IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04615249.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing GPs according to their model of practice: are multiprofessional group practices associated with more favourable working conditions?

Author

Listed:
  • Myriam Biais

    (CESP - Centre de recherche en épidémiologie et santé des populations - UVSQ - Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines - AP-HP - Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) - Hôpital Paul Brousse - INSERM - Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale - Université Paris-Saclay, IRDES - Institut de Recherche et Documentation en Economie de la Santé - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres)

  • Carine Franc

    (CESP - Centre de recherche en épidémiologie et santé des populations - UVSQ - Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines - AP-HP - Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) - Hôpital Paul Brousse - INSERM - Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale - Université Paris-Saclay)

  • Matthieu Cassou

    (IRDES - Institut de Recherche et Documentation en Economie de la Santé - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres)

Abstract

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024.In the generalized context of general practitioner shortages and transitions towards team-based primary care, we investigated how the different practising models relate to general practitionersu2019 labour supply. More precisely, we analysed the association between practice modelsu2014solo, groups of general practitioners, and multiprofessional groupsu2014and their reported labour supply and level of satisfaction with work-life balance. We used a French cross-sectional survey from 2018 that surveyed a representative national sample of 3,032 self-employed general practitioners about their working conditions. We found that the model of practice was significantly associated with differences in physician labour supply at the intensive margin and that group practice appeared to be positively associated with general practitionersu2019 reported satisfaction with work-life balance. In terms of weekly working time, only practice in groups of general practitioners was associated with a significantly lower labour supply. However, general practitioners in groupsu2013whether groups of general practitioners or multiprofessional groupsu2013reported more annual leave and seemed more willing to diversify their activity by devoting more time to secondary activities, including salaried activities. Consistently, general practitioners working in groups were also more likely than solo practitioners to report being satisfied with their work-life balance. Although group practice, whether multiprofessionnal or not, seems to be well suited to meeting the new aspirations of general practitioners, those working in multiprofessional groups are associated with a higher level of weekly work supply, which might justify special attention from the public authorities.

Suggested Citation

  • Myriam Biais & Carine Franc & Matthieu Cassou, 2024. "Comparing GPs according to their model of practice: are multiprofessional group practices associated with more favourable working conditions?," Post-Print hal-04615249, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04615249
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-024-01687-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04615249. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.