Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
  • JABFM On Facebook
EditorialEditorial

The Complexity of Family Medicine Care

Marjorie A. Bowman
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine January 2011, 24 (1) 4-5; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2011.01.100268
Marjorie A. Bowman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

In this issue, Katerndahl et al1 quantify the complexity of family physician care compared with cardiology and psychiatry. When accounting for the length of the encounter, the complexity in family medicine is one-third higher than cardiology and 5 times higher than psychiatry.

The measured complexity of family medicine is highly relevant, yet it remains unacknowledged, as evidenced by the reimbursement structure of our health system. If complexity should drive reimbursement, then family physicians should receive increased reimbursement compared with that received by cardiologists or psychiatrists. Alternatively—given that the complexity of family medicine was partially driven by the breath of problems handled by family physicians—perhaps family physicians should be given more time per visit to accomplish the broad range of tasks necessary.

Katerndahl et al1 further note that this complexity per time spent could explain the less successful completion of process measures, such as specific tests or medications, in family medicine. However, I would note that the less successful completion of process measures frequently occurs simultaneously with similar or better outcomes at a group or population level,2 such as mortality rates. Family physicians contribute improved outcomes at both the individual and group levels. Process measures do not necessarily reflect important outcomes; yes, process is easier to measure, but sometimes it is lacking sufficient substance.

The complexity of the interplay of multiple facets of human health creates at least some of the common disconnect between process measures and patient outcomes. These expected process measures have been shown by some research studies to relate to outcomes, but often have been applied to a single disease with limited variation in patient characteristics, comorbidities, and measured outcomes and in a circumstance in which the health care is covered by insurance or the study itself. Thus, for many disease states and patients with multiple diseases, these process measures add little, and sometimes no, benefit. Drug X is compared with drug Y for disease A in patients with diseases K, L, and M; drug X is associated with a 5% lower hospitalization rate during the next year. However, family medicine patients have diseases K, L, M, N, O, P, and Q; less expensive drug Y may help 2 of these problems at once to make a 10% difference in quality of life and improve the patient's ability to care for a family member; thus, family physicians will order drug Y, but get “dinged” for not ordering drug X. Or, as another example, how important is it to check urine microalbumin levels once a year in a patient with diabetes when the family physician is helping the patient work through depression related to a parent's death, increased tobacco use, and a glycosylated hemoglobin level of 10% because the patient can’t afford the copay?

Another source of the disconnect between process and outcomes is that it is the first action taken, such as the first drug added or the first preventive test completed,3 which provides most of the gain in outcome, meaning that additional processes provide little additional benefit. Thus, when time is short and many different complaints must be addressed, implying that many process measures for each complaint or disease could be expected, family physicians often do the next process measure that could make the most difference for that patient. Family physicians prioritize patient outcome over meeting externally defined process measures.

Of course, many physicians and medical students have already figured out that family physician care is more complex and that the breadth of problems is a key driver of this. It basically encapsulates why some say that family medicine is too difficult—one has to know too much and do too many types of things (breadth), and/or family medicine is too easy—one does not have to know unusual or rare conditions (depth). After all, it is mostly well care for patients of all ages, hypertension, diabetes, acute nonemergency care, asthma, depression, heart failure, obesity, pain, drug or physical abuse, the list keeps going on and on. It can seem so “anti–process measure” to consider that taking care of several diseases at the same time can create better outcomes than taking care of each separately.

It is this complexity of the human condition and the interplay of these many factors in people's lives that creates the complexity of family practice, and this is actually what draws us to family medicine, the integrator and scaffold for people's health. Family medicine: complex even in its complexity, and powerful in making a difference.

Notes

  • This article was not externally peer reviewed.

  • Conflict of interest: The author is an editor of JABFM.

  • See Related Article on Page 6.

References

  1. ↵
    Katerndahl D, Wood R, Jaén CR. Family medicine outpatient encounters are more complex than those of cardiology and psychiatry. J Am Board Fam Med 2011; 24: 6–15.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Stange KC, Ferrer RL. The paradox of primary care. Ann Fam Med 2009; 7: 293–9.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Mold JW, Hamm RM, McCarthy LH. The law of diminishing returns in clinical medicine: how much risk reduction is enough? J Am Board Fam Med 2010; 23: 371–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine: 24 (1)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 24, Issue 1
January-February 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Complexity of Family Medicine Care
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
5 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
The Complexity of Family Medicine Care
Marjorie A. Bowman
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jan 2011, 24 (1) 4-5; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2011.01.100268

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
The Complexity of Family Medicine Care
Marjorie A. Bowman
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jan 2011, 24 (1) 4-5; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2011.01.100268
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Notes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Family Medicine Outpatient Encounters are More Complex Than Those of Cardiology and Psychiatry
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Family Practice is a Highly Complex Business
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Three JABFM Articles Are in the Primary Care Collaborative Curated List of 24 Essential Primary Care Research Articles
  • The Right Report from the Right Source at the Right Time – The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) Primary Care Report
  • Increasing Article Visibility: JABFM and Author Responsibilities and Possibilities
Show more Editorial

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2023 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire