Title VII and the development and promotion of national initiatives in training primary care clinicians in the United States

What do medical students and their clinical preceptors understand by primary health care in South Africa? A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The definition of Primary Health Care (PHC) issued by the World Health Organisation in 1978 indicated that essential health care should be made accessible to individuals and their communities close to where they live and work. In 1992 Starfield articulated the four pillars of PHC: the patient's first contact with healthcare, comprehensive care, coordinated care and continuous care. Using this literature guidance, this study sought to explore what undergraduate medical students and their clinical preceptors understood by PHC in four South African medical schools.

METHODS

A qualitative study using the phenomenological design was conducted among undergraduate medical students and their clinical preceptors. The setting was four medical schools in South Africa (Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Walter Sisulu University and the University of KwaZulu-Natal and the Witwatersrand University). A total of 27 in-depth interviews were conducted among the clinical preceptors and 16 focus group discussions among the students who were in their clinical years of training (MBChB 4-6). Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim, followed by thematic data analysis using the MAXQDA 2020 (Analytics Pro) software.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified in which there were similarities between the students and their preceptors regarding their understanding of PHC: (1) PHC as the patient's first contact with the healthcare system; (2) comprehensive care; (3) coordination of care and (4) continuity of care. A further two themes were identified in which these two groups were not of similar understanding: (5) PHC as a level or an approach to healthcare and (6) the role of specialist clinical preceptors in PHC.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical students and their clinical preceptors displayed an understanding of PHC in line with four pillars articulated by Starfield and the WHO definition of PHC. However, there remains areas of divergence, on which the medical schools should follow the guidance provided by the WHO and Starfield for a holistic understanding of PHC.

Recruiting Quarterbacks: Strategies for Revitalizing Training in Primary Care Internal Medicine

Current U.S. primary care workforce shortages and trainees' declining interest in primary care residency training, especially regarding primary care internal medicine, have many parallels with circumstances in the early 1970s, when modern adult primary care first emerged. Rediscovery of the lessons learned and the solutions developed at that time and applying them to the current situation have the potential to help engage a new generation of young physicians in the primary care mission.The author compares the internal medicine residency primary care track at the University of New Mexico, described by Brislen and colleagues in this issue, with the nation's first three-year primary care internal medicine residency track introduced at Massachusetts General Hospital in 1973. Strategies for addressing the challenges of primary care practice and improving learner attitudes toward the field are discussed. The author suggests that primary care physicians should be likened to "quarterbacks" rather than "gatekeepers" or "providers" to underscore the intensity of training, level of responsibility, degree of professionalism, and amount of compensation required for this profession. The advent of multidisciplinary team practice, modern health information technology, and fundamental payment reform promises to dramatically alter the picture of primary care, restoring its standing as one of the best job descriptions in medicine.

Impact of the Affordable Care Act on Grant-Supported Primary Care Faculty Development

Health reform requires well-trained primary care physicians with new skills. Teaching faculty need to develop proficiency to deliver care in new models and systems, to lead change, and to teach these skills to the next generation of clinicians. Title VII Section 747 of the Public Health Service Act, modified and reauthorized under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), is the only federal program that specifically supports the professional development of primary care faculty. We analyzed the effect of the modifications under the ACA on a funding opportunity announcement addressing faculty development needs and attributes of funded applications, including geographic regions. The data offer useful insights to programs interested in tapping sources of support for primary care faculty development. The data also show that targeted federal funding can bring about changes that contribute to an up-to-date, responsive primary care workforce. Title VII programs, as amended by the ACA, focus on curriculum development, teaching in community-based settings, and integrating patient-centered medical home concepts and interprofessional education and practice into the training of the next generation of physicians. These strategies drive change and improve the quality of care and patient outcomes.

Which medical schools produce rural physicians? A 15-year update

PURPOSE

Despite continued federal and state efforts to increase the number of physicians in rural areas, disparities between the supply of rural and urban physicians persist. The authors examined the training of the rural physician workforce in the United States.

METHOD

Using a national cross-sectional analysis of the 2005 American Medical Association and American Osteopathic Association Masterfile physician data, the authors examined a 10-year cohort of clinically active MD and DO physicians who graduated from medical school between 1988 and 1997.

