Unlocking specialists' attitudes toward primary care gatekeepers.

OBJECTIVES: Many managed care plans rely on primary care physicians to act as gatekeepers, which may increase tension between these physicians and specialists. We surveyed specialist physicians in California to determine whether their attitudes toward primary care gatekeepers differed depending on how the specialists were paid and the settings in which they practiced. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a cross-sectional survey using a mailed questionnaire. The predictors of specialist attitudes toward gatekeepers were measured using chi-square, the t test, and regression analyses. POPULATION: A probability sample of 1492 physicians in urban counties in California in the specialties of cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, general surgery, neurology, ophthalmology, and orthopedics was used. OUTCOMES: We used questions about specialists' attitudes toward primary care physicians in the gatekeeper role. A summary score of attitudes was developed. RESULTS: A total of 979 physicians completed the survey (66%). Attitudes toward primary care physicians were mixed. Relative to nonsalaried physicians, those who were salaried had a somewhat more favorable attitude toward gatekeepers (P = .13), as did physicians with a greater percentage of practice income derived from capitation (P =.002). CONCLUSIONS: Specialists' attitudes toward the coordinating role of primary care physicians are influenced by the practice setting in which the specialists work and by financial interests that may be threatened by referral restrictions. Policies that promote alternatives to fee for service and shift specialty practice toward more organized group settings may generate a common sense of purpose among primary care physicians and specialists.

Racial/ethnic disparities in nursing.

The racial and ethnic composition of the registered nurse (RN) workforce in California is not at parity with the composition of the population. We find that the underrepresentation of African Americans in nursing in California appears to be due to lower overall educational attainment among African Americans. Underrepresentation of Latinos is due to lower overall educational attainment and, to a lesser extent, a lower percentage of college-educated Latinos pursuing careers in nursing. Improving the overall educational attainment of minority students is critical to increasing the number of minorities in nursing.

Identifying communities with low dentist supply in California.

OBJECTIVES: This study estimates the supply and geographic distribution of dentists in California and examines the community characteristics associated with supply of dentists. METHODS: The number of practicing dentists was estimated from American Dental Association data on licensed dentists in California. Each dentist's address was geocoded and matched to a Medical Service Study Area (MSSA). Dentist-to-population ratios were computed, and the association between dentist supply and community characteristics was analyzed in regression models. RESULTS: Approximately 20 percent of California communities may have a shortage of dentists. Two-thirds of dental shortage communities are rural. Communities with a lower supply of dentists have higher percentages of minorities, children, and low-income persons. Minority dentists were more likely to practice in minority communities. CONCLUSIONS: Geographic maldistribution of dentists may contribute to poor access to dental care in many communities, especially in rural, low-income, and minority communities. Minority dentists are more likely to practice in minority communities, but are a small portion of the dental workforce.

Hospital registered nurse shortages: environmental, patient, and institutional predictors.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the characteristics of acute-care hospitals that report registered nurse shortages when a widespread shortage exists and when a widespread shortage is no longer evident. DATA SOURCE: Secondary data from the American Hospital Association's Nursing Personnel Survey from 1990 and 1992 were used. The study population was all acute-care hospitals in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Outcome variables included whether a hospital experienced a shortage in 1990, when many hospitals reported a nursing shortage, or whether a hospital reported a shortage in both 1990 and 1992. Predictor variables included environmental, patient, and institutional characteristics. Associations between predictor and outcome variables were investigated using probit analyses. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Location in the South, a high percentage of nonwhite county residents, a high percentage of patients with Medicaid or Medicare as payer, a higher patient acuity, and use of team or functional nursing care delivery consistently predicted hospitals reporting shortages both when there was a widespread shortage and when there was no widespread shortage. CONCLUSIONS: Although some characteristics under the direct control of hospitals, such as nursing care delivery model, are associated with their reporting a shortage of nurses, shortage is also strongly associated with broader population characteristics such as minority communities and a public insurance payer mix. Awareness of these broader factors may help inform policies to improve the distribution of nurse supply.

Hepatitis c and cirrhotic liver disease in the Nile delta of Egypt: a community-based study.

