scholarly journals Evaluation of exposure to primary care clinics during Family Medicine residency: evidence from a training program in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-273
Author(s):  
Mamdouh Althageel ◽  
Mohammad Khan ◽  
Rizwan Abdulkader ◽  
Noorulzaman Mohaideen ◽  
Basema Alkhudair ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 751-758
Author(s):  
Stephanie A Hooker ◽  
Paul Stadem ◽  
Michelle D Sherman ◽  
Jason Ricco

Abstract Background Mounting evidence suggests that loneliness increases the risk of poor health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease and premature mortality.Objective: This study examined the prevalence of loneliness in an urban, underserved family medicine residency clinic and the association of loneliness with health care utilization. Methods Adult patients (N = 330; M age = 42.1 years, SD = 14.9; 63% female; 58% African American) completed the 3-item UCLA Loneliness screener at their primary care visits between November 2018 and January 2019. A retrospective case–control study design was used to compare health care utilization [hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, primary care visits, no-shows and referrals] in the prior 2 years between patients who identified as lonely versus those who did not. Covariates included demographics and clinical characteristics. Results Nearly half (44%) of patients exceeded the cut-off for loneliness. Patients who were lonely were more likely to identify as African American, have depression and have a substance use disorder. Patients in the lonely group had significantly longer hospital stays and more primary care visits, no-shows and referrals than patients in the non-lonely group; there were no differences in number of hospitalizations or ED visits. Conclusions The prevalence of loneliness in an urban, underserved primary care clinic was much higher than prior prevalence estimates in primary care. Patients who are lonely may use more health care resources than patients who are not lonely. Primary care may be an ideal setting in which to identify patients who are lonely to further understand the impact of loneliness on health care outcomes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-127
Author(s):  
Chooi Peng Ong ◽  
Cindy Shiqi Zhu ◽  
Desmond SL Ong ◽  
Ying Pin Toh

Family medicine training encompasses the need to develop a diverse skillset and the ability to practice in different settings. During three years of training, family medicine residents from National University Health System (NUHS) rapidly transit through many hospital rotations with varying specialty-specific competency requirements. Throughout this period, each resident is rostered to run a half-day primary care clinic on the same day each week and is assigned a dedicated faculty member to supervise him during the session. Each faculty member is assigned up to four to six residents for the half-day sessions every week. There is a need to contextualise what is learnt in hospital to primary care, and to effectively integrate knowledge across disciplines. We describe here a tool that the NUHS family medicine residency has used to bring together faculty and residents of varying seniorities and locations for discussion, reflection, and growth.


2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-96
Author(s):  
Amanda Weidner ◽  
Ryan Gilles ◽  
Dean A. Seehusen

Background and Objectives: Finding scholarship opportunities is a common struggle for family medicine residency programs, especially community-based programs. Participation in practice-based research networks (PBRNs) has been suggested as one option, but little is known about resident engagement in PBRNs. This study explores how PBRNs are currently involving family medicine residency programs and whether there are additional opportunities for engagement. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 126 primary care PBRN directors regarding residency program involvement in PBRN governance and scholarly activity. We used descriptive statistics to characterize our sample and bivariate analyses to assess association between involvement of residency programs in PBRNs and PBRN characteristics. Results: Most responding PBRNs (N=56, 44.4% response rate) included at least one residency program (80%) and many had residency faculty involved in projects (67.3%), though involvement of residents was less common (52.7%). When involved, residents were part of fewer projects but participated in the full range of research activities. Few PBRNs had deeper engagement with residencies such as written goals specifying their inclusion in projects (23.6%) or residency faculty participation in the PBRN’s governing body (45.5%). Most PBRNs not currently involving residents are interested in doing so (73.9%), and half of these have the resources to do this. Conclusions: Most family medicine and primary care PBRNs have some involvement with residency programs, usually at the faculty level. Building on current PBRN involvement and making connections between local PBRNs and residency programs where none exist represents an excellent opportunity for education and for growing the research capacity of the discipline.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document