Bowman R C
AT Still University School of Osteopathic Medicine in Arizona, Mesa, Arizona, USA.
Rural Remote Health. 2008 Jul-Sep;8(3):1009. Epub 2008 Sep 10.
Numerous reports highlight the problem of declining primary care capacity in the USA, especially in rural and remote areas. The reasons for declining primary care capacity are elusive. Little progress is likely without better definitions, tools, and approaches. The author proposes a standard primary care workforce year to adjust each primary care form for losses due to specialization, lower levels of practice activity, lower primary care volume, and shorter career length.
The author reviewed studies to create a standard primary care year estimate representing the total primary care contribution for each of the five training forms of primary care over the career length of the graduate. The standard primary care year was the product of four factors: (1) the career length in years; (2) the percentage estimated to remain in primary care; (3) the percentage active in practice; and (4) the percentage of primary care volume compared with a family practitioner. A best determination was made regarding the value of each of the four factors for each primary care form. Because specialization rates increased substantially to decrease primary care contributions, the estimate for each form also had to be linked to each class year of graduates.
Family practice is the best example of a permanent primary care training form with 29.3 standard primary care years expected over a 35 year career. Other training forms appear to be more flexible with graduates able to choose primary care or specialty care depending on policy and market forces. The 2008 pediatric residency graduates can be expected to serve 17.6 years of primary care. Internal medicine resident primary care contributions have been reduced by 50% in the past decade to 5.3 years with international medical graduate internal medicine contributions decreasing to 2.5 years. Physician assistant estimates have decreased to 6 years, while nurse practitioner estimates have declined below 3 years per graduate. Without changes in policy or training, the USA must graduate 11.7 international medical graduate internal medicine residents, or 10 nurse practitioners, or 5.5 US internal medicine residents, or 4.8 physician assistants, or 1.7 pediatric residents to equal the same primary care contributions as one family physician. With decreasing rural and underserved distribution levels in the flexible forms, the numbers of graduates needed to match the family practice rural primary care year and underserved primary care year contributions are even higher.
The primary care year is a versatile tool that can help to estimate primary care contributions across different forms of primary care. Specialization takes a huge toll on primary care capacity. Progressive failure to retain primary care makes expansions of graduates an ineffective and costly intervention. Without graduating more who remain in primary care, the USA can expect consistently lower primary care levels. Primary care contributions of progressively shorter duration could explain the perceived rapid collapse of primary care, particularly when studies of primary care fail to involve the most recent months of changes.
众多报告凸显了美国基层医疗服务能力下降的问题,尤其是在农村和偏远地区。基层医疗服务能力下降的原因难以捉摸。如果没有更好的定义、工具和方法,进展可能甚微。作者提出了一个标准基层医疗劳动力年,以调整每种基层医疗形式因专科化、较低的执业活动水平、较低的基层医疗量和较短的职业生涯长度而导致的损失。
作者回顾了各项研究,以创建一个标准基层医疗年估计值,该估计值代表了在毕业生的职业生涯中,五种基层医疗培训形式各自对基层医疗的总贡献。标准基层医疗年是四个因素的乘积:(1)以年为单位的职业生涯长度;(2)估计留在基层医疗领域的百分比;(3)积极执业的百分比;(4)与家庭医生相比的基层医疗量百分比。针对每种基层医疗形式,对这四个因素的值进行了最佳确定。由于专科化率大幅上升以减少基层医疗贡献,每种形式的估计值还必须与各届毕业生相联系。
家庭医学是永久性基层医疗培训形式的最佳范例,在35年的职业生涯中预计有29.3个标准基层医疗年。其他培训形式似乎更具灵活性,毕业生能够根据政策和市场力量选择基层医疗或专科医疗。预计2008年儿科住院医师毕业生将提供17.6年的基层医疗服务。在过去十年中,内科住院医师的基层医疗贡献减少了50%,降至5.3年,国际医学毕业生内科住院医师的贡献降至2.5年。医师助理的估计值已降至6年,而执业护士的估计值已降至每位毕业生低于3年。如果政策或培训没有变化,美国必须培养11.7名国际医学毕业生内科住院医师,或10名执业护士,或5.5名美国内科住院医师,或4.8名医师助理,或1.7名儿科住院医师,才能与一名家庭医生的基层医疗贡献相当。随着灵活形式在农村和服务不足地区的分布水平下降,要达到与家庭医学农村基层医疗年和服务不足基层医疗年贡献相匹配所需的毕业生数量甚至更高。
基层医疗年是一种通用工具,有助于估计不同基层医疗形式的基层医疗贡献。专科化对基层医疗服务能力造成了巨大损失。持续无法留住从事基层医疗工作的人员,使得增加毕业生数量成为一种无效且成本高昂的干预措施。如果不培养更多留在基层医疗领域的人员,美国的基层医疗水平预计将持续下降。基层医疗贡献的持续时间逐渐缩短,可以解释为何人们感觉基层医疗迅速崩溃,尤其是当基层医疗研究未涉及最近几个月的变化时。