Residents of Egypt's Nile river delta have among the world's highest seroprevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. To assess the impact of HCV on chronic liver disease, we studied the association between HCV, other hepatitis viruses, and cirrhotic liver disease in a cross-sectional, community-based survey of 801 persons aged > or = 10 years living in a semi-urban, Nile delta village. Residents were systematically sampled using questionnaires, physical examination, abdominal ultrasonography and serologically for antibodies to HCV (confirmed by a third-generation immunoblot assay) and to hepatitis A virus (HAV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis E virus (HEV). The seroprevalence of HCV increased with age from 19% in persons 10-19 years old to about 60% in persons 30 years and older. Although no practices that might facilitate HCV transmission were discovered, the seroprevalence of HCV was significantly associated with remote (> 1 year) histories of schistosomiasis. Sonographic evidence of cirrhosis was present in 3% (95% CI: 1%, 4%) of the population (0.7% of persons under 30 years of age and in 5% of older persons), and was significantly associated with HCV seroreactivity. Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that past mass parenteral chemotherapy campaigns for schistosomiasis facilitated HCV transmission, and that HCV may be a major cause of the high prevalence of liver cirrhosis in this Nile village.

How does a changing country change family practice?

The US population is changing. Ethnic minorities are now the fastest growing segment of the US population, and they have higher mortality rates than the remainder of Americans. Members of minority groups also earn less and are twice as likely as other residents to lack medical insurance. Minority communities have poorer health and access to care than the remainder of the population. Women constitute more than half the total population of the United States and are half of the labor force. Family structure has changed such that 53% of African-American, 32% of Hispanic, and 27% of all families were headed by a single parent in 1992. The elderly population has also increased and has a greater prevalence of chronic disease. The physician workforce has more female and younger physicians than in the past but a still-inadequate number of minority physicians. In contrast to the low proportion of minorities in the US physician workforce, women now comprise approximately half of medical students. A major economic trend affecting health care access in the United States is the lack of secure insurance coverage for 44 million people in 1998. Rates of no insurance are higher among minorities, households with no full-time worker, the near poor, and among persons with less education. Private charitable services, as well as the formal safety net systems, are experiencing financial pressure in the United States, further jeopardizing access to care for the uninsured. The average family in the United States is now working harder--but earning less money. The changing population mix, shifting gender balance, increasing proportion of elderly, and major socioeconomic trends and income disparities occurring in the United States today have shaped a practice environment that differs from whatfacedfamily physicians 30 years ago. Thus, a change in approach to training and practice is needed, while preserving the critical relationship we have with our patients and continuing to meet their needs.

Primary care physicians' experience with disease management programs.

OBJECTIVE: To examine primary care physicians' perceptions of how disease management programs affect their practices, their relationships with their patients, and overall patient care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional mailed survey. SETTING: The 13 largest urban counties in California. PARTICIPANTS: General internists, general pediatricians, and family physicians. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physicians' self-report of the effects of disease management programs on quality of patient care and their own practices. Respondents included 538 (76%) of 708 physicians: 183 (34%) internists, 199 (38%) family practitioners, and 156 (29%) pediatricians. Disease management programs were available 285 to (53%) physicians; 178 had direct experience with the programs. Three quarters of the 178 physicians believed that disease management programs increased the overall quality of patient care and the quality of care for the targeted disease. Eighty-seven percent continued to provide primary care for their patients in these programs, and 70% reported participating in major patient care decisions. Ninety-one percent reported that the programs had no effect on their income, decreased (38%) or had no effect (48%) on their workload, and increased (48%)) their practice satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Practicing primary care physicians have generally favorable perceptions of the effect of voluntary, primary care-inclusive, disease management programs on their patients and on their own practice satisfaction.

