivel; 2012. Available from www.nivel.nl/sites/default/files/bestanden/Proefschrift-Dionne-Kringos-The-strength-of-primary-care.pdf [Accessed May 1, 2022].
4. Starfield B. Primary care: an increasingly important contributor to effectiveness, equity, and efficiency of health services. SESPAS report 2012. Gaceta Sanitaria. 2012;26(S):20–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2011.10.009
5. Peckham A, Ho J, Marchildon GP. Policy innovations in primary care across Canada. Toronto: North American observatory on health systems and policies. Rapid review (No. 1), 2018. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326210991