Evaluating 10 years of state-funded GP training in GP offices in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Switzerland lacks future general practitioners (GPs). Residents who wished to specialize as general practitioners were formerly trained solely in hospital settings. To better prepare and also attract more young doctors to become GPs, the canton of Bern (equivalent to a state) has implemented a partly state-funded vocational training program in GP practices. Our study examines the efficacy of this 10-year program, identifies factors that positively influence residents in their decision to become a GP and the distribution of new GPs in the canton of Bern, who had taken part in the traineeship. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey among all residents, who participated in a traineeship in general practice from 2008 to 2017 in the canton of Bern asked if residents had taken a subsequent career choice as a GP and if so in which region. Residents scored the importance of their traineeship and their mentor's influence on becoming a GP. By using zip codes of work area of respondents already working as GPs and matching it with population census data, we could obtain the distribution of GPs on a per capita basis. RESULTS: Out of 165 residents who participated in a traineeship, 151 (92%) completed our survey. 81% had chosen a career as a GP or were on track to become a GP. Almost half of the participants became GPs in the offices of their mentors or in the area. Our respondents emphasized the importance of their mentors' influence as well as the training program in their decision-making to become a GP. Most mentioned benefits of being a GP were broad field of medical care (37%) and a fulfilling doctor-patient relationship (34%). We could show an increase in GP practices in the canton of Bern, not only in urban but also accordingly in rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: Most residents continued subsequent careers as general practitioners after having completed a GP traineeship, with almost half of them in the region of their training. A vocational training program helped motivating young doctors to become GPs and underserved regions of the canton of Bern to gain new GPs.

Assessing the mental wellbeing of next generation general practitioners: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Future and practising GPs encounter various stressors, which can potentially impair mental wellbeing and develop into mental illnesses. AIM: To assess mental wellbeing of young and future GPs by their level of training. DESIGN & SETTING: A cross-sectional anonymous survey of members of the Swiss Young General Practitioners Association (JHaS) was undertaken. METHOD: Basic characteristics and the current mental wellbeing were assessed using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS). Specific stressors that can influence wellbeing were focused on. Participants were asked for ideas on how to improve wellbeing via open questions. RESULTS: Response rate was 57% (n = 503). Mean value for mental wellbeing (WEMWBS) was 52.4 (maximum 70, standard deviation [SD] 7.2). Residents had a significantly lower level of mental health (51.0, SD 7.6) compared with GPs (54.2, SD 6.2). Overall, stress level was reported as high or very high by almost half of participants (49%). Forty-five per cent indicated a lack of private time; the highest proportion was among residents. Fifteen per cent (20% among residents) were at risk of burnout. Most frequent stressors were administrative tasks, high workload, and work demands. Support requests included improvement of work-life balance and reduction of administrative workload. CONCLUSION: Residents had the lowest mental wellbeing, at a stress level similarly high to that of GPs. They most often indicated not having enough time for a private life and were most at risk of burnout. Improvement suggestions should be implemented to maintain mental health of young and future GPs. Particular attention should be paid to GPs in training, as owing to their reduced mental health, they may benefit most.

'Optimising PharmacoTherapy In the multimorbid elderly in primary CAre' (OPTICA) to improve medication appropriateness: study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are major risk factors for potentially inappropriate prescribing (eg, overprescribing and underprescribing), and systematic medication reviews are complex and time consuming. In this trial, the investigators aim to determine if a systematic software-based medication review improves medication appropriateness more than standard care in older, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Optimising PharmacoTherapy In the multimorbid elderly in primary CAre is a cluster randomised controlled trial that will include outpatients from the Swiss primary care setting, aged ≥65 years with ≥three chronic medical conditions and concurrent use of ≥five chronic medications. Patients treated by the same general practitioner (GP) constitute a cluster, and clusters are randomised 1:1 to either a standard care sham intervention, in which the GP discusses with the patient if the medication list is complete, or a systematic medication review intervention based on the use of the 'Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing'-Assistant (STRIPA). STRIPA is a web-based clinical decision support system that helps customise medication reviews. It is based on the validated 'Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions' (STOPP) and 'Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment' (START) criteria to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing. The trial's follow-up period is 12 months. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 months. The primary endpoint is medication appropriateness, as measured jointly by the change in the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and Assessment of Underutilisation (AOU). Secondary endpoints include the degree of polypharmacy, overprescribing and underprescribing, the number of falls and fractures, quality of life, the amount of formal and informal care received by patients, survival, patients' quality adjusted life years, patients' medical costs, cost-effectiveness of the intervention, percentage of recommendations accepted by GPs, percentage of recommendation rejected by GPs and patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The ethics committee of the canton of Bern in Switzerland approved the trial protocol. The results of this trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. MAIN FUNDING: Swiss National Science Foundation, National Research Programme (NRP 74) 'Smarter Healthcare'. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03724539), KOFAM (Swiss national portal) (SNCTP000003060), Universal Trial Number (U1111-1226-8013).