Specialists' and primary care physicians' participation in medicaid managed care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare specialist and primary care physician participation in California's Medicaid fee-for-service and managed care programs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: A probability sample stratified by county and by race of 962 specialist physicians and 713 primary care physicians practicing in the 13 largest counties in California in 1998. MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS: We used physician self-report from mailed questionnaires to compare acceptance of new Medicaid and new Medicaid managed care patients by specialists versus primary care physicians and by physician demographics, practice setting, attitudes toward Medicaid patients, and attitudes toward Medicaid managed care. We analyzed results using logistic regression with data weighted to represent the total population of primary care and specialist physicians in the 13 counties. MAIN RESULTS: Specialists were as likely as primary care physicians to have any Medicaid patients in their practices (56% vs 56%; P=.9). Among physicians accepting any new patients, specialists were more likely than primary care physicians to be taking new Medicaid patients but were significantly more likely to limit their acceptance to only Medicaid fee-for-service patients. Thus, specialists were much less likely than primary care physicians to accept new Medicaid managed care patients. After controlling for physician demographics, practice settings, and attitudes toward Medicaid patients and Medicaid managed care, specialists remained much less likely to accept new Medicaid managed care patients. CONCLUSIONS: Expansion of Medicaid managed care may decrease access to specialists as specialists were less likely to accept new Medicaid managed care patients compared to Medicaid fee-for-service patients. Any decrease in access may be mitigated if states are able to contract with group model HMOs and to recruit minority physicians.

Measuring shortages of hospital nurses: how do you know a hospital with a nursing shortage when you see one?

Lack of clarity in definitions of shortages of hospital registered nurses may cause problems for effective policy making, particularly if different measures for identifying a nurse shortage lead to different conclusions about which hospitals and regions are experiencing a shortage. The authors compared different methods of identifying hospitals and regions with a shortage of registered nurses, including both relatively subjective measures (e.g., a hospital administrator's report of a nurse shortage) and more objective measures (e.g., number of registered nurses per inpatient year). Associations were strongest between self-reported shortage status and nursing vacancy rates and weaker for self-reported shortage status and registered nurses per inpatient year and overall regional supply of nurses. Different definitions of nursing shortage are not equally reliable in discriminating between hospitals and regions with and without nursing shortages. When faced with reports sounding an alarm about a hospital nursing shortage, policy makers should carefully consider the definition of shortage being used.

Effect of physician and patient gender concordance on patient satisfaction and preventive care practices.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the role of the gender of the patient and the gender of the physician in explaining differences in patient satisfaction and patient-reported primary care practice. DESIGN: Crosssectional mailed survey [response rate of 71%]. SETTING: A large group-model Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) in northern California. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Random sample of HMO members aged 35 to 85 years with a primary care physician. The respondents (N = 10,205) were divided into four dyads: female patients of female doctors; male patients of female doctors; female patients of male doctors; and male patients of male doctors. Patients were also stratified on the basis of whether they had chosen their physician or had been assigned. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among patients who chose their physician, females who chose female doctors were the least satisfied of the four groups of patients for four of five measures of satisfaction. Male patients of female physicians were the most satisfied. Preventive care and health promotion practices were comparable for male and female physicians. Female patients were more likely to have chosen their physician than males, and were much more likely to have chosen female physicians. These differences were not seen among patients who had been assigned to their physicians and were not due to differences in any of the measured aspects of health values or beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed differences in patient satisfaction related to the gender of the patient and of the physician. While our study cannot determine the reasons for these differences, the results suggest that patients who choose their physician may have different expectations, and the difficulty of fulfi11ing these expectations may present particular challenges for female physicians.

Friend or foe? How primary care physicians perceive hospitalists.

BACKGROUND: Increased use of hospitalists is redefining the role of primary care physicians. Whether primary care physicians welcome this transition is unknown. We examined primary care physicians' perceptions of how hospitalists affect their practices, their patient relationships, and overall patient care. METHODS: A mailed survey of randomly selected general internists, general pediatricians, and family practitioners with experience with hospitalists practicing in California. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians' self-reports of hospitalists' effects on quality of patient care and on their own practices. RESULTS: Seven hundred eight physicians were eligible for this study, and there was a 74% response rate. Of the 524 physicians who responded, 34% were internists, 38% were family practitioners, and 29% were pediatricians. Of the 524 respondents, 335 (64%) had hospitalists available to them and 120 (23%) were required to use hospitalists for all admissions. Physicians perceived hospitalists as increasing (41%) or not changing (44%) the overall quality of care and perceived their practice style differences as neutral or beneficial. Twenty-eight percent of primary care physicians believed that the quality of the physician-patient relationship decreased; 69% reported that hospitalists did not affect their income; 53% believed that hospitalists decreased their workload; and 50% believed that hospitalists increased practice satisfaction. In a multivariate model predicting physician perceptions, internists, physicians who attributed loss of income to hospitalists, and physicians in mandatory hospitalist systems viewed hospitalists less favorably. CONCLUSIONS: Practicing primary care physicians have generally favorable perceptions of hospitalists' effect on patients and on their own practice satisfaction, especially in voluntary hospitalist systems that decrease the workload of primary care physicians and do not threaten their income. Primary care physicians, particularly internists, are less accepting of mandatory hospitalist systems. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:2902-2908

