Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 9748839

[How does professional competence develop?].

Abstract

The reality of medical practice demands not only proficiency but also educational provisions, an aspect which traditionally has been given little attention in medicine. The competence of a general practitioner does not consist solely of professional knowledge and practical skills; it consists to a large extent of personal (intuition and creativity based on personal experience) and communicative elements, both of which are necessary in managing the unpredictable complexity and the many controversies of general practice. Such competence is difficult to develop outside the practice. By sharing the experience of actual consultations with experienced colleagues, and reflecting upon this experience within a small group, general practitioners will probably develop better professional judgement and increased awareness of their learning needs, as well as of their limitations and potential. This article discusses these topics using the authors' personal experiences in the continuous medical education effort which is based on reciprocal practice visits among a small group of experienced general practitioners.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Schei, A Gulbrandsen, T Skjerven. 1998-08-20. [How does professional competence develop?].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9748839/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Extent and determinants of error in doctors' prognoses in terminally ill patients: prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe doctors' prognostic accuracy in terminally ill patients and to evaluate the determinants of that accuracy. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five outpatient hospice programmes in Chicago. PARTICIPANTS: 343 doctors provided survival estimates for 468 terminally ill patients at the time of hospice referral. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' estimated and actual survival. RESULTS: Median survival was 24 days. Only 20% (92/468) of predictions were accurate (within 33% of actual survival); 63% (295/468) were overoptimistic and 17% (81/468) were overpessimistic. Overall, doctors overestimated survival by a factor of 5.3. Few patient or doctor characteristics were associated with prognostic accuracy. Male patients were 58% less likely to have overpessimistic predictions. Non-oncology medical specialists were 326% more likely than general internists to make overpessimistic predictions. Doctors in the upper quartile of practice experience were the most accurate. As duration of doctor-patient relationship increased and time since last contact decreased, prognostic accuracy decreased. CONCLUSION: Doctors are inaccurate in their prognoses for terminally ill patients and the error is systematically optimistic. The inaccuracy is, in general, not restricted to certain kinds of doctors or patients. These phenomena may be adversely affecting the quality of care given to patients near the end of life.

Clinical Competence