Title Bridging the gap of general practitioners' competence on European Market
Project Number 2008-1-PL1-LEO05-02080
Product Report on defining the deficit competencies of general practitioners in the field of health promotion and disease prevention
Title Report on defining the deficit competencies of general practitioners in the field of health promotion and disease prevention
Product Type others
Marketing Text The report on GPs’ deficit competencies in the field of disease prevention and health promotion.
Description The report provides summary of activities carried out within the project realization aimed at identification of the gaps in GPs competencies in the areas of health promotion and disease prevention. The main outcomes were provided by the usage of the Internet based tool for measuring GPs competencies carried out on the group of about 150 GPs in four partner countries. In order to achieve comprehensive character of the outcomes the results of other project’s analysis (analysis of the training curricula, in-depths interviews with FM experts and focus groups research with practicing GPs) were also included in the report.
Target group The report can be helpful for teachers and tutors of GPs in Greece, Lithuania, Poland and the UK who prepare curricula, teaching programmes, courses and other educational activities for GPs in the field of health promotion and disease prevention.
Comparison of the data collected through the GAP project tool and used in addition to the qualitative methods of evaluation (the interviews with experts, the focus group discussions, the analysis of the teaching curriculum and legal regulations on health promotion and disease prevention) made it possible to come to a final conclusion concerning the gaps in the competencies of GPs. Some basic conclusions of the GAP project are presented below:
• The largest competence gaps in relation to health promotion and disease prevention exist in the areas of educational and organizational competencies.
• Despite the fact that clinical competencies are considered a more developed competence area, the results of the objective evaluation show a significant gap in the sub-area of chronic disease management. On the other hand, the sub-area of preventive interventions seems to be quite well represented in the rating of competencies.
• Deficits were seen to be present in two sub-areas within the organizational field: on local community issues and information competencies. Both a subjective and an objective evaluation of the competencies within the pilot group of GPs showed a rather limited level of competence. At the same time they received a high rating in the patient relationship sub-area of organizational competencies.
• In general, GPs self-rated their disease prevention and health promotion competencies with caution (a mean score of 3.34 on a 1–5 scale) in comparison with the objective rating (a mean score of 3.77, p<0.05) of their competencies based on the knowledge/competence tests. This probably means that a majority of GPs slightly underestimate their actual competencies. However, the objective evaluation of GPs’ competencies in the field of health promotion and disease prevention with the use of GAP project tools showed a much larger variation of results than in the case of subjective evaluation. This means that some physicians may overestimate their real level of competence.
• Significant gaps were established between relatively good training curriculum/programs and the practical implementation of health promotion and disease prevention activities at the GP’s office.
• Significant gaps exist in national legislation (concerning functions, competencies, services and reimbursement for GPs for preventive activities), making impossible the implementation of health promotion and disease prevention on a larger scale.
Area of application Course organizers and teachers of family medicine could use the Report as a source of reference on existing GPs’ competencies deficits.
Product Languages English