Racial and ethnic differences in a patient survey: patients' values, ratings, and reports regarding physician primary care performance in a large health maintenance organization.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated the influence of race and/or ethnicity on patients' ratings of quality of care. None have incorporated patients' values and beliefs regarding medical care in assessing these possible differences. OBJECTIVES: We explored whether patients' values, ratings, and reports regarding physicians' primary care performance differed by race and/or ethnicity. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional, mailed patient survey. SUBJECTS: The study subjects were adult primary care patients in a large health maintenance population (7,747 whites, 836 blacks, 710 Latinos, and 1,007 Asians). MEASURES AND METHODS: Ratings of the following dimensions of primary care were measured: technical competence, communication, accessibility, prevention and health promotion, and overall satisfaction. Patients' values regarding these dimensions and their confidence in medical care were measured. Multivariate analyses yielded associations of race/ethnicity with satisfaction and with reports of prevention services received. RESULTS: For 7 of the 10 dimensions of primary care measured, Asians rated physician performance significantly less favorably than did whites, including differences among Asian ethnic subgroups. Latinos rated physicians' accessibility less favorably than did whites. Blacks rated physicians' psychosocial and lifestyle health promotion practices higher than did whites. No differences were found in patient reports of prevention services received, except Pacific Islanders reported receiving significantly more prevention services than whites. CONCLUSIONS: In a large HMO population, significant differences were found by race and ethnicity, and among Asian ethnic subgroups, in levels of patient satisfaction with primary care. These findings may represent actual differences in quality of care or variations in patient perceptions, patient expectations, and/or questionnaire response styles. More research is needed to assess, in accurate and culturally appropriate ways, whether health plans are meeting the needs of all enrollees.

Medicaid managed care's impact on safety-net clinics in California.

A growing percentage of Medicaid patients are receiving medical care within a managed care system. This policy change has raised concerns about whether safety-net providers can maintain their share of Medi-Cal (California Medicaid) patients. From 1995 to 1997 several of California's counties implemented mandatory Medi-Cal managed care. The majority of California's safety-net primary care clinics experienced a decline in the percentage of their patients insured by Medi-Cal. However, after the overall decline in the number of Medi-Cal beneficiaries was controlled for, the increased penetration of Medi-Cal managed care in a county was not independently associated with a decline in clinics' share of Medi-Cal patients. Despite this fact, it may become increasingly difficult for clinics to maintain their current level of services with declining Medi-Cal enrollment and other anticipated reforms in their funding.

Is experience with human immunodeficiency virus disease related to clinical practice? A survey of rural primary care physicians.

