AIMS: To explore the concerns of pre-registration house officers (PRHOs) and the views of hospital consultants in relation to pre-registration rotations with a general practice component. METHOD: As part of a larger qualitative study evaluating how a group of 24 PRHOs learn in hospital and primary care settings, face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted with the PRHOs, and semistructured telephone interviews with the PRHOs' educational supervisors were carried out. RESULTS: The interviews with the PRHOs highlighted their concerns about how consultants might view PRHO rotations into general practice. However, the majority of consultants interviewed recognized and valued specific aspects of the experience to be gained by PRHOs in general practice, including the relationship between primary and secondary care; communications skills; specific clinical skills, and an understanding of the natural course of illnesses. The experience was seen as valuable for PRHOs considering either a general practice or a hospital career. Of the 17 consultants, 10 were also confident that 4-month placements in surgery and medicine would give PRHOs adequate experience in either specialty, providing the placements were sufficiently busy. CONCLUSIONS: Medical school deans and medical students considering PRHO rotations with a general practice component can be encouraged by the fact that, in this small study, the majority of hospital consultants interviewed valued the specific experience offered by these rotations, and felt that adequate medical and surgical experience could be gained in busy 4-month hospital placements.
AIMS: To explore the concerns of pre-registration house officers (PRHOs) and the views of hospital consultants in relation to pre-registration rotations with a general practice component. METHOD: As part of a larger qualitative study evaluating how a group of 24 PRHOs learn in hospital and primary care settings, face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted with the PRHOs, and semistructured telephone interviews with the PRHOs' educational supervisors were carried out. RESULTS: The interviews with the PRHOs highlighted their concerns about how consultants might view PRHO rotations into general practice. However, the majority of consultants interviewed recognized and valued specific aspects of the experience to be gained by PRHOs in general practice, including the relationship between primary and secondary care; communications skills; specific clinical skills, and an understanding of the natural course of illnesses. The experience was seen as valuable for PRHOs considering either a general practice or a hospital career. Of the 17 consultants, 10 were also confident that 4-month placements in surgery and medicine would give PRHOs adequate experience in either specialty, providing the placements were sufficiently busy. CONCLUSIONS: Medical school deans and medical students considering PRHO rotations with a general practice component can be encouraged by the fact that, in this small study, the majority of hospital consultants interviewed valued the specific experience offered by these rotations, and felt that adequate medical and surgical experience could be gained in busy 4-month hospital placements.