The epidemiology of teaching and training practices in North-East England

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Teaching and training practices in England serve less ethnically diverse and urban environments than non-teaching practices. However, it is not known if these trends are consistent across the country.

Methods: We linked data on teaching and training status for all North-East England practices to practice characteristics, locality and patient variables, calculated the association with each variable and compared to the national figures.

Results: Teaching and training practices in North-East England are larger than non-teaching and non-training practices (mean list size (SD) 9109 (4080) vs. 5547 (5325), p < 0.001), have fewer patients per GP (1649 (404) vs. 2302 (1245), p < 0.001), higher patient satisfaction (43.45 (1.61) vs. 42.77 (2.14), p < 0.005) and quality and outcomes framework scores (98.3% (2.2%) vs. 95.5% (6.9%), p < 0.001), and are less likely to be in deprived areas (OR = 0.63; 95% CI 0.42–1.44). However, rurality, ethnic diversity, and patients’ health status were not significantly associated with teaching and training status.

Conclusions: In North-East England, general practices’ teaching and training status is not associated with serving an urban or more ethnically diverse locality, in contrast with the national picture. The national profile may mask significant regional variations.

KEYWORDS:

• Medical Education
• epidemiology
• general practice
• teaching
• undergraduate
• postgraduate

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Eliot Rees and Robert McKinley of Keele University for kindly providing us with their national dataset and the Primary Care School and HEE (NE&NC) for their data on F2 and training practices.