Yes, I am a Rhodes Scholar who is “just” a family doctor. Here’s why.

“So you’re a Rhodes Scholar, and you’re just a family doctor?” If I was paid a dollar each time I’m asked this question, I can safely retire. It seems innocent enough, and it’s usually asked without malice. But the fundamental assumption behind this question alarms me: that family doctors are somehow less competent and less valuable to society than specialist doctors. It’s an assumption that cannot be more wrong. Not only is such implicit stigmatization unfair to family doctors, it also misleads the future of our profession and harms the patients we serve. Are family doctors less competent? Common accusations of family doctor incompetency include being more error-prone than specialists, and not following evidence-based clinical guidelines. But, really? I was genuinely curious. So I turned to the published medical literature. It turns out that family doctors are no more error-prone than any other kind of doctor. Instead, mistakes happen at similar rates across all disciplines of medicine. Moreover, since family doctors tend to see undifferentiated patients with vague presenting symptoms, whereas specialists tend to see patients with more overt symptoms, the job of a family doctor is even harder in some ways. So much for “incompetence”! Second, just like any other doctor, family doctors not only follow clinical guidelines whenever possible, but also know when to deviate from them. Precise guideline adherence doesn’t always turn into best patient care. For in...
Source: Kevin, M.D. - Medical Weblog - Category: Journals (General) Authors: Tags: Physician Primary care Source Type: blogs