BACKGROUND: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease is spreading to the rural United States, and medical care is increasingly provided by local primary care physicians. A volume-outcome relationship might exist in HIV care. However, little is known about the HIV experience and practices of rural primary care physicians. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the HIV experience of rural primary care physicians, and to determine whether experience is associated with use of newer management strategies, confidence in care, and consultation needs. DESIGN: Telephone survey of a random sample of primary care physicians. SETTING: Primary care sites in nonmetropolitan California. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty eligible primary care physicians in nonmetropolitan California, with 102 respondents (85.0%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians' HIV experience, use of protease inhibitors and viral load tests, familiarity with vertical HIV transmission prophylaxis, confidence in HIV care, and consultation needs. RESULTS: Most physicians were low-volume providers of HIV care and had limited knowledge of newer management strategies. Experience with protease inhibitors and viral load tests was significantly related to number of recent patients with HIV; 25.0% of those with 1 to 3 patients but 75.0% of those with 4 or more patients had prescribed protease inhibitors (P = .01), whereas 20.8% of those with 1 to 3 patients but 83.3% of those with 4 or more patients had used a viral load test (P = .001). Only 59.8% of all respondents, but 100.0% of those with 4 or more patients, were familiar with vertical HIV transmission prophylaxis (P = .001). After adjustment for other characteristics, HIV experience remained significantly associated with use of newer management strategies (P = .01) and familiarity with vertical HIV transmission prophylaxis (P = .007). Physicians' confidence in HIV care increased with experience (P = .006), and consultation needs decreased (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians in rural California lacked in-depth experience with HIV disease. Experience was significantly associated with use of newer HIV management strategies, confidence, and consultation needs. Treating 4 or more patients with HIV or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome may be the threshold above which primary care physicians rapidly adopt new strategies and have confidence in their care.

Women's provider preferences for basic gynecology care in a large health maintenance organization.

To examine women's preferences for the type and sex of the provider of basic gynecological services and the correlates of these preferences, we mailed a cross-sectional survey to 8406 women in a large group model health maintenance organization (HMO) in northern California, with a response rate of 73.6%. Four questions asked women the type (obstetrician/gynecologist, nurse practitioner, or primary care physician) and sex of provider who performed their last pelvic examination and their preferences in type and sex of provider for these examinations. This was a random sample of female HMO members 35-85 years of age who were empaneled with a primary care physician from one of three categories: family practitioner, general internist, or subspecialist. Of the 5164 respondents who received their last pelvic examination at Kaiser Permanente, 56% had seen a gynecologist, 26% a nurse practitioner, and only 18% their own primary care physician for the examination. Of these women, 60.3% reported preferring a gynecologist for basic gynecology care, 12.6% preferred a nurse practitioner, 13.3% preferred their own primary care physician, and 13.8% had no preference. Patients of family practitioners were more likely to prefer their own primary care practitioner than patients of other types of doctors. The strongest independent predictor of preferring a gynecologist over the primary care physician was having seen a gynecologist for the last pelvic examination (OR = 28.3, p < 0.0001). Other independent predictors of preferring a gynecologist were younger age, higher education and income, and having a male primary care physician. Of respondents, 52.2% preferred a female provider for basic gynecological care, and 42.0% had no preference for the sex of the provider. Preferring a female provider was strongly and independently associated with lower income, higher education, nonwhite race, having a male primary care physician, having an older primary care, physician, and having seen a female provider at the last pelvic examination. In this HMO, a majority of women reported a preference for seeing an obstetrician/gynecologist for their routine gynecological care, despite having a primary care physician. This most likely reflects the strong influence of previous patient experience and that familiarity with a particular type of provider leads to preferences for that type. This medical group's structure probably also affects preferences, as in this HMO, primary care physicians can be discouraged from performing pelvic examinations. Many women do prefer female providers for pelvic examinations, but a large percentage have no preference. These women often see male providers for basic gynecological care. As managed care places increasing emphasis on providing integrated, comprehensive primary care, this apparent preference for specialty gynecological care will require further study.

Screening and intervention for intimate partner abuse: practices and attitudes of primary care physicians.

