BackgroundIn Germany, there is a shortage of young physicians in several specialties, the situation of general practitioners (GP) being especially precarious. The factors influencing the career choice of German medical students are poorly understood. This study aims to identify factors influencing medical students' specialty choice laying a special focus on general practice.MethodsThe study was designed as a cross-sectional survey. In 2010, students at the five medical schools in the federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany) filled out an online-questionnaire. On 27 items with 5-point Likert scales, the students rated the importance of specified individual and occupational aspects. Furthermore, students were asked to assign their intended medical specialty.Results1,299 students participated in the survey. Thereof, 1,114 students stated a current choice for a specialty, with 708 students choosing a career in one of the following 6 specialties: internal medicine, surgery, gynaecology and obstetrics, paediatrics, anaesthetics and general practice. Overall, individual aspects ('Personal ambition', 'Future perspective', 'Work-life balance') were rated as more important than occupational aspects (i.e. 'Variety in job', 'Job-related ambition') for career choice. For students favouring a career as a GP individual aspects and the factor 'Patient orientation' among the occupational aspects were significantly more important and 'Job-related ambition' less important compared to students with other specialty choices.ConclusionsThis study confirms that future GPs differ from students intending to choose other specialties particularly in terms of patient-orientation and individual aspects such as personal ambition, future perspective and work-life balance. Improving job-conditions in terms of family compatibility and work-life balance could help to increase the attractiveness of general practice. Due to the shortage of GPs those factors should be made explicit at an early stage at medical school to increase the number of aspirants for general practice.

OBJECTIVE—With the introduction of diabetes disease management programs (DMPs) in Germany, there is a necessity to evaluate whether patients receive care that is congruent to the Chronic Care Model (CCM) and evidence-based behavioral counseling. We examined differences as perceived and experienced by patients with type 2 diabetes between those enrolled in a DMP compared with patients receiving usual care in two federal states of Germany. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—A random, heterogeneous sample of 3,546 patients (59.3% female) received a mailed questionnaire from their regional health fund, including the German version of the Patient Assessment of Chonic Illness Care (PACIC) instrument, which had additional items for behavioral advice (5A). Two weeks later, a general reminder was sent out. RESULTS—A total of 1,532 questionnaires were returned (response rate 42.2%), and valid data could be obtained for 1,399 patients. Mean age of responders was 70.3 years, of which 53.6% were female. Overall, patients enrolled in a DMP scored significantly higher (3.21 of a possible 5) than patients not enrolled in a DMP (2.86) (P < 0.001). Significant differences in the same direction were found on all five subscales of the PACIC. For the 5A scales, similar differences were found for all five subscales plus the sum score (P < 0.001; mean for DMP = 3.08, mean for non-DMP = 2.78). CONCLUSIONS—DMPs, as currently established in primary care in Germany, may impact provided care significantly. The changes in daily practice that have been induced by the DMPs are recognized by patients as care that is more structured and that to a larger extent reflects the core elements of the CCM and evidence-based counseling compared with usual care.