Suppr超能文献

[基层医疗中全科医生与普通内科医生的地区差异]

[Regional differences between general practitioners and general internal medicine physicians in primary care].

作者信息

Strumann Christoph, Emcke Timo, Flägel Kristina, Steinhäuser Jost

机构信息

Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Lübeck, Deutschland.

Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Schleswig-Holstein, Bad Segeberg, Deutschland.

出版信息

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2020 Apr;150-152:88-95. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2020.01.005. Epub 2020 Feb 28.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

In many places in Germany, the need for primary care physicians has been steadily increasing for several years, especially in rural areas. It is hypothesized that physicians are more likely to practice in rural areas if they have received a broad education and vocational training. Differences between general practitioners (GPs) and physicians in general internal medicine (GIM) in the breadth of their vocational training are created by the underlying distinct training schemes. The aim of the analysis was to test whether GPs and GIM physicians differ in their distribution between urban and rural regions of Schleswig-Holstein and whether there are differences in the rate and frequency of performing home visits.

METHODS

Based on invoicing data of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians in the federal state of Schleswig-Holstein (Northern Germany) covering the years 2015 up to the third quarter (Q3) of 2018, we analysed differences between GPs and GIM physicians in their regional distribution. Furthermore, we looked at differences between both specialties regarding the application rate and the number of home visits performed and unforeseen physician visits. In addition to bivariate approaches, we also used multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

Between 2017 (Q4) and 2018 (Q3), 1,378 GPs and 585 GIM physicians provided medical services in Schleswig-Holstein. While 27.5 % of the GPs had practices in rural areas, the share of GIM physicians was 14.5 % (p < 0.001). Home visits were performed by 97.8 % of the GPs and 93.2 % of the GIM physicians (p < 0.001). This difference was even more pronounced in rural areas (99.5 % vs. 94.1 % (p = 0.002)). Significant differences have also been found in the number of billed home visits. GPs made 36 % more home visits than GIM physicians. In rural areas, the difference was 60 %.

CONCLUSION

The analysis revealed significant differences between GPs and GIM physicians regarding the type of region where they work, the application rate and the number of performed home visits. The findings could foster a discussion about how GIM physicians can be better prepared to provide primary care, especially in rural areas.

摘要

目的

在德国的许多地方,对基层医疗医生的需求多年来一直在稳步增长,尤其是在农村地区。据推测,如果医生接受过广泛的教育和职业培训,他们更有可能在农村地区执业。全科医生(GPs)和普通内科医生(GIM)在职业培训广度上的差异是由各自不同的培训方案造成的。本分析的目的是检验全科医生和普通内科医生在石勒苏益格 - 荷尔斯泰因州城乡地区的分布是否存在差异,以及在进行家访的比例和频率上是否存在差异。

方法

基于德国北部石勒苏益格 - 荷尔斯泰因州法定医疗保险医生协会2015年至2018年第三季度(Q3)的计费数据,我们分析了全科医生和普通内科医生在区域分布上的差异。此外,我们研究了这两个专业在家访申请率、家访次数以及意外出诊方面的差异。除了双变量分析方法外,我们还使用了多元回归分析。

结果

在2017年第四季度(Q4)至2018年第三季度(Q3)期间,1378名全科医生和585名普通内科医生在石勒苏益格 - 荷尔斯泰因州提供医疗服务。虽然27.5%的全科医生在农村地区执业,但普通内科医生的这一比例为14.5%(p < 0.001)。97.8%的全科医生和93.2%的普通内科医生进行了家访(p < 0.001)。这种差异在农村地区更为明显(99.5%对94.1%,p = 0.002)。在计费家访次数上也发现了显著差异。全科医生进行的家访比普通内科医生多36%。在农村地区,这一差异为60%。

结论

分析显示,全科医生和普通内科医生在工作地区类型、家访申请率和家访次数方面存在显著差异。这些发现可能会引发一场关于如何让普通内科医生更好地准备提供基层医疗服务的讨论,尤其是在农村地区。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验