CONTEXT: Although practice guidelines encouraging the screening of patients for intimate partner abuse have been available for several years, it is unclear how well and in which circumstances physicians adhere to them. OBJECTIVE: To describe the practices and perceptions of primary care physicians regarding intimate partner abuse screening and interventions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional survey of a stratified probability sample of 900 physicians practicing family medicine, general internal medicine, and obstetrics/gynecology in California. After meeting exclusion criteria, 582 were eligible for participation in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Reported abuse screening practices in a variety of clinic settings, based on a 24-item questionnaire, with responses compared by physician sex, practice setting, and intimate partner abuse training. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 400 (69%) of the 582 eligible physicians, including 149 family physicians, 115 internists, and 136 obstetrician/gynecologists. Data were weighted to estimate the practices of primary care physicians in California. An estimated majority (79%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 75%-83%) of these primary care physicians routinely screen injured patients for intimate partner abuse. However, estimated routine screening was less common for new patient visits (10%; 95% CI, 7%-13%), periodic checkups (9%; 95% CI, 6%-12%), and prenatal care (11%; 95% CI, 7%-15%). Neither physician sex nor recent intimate partner abuse training had significant effects on reported new patient screening practices. Obstetrician/gynecologists (17%) and physicians practicing in public clinic settings (37%) were more likely to screen new patients. Internists (6%) and physicians practicing in health maintenance organizations (1%) were least likely to screen new patients. Commonly reported routine interventions included relaying concern for safety (91%), referral to shelters (79%) and counseling (88%), and documentation in the medical chart (89%). Commonly cited barriers to identification and referral included the patients' fear of retaliation (82%) and police involvement (55%), lack of patient disclosure (78%) and follow-up (52%), and cultural differences (56%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that primary care physicians are missing opportunities to screen patients for intimate partner abuse in a variety of clinical situations. Further studies are needed to identify effective intervention strategies and improve adherence to intimate partner abuse practice guidelines.

Resolving the gatekeeper conundrum: what patients value in primary care and referrals to specialists.

CONTEXT: Few data are available regarding how patients view the role of primary care physicians as "gatekeepers" in managed care systems. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which patients value the role of their primary care physicians as first-contact care providers and coordinators of referrals, whether patients perceive that their primary care physicians impede access to specialists, and whether problems in gaining access to specialists are associated with a reduction in patients' trust and confidence in their primary care physicians. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Cross-sectional survey mailed in the fall of 1997 to 12707 adult patients who were members of managed care plans and received care from 10 large physician groups in California. The response rate among eligible patients was 71%. A total of 7718 patients (mean age, 66.7 years; 32 % female) were eligible for analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Questionnaire items addressed 3 main topics: (1) patient attitudes toward the first-contact and coordinating role of their primary care physicians, (2) patients' ratings of their primary care physicians (trust and confidence in and satisfaction with), and (3) patient perceptions of barriers to specialty referrals. Referral barriers were analyzed as predictors of patients' ratings of their physicians. RESULTS: Almost all patients valued the role of a primary care physician as a source of first-contact care (94%) and coordinator of referrals (89%). Depending on the specific medical problem, 75% to 91% of patients preferred to seek care initially from their primary care physicians rather than specialists. Twenty-three percent reported that their primary care physicians or medical groups interfered with their ability to see specialists. Patients who had difficulty obtaining referrals were more likely to report low trust (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.5), low confidence (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.6-2.9), and low satisfaction (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 2.6-4.2) with their primary care physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Patients value the first-contact and coordinating role of primary care physicians. However, managed care policies that emphasize primary care physicians as gatekeepers impeding access to specialists undermine patients' trust and confidence in their primary care physicians.

Quality of primary care practice in a large HMO according to physician specialty.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether physician specialty was associated with differences in the quality of primary care practice and patient satisfaction in a large, group model HMO. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: 10,608 patients ages 35-85 years, selected using stratified probability sampling from the primary care panels of 60 family physicians (FPs), 245 general internists (GIMs), and 55 subspecialty internists (SIMs) at 13 facilities in the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program of Northern California. Patients were surveyed in 1995. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional patient survey measured patient reports of physician performance on primary care measures of coordination, comprehensiveness, and accessibility of care, preventive care procedures, and health promotion. Additional items measured patient satisfaction and health values and beliefs. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patients were remarkably similar across physician specialty groups in their health values and beliefs, ratings of the quality of primary care, and satisfaction. Patients rated GIMs higher than FPs on coordination (adjusted mean scores 68.0 and 58.4 respectively, p<.001) and slightly higher on accessibility and prevention; GIMs were rated more highly than SIMs on comprehensiveness (adjusted mean scores 76.4 and 73.8, p<.01). There were no significant differences between specialty groups on a variety of measures of patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Few differences in the quality of primary care were observed by physician specialty in the setting of a large, well-established group model HMO. These similarities may result from the direct influence of practice setting on physician behavior and organization of care or, indirectly, through the types of physicians attracted to a well-established group model HMO. In some settings, practice organization may have more influence than physician specialty on the delivery of primary care.