Cross-sectional analysis of the clinical work hours of early-career general practitioners.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The clinical working hours of early-career general practitioners (GPs) are an important factor in Australian GP workforce planning. This study aimed to establish the prevalence and associations of early-career GPs working full time (nine or more sessions per week) in clinical practice. METHOD: This was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study of alumni (from six months to two years post-Fellowship) from three regional training organisations. Multivariable logistic regression was used to establish factors associated with alumni working full time. RESULTS: Of 356 currently practising early-career alumni participants, 30% worked full time. Factors associated with working full time included spouse/partner employment and family structure and any examination failure. Factors associated with working less than full time included female gender, being an Australian medical graduate, provision of other medical work and having taken additional leave during training. DISCUSSION: A high proportion of early-career GPs working part time in clinical general practice has implications for workplace planning, as GPs seek workload diversity and flexibility across their career stages.

Socioeconomic status of practice location and Australian GP registrars' training: a cross-sectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) is a major determinant of health. In Australia, areas of socioeconomic disadvantage are characterised by complex health needs and inequity in primary health care provision. General Practice (GP) registrars play an important role in addressing workforce needs, including equitable health care provision in areas of greater socioeconomic disadvantage. We aimed to characterize GP registrars' practice location by level of socioeconomic disadvantage, and establish associations (of registrar, practice, patient characteristics, and registrars' clinical behaviours) with GP registrars training being undertaken in areas of greater socioeconomic disadvantage. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis from the Registrars' Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) study. ReCEnT is an ongoing, multi-centre, cohort study that documents 60 consecutive consultations by each GP registrar once in each of their three six-monthly training terms. The outcome factor was the practice location's level of socioeconomic disadvantage, defined using the Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage (SEIFA-IRSD). The odds of being in the lowest quintile was compared to the other four quintiles. Independent variables related to the registrar, patient, practice, and consultation. RESULTS: A total of 1,736 registrars contributed 241,945 consultations. Significant associations of training being in areas of most disadvantage included: the registrar being full-time, being in training term 1, being in the rural training pathway; patients being Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, or from a non-English-speaking background; and measures of continuity of care. CONCLUSIONS: Training in areas of greater social disadvantage, as well as addressing community need, may provide GP registrars with richer learning opportunities.

Socioeconomic disadvantage and the practice location of recently Fellowed Australian GPs: a cross-sectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic disadvantage and the 'inverse care law' have significant effects on the health and well-being of Australians. Early career GPs can help address the needs of socioeconomically disadvantaged communities by choosing to practice in these locations. This study addressed an evidence gap around GPs post-Fellowship (within 2 years) practice location, and whether practice location is related to postgraduate vocational training. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study of recently Fellowed GPs from New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory, Victoria and Tasmania. Questionnaire items elicited information about participants' current practice, including location. Where consent was provided, participants' questionnaire responses were linked to previously collected vocational GP training data. The outcome factor in analyses was practice location socioeconomic status (SES): the four deciles of greater socioeconomic disadvantage versus locations with a higher SES. SES was classified according to the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas - Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage. Multivariable logistic regression was undertaken. RESULTS: Of participants currently working in clinical general practice, 26% were practicing in the four deciles of greater socioeconomic disadvantage. Significant multivariable associations of working in these locations included having trained in a practice located in an area of greater socioeconomic disadvantage (odds ratio (OR) 3.14), and having worked at their current practice during vocational training (OR 2.99). CONCLUSION: Given the association of training and practice location for recently Fellowed GPs, policies focused on training location may help in addressing ongoing workforce issues faced by areas of higher socioeconomic disadvantage.

Prevalence and Associations of General Practice Registrars' Management of Atopic Dermatitis: A Cross-Sectional Analysis from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training Study.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory condition which imposes substantial burden upon patients and their families. As a frequent primary care presentation, general practice (GP) trainees must develop adequate skills in AD diagnosis and management. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to explore the prevalence and associations of GP registrars' management of patients with AD. METHODS: This study used data from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) project, an ongoing cohort study of the clinical and educational experience of Australian GP registrars. Registrar, patient, and consultation factors were independent variables in multivariable logistic regression with outcome factor 'diagnosis/problem being AD'. RESULTS: From 2010-2019, 2,783 registrars (96% response rate) provided data from 381,180 consultations. AD was encountered in 0.6% of consults. AD was more likely to be seen in patients aged 0-1 years and patients from a non-English speaking background. AD was less likely to be seen in Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander patients. Learning goals were more likely to be generated for AD and these consultations were associated with registrars seeking information or assistance. AD was strongly associated with a medication being prescribed, of which the most prescribed medications were mild or moderate potency topical corticosteroids. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that, similar to other dermatological presentations, registrars find AD challenging to manage. There may be some gaps in AD management knowledge and application.

