PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 3695671

Academic group practice. The physicians' view.

Abstract

In order to evaluate physician response to the reorganization of a traditional medical clinic into a group practice model, a randomized controlled trial was conducted using equivalent groups of patients and physicians. The group practice model, unlike the traditional clinic, provided decentralized registration, 5 days/week clinic coverage, and night/weekend phone coverage. Residents worked in small groups with an attending physician, nurse practitioner, staff nurse, and receptionist. A panel of 50 medical residents was interviewed prior to the reorganization and 1 year later. Residents in the experimental groups perceived improvements in the ancillary staff, placed a higher value on informal discussion of patient management problems, and were more satisfied with the outpatient experience. Moreover, residents in the group practices were more likely to voluntarily schedule additional clinic sessions to accommodate their patients. No change was noted in their career choices. We conclude that reorganization of a traditional medical clinic into a group practice model can result in increased physician satisfaction although it may not have a major impact on long-term career goals.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D I Cohen, D Breslau, D K Porter, H I Goldberg, C O Hershey, J C Lee, C E McLaren. 1987. Academic group practice. The physicians' view.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198708000-00002

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Opinion survey towards hormone replacement therapy in the prevention of coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Observational and experimental data underscore the cardioprotective effects of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). On the other hand, the randomised trial available, the 'Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS)', showed no reduced risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), using HRT. AIM: Opinion survey on the effect of HRT on CHD risk. SETTING: Identification of articles on the related topic using a Medline search. Written survey of the authors' opinion towards HRT in relation to CHD. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of the 108 principal authors responded. Among them, respectively, 16 (43%) and seven (19%) found that HRT has favourable effects on primary and secondary prevention, two (5%) and five (14%) that it had no effect, none (0%) and four ( 11%) that it had an unfavourable effect, seven (19%) and nine (25%) that it had both favourable and unfavourable effects, and nine (25%) and ten (27%), thought that there are not enough data. Considering a risk modification superior to 20% as clinically relevant, then 57% thought that HRT has a beneficial effect of on primary prevention and 30% on secondary prevention, while none of the responders considered that HRT has unfavourable effects on primary prevention and only 2% on secondary prevention of CHD. CONCLUSION: Despite the negative results of the HERS study, about one-half of the responders still think that HRT has a beneficial effect on primary prevention of CHD and almost one-third on secondary prevention.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