Retirement ages of senior UK doctors: national surveys of the medical graduates of 1974 and 1977

General practitioner workforce sustainability to maximise effective and equitable patient care: a realist review protocol

INTRODUCTION

There are not enough general practitioners (GPs) in the UK National Health Service. This problem is worse in areas of the country where poverty and underinvestment in health and social care mean patients experience poorer health compared with wealthier regions. Encouraging more doctors to choose and continue in a GP career is a government priority. This review will examine which aspects of the healthcare system affect GP workforce sustainability, how, why and for whom.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A realist review is a theory-driven interpretive approach to evidence synthesis, that brings together qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods research and grey literature. We will use a realist approach to synthesise data from the available published literature to refine an evidence-based programme theory that will identify the important contextual factors and underlying mechanisms that underpin observed outcomes relating to GP workforce sustainability. Our review will follow Pawson's five iterative stages: (1) finding existing theories, (2) searching for evidence, (3) article selection, (4) data extraction and (5) synthesising evidence and drawing conclusions. We will work closely with key stakeholders and embed patient and public involvement throughout the review process to refine the focus of the review and enhance the impact and relevance of our research.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review does not require formal ethical approval as it draws on secondary data from published articles and grey literature. Findings will be disseminated through multiple channels, including publication in peer-reviewed journals, at national and international conferences, and other digital scholarly communication tools such as video summaries, X and blog posts.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023395583.

Benchmarking Surgeons’ Gender and Year of Medical School Graduation Associated With Monthly Operative Workdays for Multispecialty Groups

Background

Female surgeons reportedly receive less surgical block time and fewer procedural referrals than male surgeons. In this study, we compared operative days between female and male surgeons throughout Florida. Our objective was to facilitate benchmarking by multispecialty groups, both the endpoint to use for statistically reliable results and expected differences.

Methodology

The historical cohort study included all 4,060,070 ambulatory procedural encounters and inpatient elective surgical states performed between January 2017 and December 2019 by 8,472 surgeons at 609 facilities. Surgeons’ gender, year of medical school graduation, and surgical specialty were obtained from their National Provider Identifiers.

Results

Female surgeons operated an average of 1.0 fewer days per month than matched male surgeons (99% confidence interval 0.8 to 1.2 fewer days, P < 0.0001). The mean differences were 0.8 to 1.4 fewer days per month among each of the five quintiles of years of graduation from medical school (all P ≤ 0.0050). Results were comparable when repeated using the number of monthly cases the surgeons performed.

Conclusions

An average difference of ≤1.4 days per month is a conservative estimate for the current status quo of the workload difference in Florida. Suppose that a group’s female surgeons average more than two fewer operative days per month than the group’s male surgeons of the same specialty. Such a large average difference would call for investigation of what might reflect systematic bias. While such a difference may reflect good flexibility of the organization, it may show a lack of responsiveness (e.g., fewer referrals of procedural patients to female surgeons or bias when apportioning allocated operating room time).

Won't you stay just a little bit longer? A discrete choice experiment of UK doctors' preferences for delaying retirement

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Health systems around the world face difficulties retaining their workforce, which is exacerbated by the early retirement of experienced clinicians. This study aims to determine how to incentivise doctors to delay their retirement.

METHODS

We used a discrete choice experiment to estimate the relative importance of job characteristics in doctors' willingness to delay retirement, and the number of extra years they were willing to delay retirement when job characteristics improved. 2885 British Medical Association members aged between 50 and 70 years, registered with the General Medical Council, practising in Scotland (in December 2019), and who had not started to draw a pension were invited. We compared the preferences of hospital doctors (HDs) and general practitioners (GPs).

RESULTS

The response rate was 27.4% (n = 788). The number of extra years expected to work was the most important job characteristic for both respondents, followed by work intensity for GPs, whereas working hours and on-call were more important for HDs. Personalised working conditions and pension taxation were the least important characteristics for both groups. Setting all characteristics to their BEST levels, GPs would be willing to delay retirement by 4 years and HDs by 7 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Characteristics related to the job rather than pension could have the greatest impact on delaying retirement among clinicians.

'Quit while you are ahead - and smell the roses!' A survey of retired Fellows of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists

There are no published data on the age of retirement of anaesthetists in Australia and New Zealand. We surveyed 622 retired Fellows of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists to determine their ages of complete retirement from clinical practice, demographics, and whether they had retired at the age they had intended to retire. We also aimed to explore factors affecting the decision to retire, the practice of 'winding down', common post-retirement activities, and the arrangement of personal and professional affairs. Responses were received from 371 specialists (response rate 60%). The mean (standard deviation) age of retirement was 65.2 (6.9) years. The mean (standard deviation) retirement ages ranged from 62.0 (7.1) years (those who retired earlier than planned) to 68.0 (4.3) years (those who retired later than they had intended). The mean (standard deviation) age of retirement of the male respondents was 66.0 (6.5) years, and for female respondents was 62.7 (7.7) years. Two hundred and thirty-three respondents (63%) reported winding down their practice prior to retirement, and 360 (97%) had made a will. Poor health and loss of confidence were the two most common factors in the retirement decisions of those who retired earlier than they had planned. Our results may assist current practitioners plan for retirement, and suggest strategies to help health services, departments and private groups accommodate individuals in winding down their practice.

'Let us Help'-Why senior medical students are the next step in battling the COVID-19 Pandemic

As senior medical students in the UK, we read Dr Stein's letter on the novel coronavirus (COVID-19)² and began wondering where we fit in, in this pandemic. As the government heads into a 'war footing',¹³ there is an increased need for medical staff. There is speculation of bringing back retired doctors, many of who fall into at-risk categories. With clinical placement and exams cancelled, we are determined to use our hard-earned skills in some way, to help in what is the biggest global emergency of our lifetime.

General practice recruitment - a survey of awareness and influence of the Scottish Targeted Enhanced Recruitment Scheme (TERS)

The World Health Organisation reported that health-care systems worldwide have problems with the recruitment and retention of general practitioners (GPs) into clinical practice, particularly to rural and under-served areas. A recent survey of United Kingdom (UK) trainees found that they valued posts with good training conditions, were in desirable locations and gave opportunities for their partner. The Scottish Government has set a target to increase the number of GPs in Scotland by 800 in the next 10 years. In recent years, GP speciality training recruitment has been challenging with significant vacancies in some training programmes, primarily in rural areas, or urban areas with a history of poorer recruitment. Recruitment incentive schemes are in operation in different countries in the UK. The Scottish Government introduced a Targeted Enhanced Recruitment Scheme (TERS), offering a £20,000 payment to GPST trainees accepting a targeted post. This study aimed to evaluate awareness and influence of the TERS initiative on programme choice in Scotland in August 2017. A survey was developed and sent to GP trainees taking up a GPST post in August 2017. Ninety-five out of 245 doctors responded (response rate of 39%). Almost two-thirds (65.3%) were aware of TERS at the time of application and this was via word of mouth and from the National Recruitment Office website. Only 21% of GPSTs aware of TERS were influenced by it in their choice of training location. The locations of family, spouse or partner, and of pre-existing geographical preferences were more influential than TERS.