PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9125937

Retraining specialist physicians for primary care practice.

Abstract

Managed care has led to unprecedented changes in the market forces in medicine. As a result, many physicians not in primary care will find it difficult to sustain their practices, and many of them who attempt to change to primary care careers will find themselves unprepared. Rather than CME or GME, a better response is retraining programs designed for these trainees' needs, which provide credentials that are valued by MCOs and develop expertise in primary care practice in MCO settings. MCOs and academic medical centers have an important opportunity to collaborate in serving the medical profession and meeting the primary care needs of the United States.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J Sidorov. 1997. Retraining specialist physicians for primary care practice.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199704000-00006

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts.

INTRODUCTION: The purposes of this study were to determine whether the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO OGS) can be assessed accurately from digital dental casts and whether there are statistical differences between digital and plaster dental casts in scoring the ABO OGS. METHODS: Thirty posttreatment plaster dental casts were selected and scanned by OrthoCAD (Cadent, Carlstadt, NJ) to produce 30 corresponding digital dental casts. The plaster and digital casts were compared by using the criteria of the ABO OGS. Because the data were ordinal, a nonparametic statistical analysis was used. RESULTS: The Wilcoxon test for paired samples showed significant differences between the plaster and digital casts for occlusal contacts, occlusal relationships, and total scores (P <.05). No significant differences were found for alignment, marginal ridges, overjet, and interproximal contacts. Buccolingual inclination was not included in this study because of inability to perform proper measurements with the OrthoCAD program. Mean differences of points deducted ranged from .03 point for marginal ridges to 5.07 points for the total score. The variable with the most points deducted related to occlusal relationships, and the fewest points were deducted for interproximal contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, the current OrthoCAD program (version 2.2) was not adequate for scoring all parameters as required by the ABO OGS.

Certification↗