Is there an association between socioeconomic status of General Practice population and postgraduate training practice accreditation? A cross-sectional analysis of Scottish General Practices

McCallum, M. , Hanlon, P. , Mair, F. S. and McKay, J. (2019) Is there an association between socioeconomic status of General Practice population and postgraduate training practice accreditation? A cross-sectional analysis of Scottish General Practices. Family Practice, 37(2), pp. 200-205. (doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmz071) (PMID:31746981) (PMCID:PMC7094817)

[img]
Preview
Text
cmz071.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

155kB

Abstract

Background: Practice population socioeconomic status is associated with practice postgraduate training accreditation. General Practitioner recruitment to socioeconomically deprived areas is challenging, exposure during training may encourage recruitment. Objectives: To determine the association of practice population socioeconomic deprivation score and training status, and if this has changed over time. Methods: Cross-sectional study looking at socioeconomic deprivation and training status for all General Practices in Scotland (n = 982). Data from Information Services Division, from 2015, were combined with the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation to calculate weighted socioeconomic deprivation scores for every practice in Scotland. Scottish training body database identified training practices (n = 330). Mean deprivation score for training and non-training practices was calculated. Logistic regression was used to quantify the odds ratio of training status based on deprivation score, adjusted for practice list size, and compared with a similar 2009 analysis. Results: Socioeconomic deprivation score is associated with training status, but is not significant when adjusted for practice list size [OR (adjusted) 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74–1.04]. In contrast, in 2009, adjusted deprivation score remained significant. Mean deprivation score in training and non-training practices remained similar at both time points [2015: 2.98 (SD 0.88) versus 3.17 (SD 0.81); 2009: 2.95 versus 3.19), with a more deprived mean score in non-training practices. Conclusions: General practices in affluent areas remain more likely to train, although this association appears to be related to larger practice list sizes rather than socioeconomic factors. To ensure a variety of training environments training bodies should target, and support, smaller practices working in more socioeconomically deprived areas.

Item Type:Articles
Additional Information:Funding: MM was an NHS Education for Scotland Health Inequality Fellow from August 2016 to August 2017, and a NES funded Clinical Research Fellow August 2017–August 2019. PH was NES funded Clinical Research Fellow August 2018–2019.
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:McCallum, Dr Marianne and McKay, Dr John and Mair, Professor Frances and Hanlon, Dr Peter
Authors: McCallum, M., Hanlon, P., Mair, F. S., and McKay, J.
College/School:College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > Institute of Health and Wellbeing > General Practice and Primary Care
Journal Name:Family Practice
Publisher:Oxford University Press
ISSN:0263-2136
ISSN (Online):1460-2229
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2019 The Authors
First Published:First published in Family Practice 37(2):200–205
Publisher Policy:Reproduced under a Creative Commons License

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record