Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 9972094

Oklahoma physician needs.

Abstract

State policy makers, healthcare professionals, and advocates have been asking various iterations of the question, Do we have too many or too few physicians? In order to address this question, a relative-needs analysis was conducted for the state of Oklahoma. Six projection-needs studies were used for comparison with Oklahoma's supply of practicing physicians. This analysis found that Oklahoma did not have a surplus of primary care physicians. While the national average for primary care physicians per 100,000 was 79, Oklahoma's ratio was 68. This analysis also compares not only the number of physicians in Oklahoma per 100,000 population, it also discusses the proportion of primary care physicians in the physician workforce. Primary care physicians were found to be neither oversupplied nor undersupplied in Oklahoma. Oklahoma was found to be closer to national planning model goals than most states in the United States. Because this study combines both allopathic and osteopathic physicians and includes only those physicians in active practice, it is unique in comparison to many other studies concerning physician workforce needs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T Grewe, M Lapolla, S Phillips, L Mitchell. 1999. Oklahoma physician needs.. https://doi.org/10.7556/jaoa.1999.99.1.34

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Improving quality in general practice: qualitative case study of barriers faced by health authorities.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and assess the barriers that health authorities face as they manage quality improvements in general practice in the context of the NHS reforms. DESIGN: Qualitative case study. SETTING: Three UK health authorities: a rural health authority in the south west, a deprived inner city health authority in the north east, and an affluent suburban health authority in the south east. PARTICIPANTS: Senior and junior managers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Structure of strategic and organisational management, and barriers to the leadership and management of quality improvement in general practice. RESULTS: Seven barriers were identified: absence of an explicit strategic plan for general practice, competing priorities for attention of the health authority, sensitivity of health professionals, lack of information due to poor quality of clinical data, lack of authority to implement change, unclear roles and responsibilities of managers within the organisations, and isolation from other authorities or organisations facing similar challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The health authorities faced significant barriers that would impede their ability to fulfil their responsibilities in the new NHS and that would reduce their capacity to contribute to quality improvements in general practice.

Family Practice