Australian general practice at a fork in the road: which way forward? (In reply)
Author: Martin Van Der Weyden
Published online: 17 December 2001
|
Letter Australian general practice at a fork in the road: which way forward? (In reply)
MJA 2001; 175: 667
| |
|
In reply: Despite Rogers' views to the contrary,
disillusionment and disenchantment are pan-profession phenomena.
Like general practitioners, consultants are unhappy with the
deteriorating hospital conditions and working
environment1 that are their lot. Further,
I am not moved by Rogers' worn view of the profession as "them"
(specialists) and "us" (GPs). Most modern GPs consider general
practice a specialty.
To qualify as a specialty, a branch of medicine needs to have a unique body of knowledge and techniques which are sustained and expanded by its members. Unfortunately, general practice lags behind other specialties in these requirements.2,3 It is depressing that the call for general practice to develop and enhance its educational and research programs occasioned "the greatest hoots of laughter" from Rogers and his fellow GPs. This destructive ethos persists in general practice, to its own detriment. In my editorial,4 I suggested that the trend to corporatisation in general practice presents an opportunity to address the lack of time, lack of critical mass and lack of recognition that are barriers to effective research in this field.5 If GP corporatisation simply replicates the current culture and barriers to research on a larger scale, what is the gain? Rogers' question "what has been done about it [research]?" reflects a passive approach — "important, but not my problem", "someone should do it, but not me". Unless research and education become the business of every GP, general practice as a specialty is in danger of disintegrating into multiple craft groups, not necesarily medically based. Such a development is certainly not a cause for hoots of laughter. Martin B Van Der Weyden
| |
References
- Perkins RJ, Petrie KJ, Alley PG, et al. Health service reform: theperceptions of medical specialists in Australia (NSW), the UnitedKingdom and New Zealand. Med J Aust 1977; 167: 201-204.
- Van Der Weyden MB. Promoting an evidence base for general practice[editorial]. Med J Aust 1999; 171: 60-61.
- McAvoy B. General practice research. Aust Fam Physician2001; 30: 175-176.
- Van Der Weyden MB. Australian general practice at a fork in the road:which way forward? [editorial]. Med J Aust 2001; 175: 62-63.
- Kljakovic M. Flourishing research in academic general practice.NZ Fam Physician 1998; 25: 35-40.
Shifting focus to adolescent wellbeing and inclusive participation in the digital age
Allyson R Todd, Elena Wang, Stephanie R Partridge
The clinical presentation, investigation, and management of women diagnosed with endometriosis in Australian general practices, 2011–2021: an open cohort study
Danielle Mazza, Kailash Thapaliya, Sharinne B Crawford, Alissia Hui, Maryam Moradi, Luke E Grzeskowiak
The impact of the Breast Screen NSW transition from film to digital mammography, 2002–2016: a linked population health data analysis
Rachel Farber, Nehmat Houssami, Katy J L Bell
Non‐technical errors associated with deaths in surgical care, Australia, 2012–2019, by surgical specialty (Australian and New Zealand Audit of Surgical Mortality): a retrospective cohort study
Jesse Ey, Victoria Kollias, Octavia Lee, Kelly Hou, Matheesha Herath, John B North, Ellie Treloar, Suzanne Edwards, Martin Bruening, Adam J Wells, Guy J Maddern
The CURE Asthma roadmap
Gary P Anderson, Anthony Flynn, Phil G Bardin, John D Blakey, Shyamali C Dharmage, Paul Foster, Peter G Gibson, Adam Jaffe, Alan James, Christine R Jenkins, Sundram Sivamalai, Peter D Sly, Guy B Marks, Vanessa M McDonald, Judy Wetttenhall
Evidence from Australian cohort studies about asthma trajectories and transitions across the life course: a narrative review
Caroline Lodge, Xin Dai, Ingrid A. Laing, Michael P Menden, Anthony Flynn, Gary P Anderson, Sarath Ranganathan, Shyamali C Dharmage