General Practice Registrars' Management of and Specialist Referral Patterns for Atopic Dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common presentation in the general practice (GP) setting. Implementation of appropriate referral pathways is instrumental for best patient care and is an essential skill for Australian GP registrars. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to explore the prevalence and associations of GP registrar referrals to specialists for AD management. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis utilizing data from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) project, an ongoing cohort study that documents in-consultation clinical and educational experience of Australian GP registrars. Registrar, patient, and consultation factors associated with referrals for AD were established using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 2,783 registrars (96% response rate) provided data from 381,180 consultations from 2010 to 2019. A total of 3,285 (0.55%) of 595,412 diagnoses managed were AD, of which 222 (6.8%) resulted in referral. Of these referrals, 70% were to dermatologists, 17% to allergists/immunologists, and 10% to pediatricians. Associations of referral included registrar female gender, patient age, longer consultation duration; an established (rather than new) AD diagnosis; supervisor advice being sought; and learning goals being generated. CONCLUSIONS: Both registrar and patient factors influence AD referral patterns. Registrars referred established rather than newly diagnosed AD, suggesting a level of comfort in initial management. Referral was associated with longer consultations, seeking supervisor advice, and generation of learning goals-suggesting these are more complex presentations and, possibly, registrar learning opportunities. A significant proportion of referrals were to non-dermatologist specialists. The implication of this for optimal patient care is a subject for further study.

Configurations for obtaining in-consultation assistance from supervisors in general practice training, and patient-related barriers to trainee help-seeking: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: General practice (GP) trainees may seek supervisor assistance to complete their patient consultations. This in-consultation assistance plays a key role in the supervisory oversight of trainees and in trainee learning. It may be obtained face-to-face, or using phone or messaging systems, and either in front of patients or outside their hearing. Trainee concerns about decreased patient impressions of their competence, and discomfort presenting patients within their hearing, act as barriers to seeking help during consultations. Little is known about the frequency and associations of trainee concerns about these patient-related barriers, or the various trainee-supervisor-patient configurations used to obtain in-consultation assistance. METHODS: Australian GP trainees rated their frequency of use of five specific configurations for obtaining in-consultation assistance, perceived change in patient impressions of their competence after this assistance, and relative trainee comfort presenting patients outside, compared to within, patients' hearing. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Responses were received from 778 Australian GP trainees (response rate 89%). Help-seeking configurations did not differ between trainees at different training stages, except for greater use of electronic messaging in later stages. In-consultation assistance was most commonly provided by phone between trainee and supervisor consulting rooms, or outside the trainee's patient's hearing. Supervisor assistance in the trainee's room face-to-face with the patient was reported as either never or rarely obtained by 12% of respondents. More trainees (25%) perceived that patient impressions of their competence increased after help-seeking than perceived that these impressions decreased (19%). Most trainees (55%) preferred to present patients outside their hearing. Trainee age was the only variable associated with both patient-related barriers. CONCLUSION: Supervisors appear to have considerable influence over trainee help-seeking, including which configurations are used and trainee perceptions of patient-related barriers. In-consultation supervision may actually increase trainee perceptions of patient impressions of their competence. Many supervisors and trainees may benefit from additional educational and workplace interventions to facilitate comfortable and effective trainee help-seeking in front of patients. More work is required to understand the clinical and educational implications of different help-seeking configurations when trainees require 'just in time' supervisor assistance.

Does brief chronic pain management education change opioid prescribing rates? A pragmatic trial in Australian early-career general practitioners.

We aimed to evaluate the effect of pain education on opioid prescribing by early-career general practitioners. A brief training workshop was delivered to general practice registrars of a single regional training provider. The workshop significantly reduced "hypothetical" opioid prescribing (in response to paper-based vignettes) in an earlier evaluation. The effect of the training on "actual" prescribing was evaluated using a nonequivalent control group design nested within the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) cohort study: 4 other regional training providers were controls. In ReCEnT, registrars record detailed data (including prescribing) during 60 consecutive consultations, on 3 occasions. Analysis was at the level of individual problem managed, with the primary outcome factor being prescription of an opioid analgesic and the secondary outcome being opioid initiation. Between 2010 and 2015, 168,528 problems were recorded by 849 registrars. Of these, 71% were recorded by registrars in the nontraining group. Eighty-two percentages were before training. Opioid analgesics were prescribed in 4382 (2.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.40-2.63) problems, with 1665 of these (0.97%, 95% CI: 0.91-1.04) representing a new prescription. There was no relationship between the training and total prescribing after training (interaction odds ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.75-1.35; P value 0.96). There was some evidence of a reduction in initial opioid prescriptions in the training group (interaction odds ratio: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.48-1.16; P value 0.19). This brief training package failed to increase overall opioid cessation. The inconsistency of these actual prescribing results with "hypothetical" prescribing behavior suggests that reducing opioid prescribing in chronic noncancer pain requires more than changing knowledge and attitudes.