RESULTS

Eleven percent (20,037) of the physician cohort were currently practicing in a rural location in 2005. Eighteen percent (2,045) of osteopathic medical school graduates were currently practicing in a rural location. Twenty-three percent (6,282) of family physician graduates practiced in rural areas. Women continue to be less likely than men to practice in rural areas, although the gap is narrowing. Rural residency trainees were over three times more likely to practice in rural areas (RR = 3.4, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion and number of physicians entering rural practice has remained stable compared with earlier analyses. However, recent trends such as declining primary care interest are not yet reflected in these data and may portend worsening shortages of rural physicians.

National trends in the United States of America physician assistant workforce from 1980 to 2007

BACKGROUND

The physician assistant (PA) profession is a nationally recognized medical profession in the United States of America (USA). However, relatively little is known regarding national trends of the PA workforce.

METHODS

We examined the 1980-2007 USA Census data to determine the demographic distribution of the PA workforce and PA-to-population relationships. Maps were developed to provide graphical display of the data. All analyses were adjusted for the complex census design and analytical weights provided by the Census Bureau.

RESULTS

In 1980 there were about 29,120 PAs, 64% of which were males. By contrast, in 2007 there were approximately 97,721 PAs with more than 66% of females. In 1980, Nevada had the highest estimated rate of 40 PAs per 100,000 persons, and North Dakota had the lowest rate (three). The corresponding rates in 2007 were about 85 in New Hampshire and ten in Mississippi. The levels of PA education have increased from less than 21% of PAs with four or more years of college in 1980, to more than 65% in 2007. While less than 17% of PAs were of minority groups in 1980, this figure rose to 23% in 2007. Although nearly 70% of PAs were younger than 35 years old in 1980, this percentage fell to 38% in 2007.

CONCLUSION

The trends of sustained increase and geographic variation in the PA workforce were identified. Educational level, percentage of minority, and age of the PA workforce have increased over time. Major causes of the changes in the PA workforce include educational factors and federal legislation or state regulation.

Title VII innovations in American medical and dental education: responding to 21st century priorities for the health of the American public

The Title VII Training in Primary Care Medicine and Dentistry grant program has been an engine for innovation by providing funds to develop and implement new curricula, new models of care delivery, and new methods of fellowship and faculty development. During period one, 1963-1975, the disciplines of family medicine and physicians assistants (PAs) first received funding to establish residency programs in family medicine and student training for PAs. Other innovations included interdisciplinary training and curricula in substance abuse and nutrition. During period two, 1976-1991, Title VII funds supported implementation of general dental residency programs. In family medicine, general internal medicine, and general pediatrics, ambulatory care training was expanded with a focus on community-oriented primary care and preventive medicine, as well as curricula in ethics, distance learning, behavioral health, and what is now called evidence-based medicine. During period two, Title VII also helped build the infrastructure of primary care through funding to recruit faculty, to expand training sites into community settings, and to incorporate topics relevant to primary care. During period three, 1992-present, innovations shifted to areas of clinical relevance or national priority, training in the care of vulnerable populations, and design of educational strategies to eliminate health disparities, often through collaborative partnerships between medicine, dentistry, and public health. This article focuses on three areas that reflect much of the current work of Title VII grantees: clinical skills and practice improvement, interdisciplinary models of training and patient care, and care of vulnerable and underserved populations.This article is part of a theme issue of Academic Medicine on the Title VII health professions training programs.

A legislative history of federal assistance for health professions training in primary care medicine and dentistry in the United States, 1963-2008

This article reviews the legislative history of Title VII of the United States Public Health Service Act. It describes three periods of federal support for health professions training in medicine and dentistry. During the first era, 1963 to 1975, federal support led to an increase in the overall production of physicians and dentists, primarily through grants for construction, renovation, and expansion of schools. The second period, 1976 to 1991, witnessed a shift in federal support to train physicians, dentists, and physician assistants in the fields of primary care defined as family medicine, general internal medicine, and general pediatrics. During this era, divisions of general internal medicine and general pediatrics, and departments of family medicine, were established in nearly every medical and osteopathic medical school. All three disciplines conducted primary care residencies, medical student clerkships, and faculty development programs. The third period, 1992 to present, emphasized the policy goals of caring for vulnerable populations, greater diversity in the health professions, and curricula innovations to prepare trainees for the future practice of medicine and dentistry. Again, Title VII grantees met these policy goals by designing curricula and creating clinical experiences to teach care of the homeless, persons with HIV, the elderly, and other vulnerable populations. Many grantees recruited underrepresented minorities into their programs as trainees and as faculty, and all of them designed and implemented new curricula to address emerging health priorities.This article is part of a theme issue of Academic Medicine on the Title VII health professions training programs.