Evaluation of the education family HEALTH center application in family medicine specialization education

Introduction: It is known that there are some differences between the patient profiles applying to our tertiary care hospitals and the patient profile encountered by the family physician in the family health center (Education FHC). For example, patients who apply to tertiary hospitals for the follow-up and treatment of chronic diseases and to investigate them in an advanced center; Pregnant women, children for healthy child follow-up and vaccination services, people in different age groups for periodic health screenings, patients who have not been diagnosed and have various undifferentiated diagnoses come to primary health care institutions. Due to this difference, the necessity of EASM in specialization training has emerged. It is a fact that EASM is an indispensable part of family medicine residency training. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the necessity of EASM by family medicine specialists and assistants. Materials and Methods: Our research is a descriptive-cross-sectional survey study. The study was carried out by conducting a survey on Google forms to family physicians who could be reached between 23/02/2022 -23/04/2022. While making the statistics of the study, numerical data in descriptive statistics are mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum; Categorical data were given as numbers and percentages. Distribution of numerical data was analyzed with histogram graphics. Numerical data in two different groups were analyzed with Man Whitney U test, and numerical data in more than two groups were analyzed with Kruskal Wallis Test. Comparisons of categorical data were done with chi-square test and Fisher's Exact test. The correlation of the numerical data was checked with the Pearson correlation test. P significance value was accepted as <0.05. SPSS 23.0 package program was used in the analysis. Results: A total of 263 physicians participated in the study. 58.2% (n=153) of the physicians were female and 41.8% (n=110) were male. Of the participants in the study, 62% (n=163) were married and 38% (n=100) were single. While 55.1% (n=145) of the physicians participating in the study were full-time family medicine residents, 16.3% (n=43) were contracted family medicine residents and 28.5% (n=75) were family medicine residents. He was an expert. Physicians participating in the study were asked whether they had EASMs at the time of their residency training. It was learned that 35% (n=92) had EASMs. Only 18.6% (n=49) of the physicians worked in EASM. Again, 15.6% (n=41) of the physicians had a responsible trainer while working at EASM. There was no significant difference in the correct answers according to whether there was an EASM during the residency training and whether or not to work there (p=0.299,p=0.127) . The number of correct answers given by those who had a responsible trainer while working at the EASM was significantly higher than those who did not (p=0.049) . There was no significant difference in the number of correct answers to be given between those who deemed field training (EASM) necessary and those who did not (p=0.091). There was no significant difference in the correct answers given between physicians who found the specialist training sufficient in terms of content and those who did not (p=0.166). Conclusion: In our study, the necessity of EASM and the importance of the trainer factor in EASM are understood. It was observed that the assistants trained only in tertiary hospitals considered themselves inadequate and had a low level of knowledge. In this case, there is a need for specialization training in both outpatient clinics; It is possible to say that the opening of EASMs should be ensured and the structuring of hospital education for primary care will affect the specialty education in a better way. Keywords: Family medicine residency training, education family health center