Introduction
Since 2010, increasingly the Chinese government has made training of general practitioners a priority to help resolve the nation’s healthcare provider shortage. The aim of general practice (GP) residency training is to provide trainees with the skills necessary to practise fully as general practitioners. In 2011, the State Council of the People’s Republic of China strengthened the training requirements of general practitioners by implementing standardised training.1 Since December 2013, every medical student needs to complete residency training to become an independent physician.2 As an illustration of the commitment by the government, in September 2018, the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China mandated that all general hospitals that were already qualified to provide standardised residency training needed to establish a GP department by the end of December 2019 or face cancellation of the hospital’s training certification.3
The Chinese Medical Doctor Association commissioned Wu et al (2018) to examine 72 training programmes in 19 provinces that were developed to trial standardised GP residency training by the National Health and Family Planning Commission.4 In the 2017 annual evaluation report they found that most of the GP training programmes were complying with the training requirements, but 50% of hospitals had not established an independent GP department, and in many programmes, the GP training was indistinguishable from other disciplines. The qualifications of the GP teaching faculty varied greatly as most were from other specialties and had not trained sufficiently in GP teaching. The report concluded the educational background and experiences of faculty in the community health centres needed improvement.4
Depending on the geographic location, GP residency training has different characteristics, financial support and training pathways in China. For example, in a survey of five well-known Chinese GP training institutions, the authors reported that the first GP residency training programme began in Beijing, and that Guangdong has the largest scale of training.5 The degree of government financial support for GP training varies by province. For example, in 2012, the highest level of government financial support per programme amounted to ¥560 000 (about US$88 900) in Chongqing, and ¥150 000 (about US$23 800) in Beijing,5 while there was no financial support in Sichuan.5 Lian et al 6 have documented eight pathways used to train general practitioners in China, but the government has encouraged mostly the ‘5+3’ pathway.6 The 5+3 pathway comprises 5 years of undergraduate training in medical sciences conferring a Bachelor of Science degree and then 3 years of postgraduate and clinical training. In 2013, the government chose 64 medical colleges, including Peking University First Hospital, to pilot a “Four-Certificates-In-One programme” that encompasses a physician qualification certificate, standard residency training certificate, master’s degree certificate and graduate certificate. Completion of the programme confers a higher level of qualifications based on additional requirements during residency.7
As GP residency training remains relatively new in China, the attitudes of GP residents about their training could provide a perspective on how the training process affects those the system is intended to educate. Previous literature concerning GP residency training has addressed a series of concerns including job burnout,8 training satisfaction,9–11 policy support, theory courses, and faculty qualifications,9 10 opportunity to learn management of diseases,10 personal values, income level, career development, social respect, and professional risk during GP residency training,11 12 as well as perspectives about GP residency training,9 and factors affecting standardised training quality.13 One previous qualitative study examining work–family balance by women GP specialist trainees in Slovenia demonstrated they faced intense burdens at work and home.14 Little current literature addresses the workload of GP residency training, the emphasis of training for GP, the impact of GP residency training on physical health and daily life, and gender issues in GP residency training. In addition, few previous studies have leveraged the benefits of mixed methods data collection to examine the GP residents’ perspectives about their residency training which have been conducted in China.9 10 Most articles have used pure quantitative methods,8 11 or pure qualitative methods.14
Through this study, we sought to understand GP residents’ attitudes and perceptions about GP residency training, and further to compare the findings between two 5+3 GP residency programmes, one 5+3 programme piloting the ‘Four-Certificates-In-One’ option in Beijing with the standard 5+3 residency training approach at the other programme in Shenzhen.