An evaluation of the impact of an increase in community-based medical undergraduate education in a UK medical school.

BACKGROUND

In 1996 Liverpool University reformed its MBChB programme from a traditional course to a reformed curriculum based on the recommendations in Tomorrow's Doctors. Liverpool community-based undergraduate medical education increased significantly.

METHODS

Research comprised questionnaires and interviews six years after graduation with the final two cohorts to graduate from the traditional curriculum and the first two cohorts to graduate from the reformed curriculum, to ascertain their views on their undergraduate medical education. Two of the questionnaire variables and some of the interview questions were directly related to their community-based undergraduate medical education.

RESULTS

Reformed curriculum graduates felt better prepared for understanding the relationship between primary and hospital care than traditional graduates. This was statistically significant. When assessing the amount of GP teaching they received, 64% of the traditional graduates felt their GP teaching was less than 'about right' compared with only 8% of reformed curriculum graduates. During the interviews the traditional graduates were divided about whether there should have been more GP exposure in their course and many said they had little knowledge about the relationship between primary and secondary care. Generally, the reformed curriculum graduates thought it was beneficial to have a larger amount of community teaching and it was useful for developing clinical skills and they understood the relationship between primary and secondary care.

CONCLUSION

An increase in exposure to community-based undergraduate medical education can change the way graduates perceive and understand general practice.