To assess the effects of physician-colleague and coworker abuse on family physicians in Canada.A mixed-methods, bilingual study that included surveys and telephone interviews.Canada.Family physicians in active practice who were members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada in 2009.Surveys were mailed to a random sample of family physicians (N = 3802), and 37 family physicians who had been abused in the past year participated in telephone interviews.A total of 770 surveys (20%) were completed. A small number of respondents reported having been subjected to abuse by physician colleagues (9%) or coworkers (6%) in the previous month. Many of the respondents reported that the same physician colleagues or coworkers were repeat abusers. More than three-quarters (77%) of the physician-colleague abusers were men, whereas more than three-quarters (77%) of the other coworker abusers were women. Interviewed family physicians described feeling humiliated and unappreciated, and developed symptoms of anxiety or depression. As a result of the abuse, some family physicians terminated their employment or refused to work in certain environments. The most striking effect of this abuse was that respondents reported losing confidence in their professional abilities and skills.Although only a small number of family physicians experience abuse by physician colleagues and other coworkers, the effects can be considerable. Victims reported a loss of confidence in their clinical abilities and some subsequently were faced with mental health issues.
Background: Currently, the specific role of family physicians (fps) in the care of people with cancer is not well defined. Our goal was to explore physician perspectives and contextual factors related to the coordination of cancer care and the role of fps. Methods: Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we conducted telephone interviews with 58 primary and cancer specialist health care providers from across Canada. Results: The participants—21 fps, 15 surgeons, 12 medical oncologists, 6 radiation oncologists, and 4 general practitioners in oncology—were asked to describe both the role that fps currently play and the role that, in their opinion, fps should play in the future care of cancer patients across the cancer continuum. Participants identified 3 key roles: coordinating cancer care, managing comorbidities, and providing psychosocial care to patients and their families. However, fps and specialists discussed many challenges that prevent fps from fully performing those roles: (1) The fps described communication problems resulting from not being kept “in the loop” because they weren’t copied on patient reports and also the lack of clearly defined roles for all the various health care providers involved in providing care to cancer patients. (2) The specialists expressed concerns about a lack of patient access to fp care, leaving specialists to fill the care gaps. The fps and specialists both recommended additional training and education for fps in survivorship care, cancer screening, genetic testing, and new cancer treatments. Conclusions: Better communication, more collaboration, and further education are needed to enhance the role of fps in the care of cancer patients.
The New Brunswick Medical Society states that New Brunswick has a shortage of physicians. This study examines retention of newly graduated family physicians from the Dalhousie University family medicine residency sites in New Brunswick from 2005– 2014, and factors influencing physicians’ choices of first practice locations. Approximately half of respondents remained in New Brunswick to establish their first practice. The majority who left New Brunswick to establish their first practice have not returned, whereas most who remained still practice in New Brunswick. Choice of first practice location was influenced by a combination of personal and professional factors. Reasons for leaving New Brunswick were predominantly personal.
The more we learn about family violence, the more it becomes apparent that it is a complex and multifaceted issue. Family violence is more than woman abuse. It is also more than child abuse, sibling abuse, parent abuse, or elder abuse. It is all of these violations and more. Nevertheless, family violence is gendered; most abused victims are female and most perpetrators are male. Family violence is not merely personal. It is also a consequence of social inequality, and in that sense is socially constructed. Based on research projects conducted over ten years, Understanding Abuse profiles the work done by researchers of issues related to woman abuse and family violence. The contributors demonstrate the strength of community-based, action-oriented collaborations by carefully identifying the multiplicity of causes, clearly articulating the issues raised by abused women, and seeking to identify realistic solutions. Not only does this work provide invaluable information for policy makers on successful versus unsuccessful programs to prevent violence, it also provides academic and community researchers with detailed data on the intricacies of academic-community action research partnerships.
When a research team of community and academic members was formed to study issues of family violence in immigrant communities, the team found that although in theory the academy is encouraged to work with the community, in reality structural barriers make this cooperation difficult.
