M H Kelly1, T S Murray. 1. Department of Postgraduate Medicine, University of Glasgow.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 1990 Contract encouraged general practitioners to participate in continuing medical education by providing a financial incentive. AIM: The study was designed: to determine the motivation of general practitioners attending education events; and to compare motivation and reasons for attendance pre- and post-Contract at commercial and non-commercial meetings, and at the different educational categories of Disease Management (DM), Health Promotion (HP) and Service Management (SM). METHOD: Two structured questionnaires were used. The first was sent to all general practitioners in the West of Scotland and asked about motivation pre-1990 Contract and the second, post-Contract, looked at motivation and reasons for attending a course as part of post course assessment. This latter was part of a much larger study evaluating continuing medical education. RESULTS: A total of 1161 practitioners responded to questionnaire I and 552 general practitioners attended 27 randomly selected postgraduate meetings. Finance was a motivator in 3.8% pre-Contract, and this increased to 33.3% post-Contract and was the most commonly stated reason for attendance in 81.3%. Financial incentive had the biggest influence on those attending HP sessions (91.5%), then SM (87.2%) and finally DM (78.6% (chi 2 = 8.68; P < or = 0.013). It was also important to 73% attending drug-company-sponsored meetings compared with 83.7% going to non-commercial ones. Interest was a good motivator both pre- and post-Contract, but more so for DM than other categories and drug company as opposed to non-commercial meetings (chi 2 = 9.4; P < 0.002). Lack of knowledge became a less-important motivator post-Contract, and doctors felt least knowledgeable in SM (62.2%), as opposed to DM (57.9%) and HP (23.6%) (chi 2 = 38.8; P < 0.001, with each differing significantly from both others). Doctors found the topics provided by the pharmaceutical companies more interesting (chi 2 = 9.4; P < 0.002) and the hospitality provided more alluring than scheme meetings (chi 2 = 28.6; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Finance has a major effect on attendance at postgraduate meetings but may not be a good incentive for learning. Planning for education must take into account the different motivational factors for the different categories. Reasons for attending commercial meetings differ from non-commercial ones and these events should be closely monitored.
BACKGROUND: The 1990 Contract encouraged general practitioners to participate in continuing medical education by providing a financial incentive. AIM: The study was designed: to determine the motivation of general practitioners attending education events; and to compare motivation and reasons for attendance pre- and post-Contract at commercial and non-commercial meetings, and at the different educational categories of Disease Management (DM), Health Promotion (HP) and Service Management (SM). METHOD: Two structured questionnaires were used. The first was sent to all general practitioners in the West of Scotland and asked about motivation pre-1990 Contract and the second, post-Contract, looked at motivation and reasons for attending a course as part of post course assessment. This latter was part of a much larger study evaluating continuing medical education. RESULTS: A total of 1161 practitioners responded to questionnaire I and 552 general practitioners attended 27 randomly selected postgraduate meetings. Finance was a motivator in 3.8% pre-Contract, and this increased to 33.3% post-Contract and was the most commonly stated reason for attendance in 81.3%. Financial incentive had the biggest influence on those attending HP sessions (91.5%), then SM (87.2%) and finally DM (78.6% (chi 2 = 8.68; P < or = 0.013). It was also important to 73% attending drug-company-sponsored meetings compared with 83.7% going to non-commercial ones. Interest was a good motivator both pre- and post-Contract, but more so for DM than other categories and drug company as opposed to non-commercial meetings (chi 2 = 9.4; P < 0.002). Lack of knowledge became a less-important motivator post-Contract, and doctors felt least knowledgeable in SM (62.2%), as opposed to DM (57.9%) and HP (23.6%) (chi 2 = 38.8; P < 0.001, with each differing significantly from both others). Doctors found the topics provided by the pharmaceutical companies more interesting (chi 2 = 9.4; P < 0.002) and the hospitality provided more alluring than scheme meetings (chi 2 = 28.6; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Finance has a major effect on attendance at postgraduate meetings but may not be a good incentive for learning. Planning for education must take into account the different motivational factors for the different categories. Reasons for attending commercial meetings differ from non-commercial ones and these events should be closely monitored.
Authors: Murray Lough; Diane Kelly; Mike Taylor; David Snadden; Bill Patterson; Iain McNamara; Stuart Murray Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 5.386