Background The Covid-19 pandemic has increased stress levels in GPs, who have resorted to different coping strategies to deal with this crisis. Gender differences in coping styles may be contributing factors in the development of psychological distress. Objectives To identify differences by gender and by stress level in coping strategies of GPs during the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods A cross-sectional, web-based survey conducted with GPs in Catalonia (Spain), in June–July 2021. via the institution’s email distribution list, all GPs members of the Catalan Society of Family and Community Medicine were invited to complete a survey assessing sociodemographic, health and work-related characteristics, experienced stress (Stress scale of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales-DASS 21) and the frequency of use of a range of coping strategies (Brief-COPE) classified as problem-focused, emotion-focused and avoidant strategies, some of which are adaptive and others maladaptive. We compared the scores of each strategy by gender and stress level using Student’s t -test. Results Of 4739 members, 522 GPs participated in the study (response rate 11%; 79.1% women; mean age = 46.9 years, SD = 10.5). Of these, 41.9% reported moderate-severe stress levels. The most common coping strategies were acceptance, active coping, planning, positive reframing and venting. More frequently than men, women resorted to emotional and instrumental support, venting, distraction and self-blame, whereas men used acceptance and humour more commonly than women. Moderate-severe stress levels were associated with non-adaptive coping, with increased use of avoidance strategies, self-blame, religion and venting, and decreased use of positive reframing and acceptance. Conclusion The most common coping strategies were adaptive and differed by gender. However, highly stressful situations caused maladaptive strategies to emerge.

Background The introduction of portable and pocket ultrasound scanners has potentiated the use of ultrasound in primary care, whose many applications have been studied, analyzed and collected in the literature. However, its use is heterogeneous in Europe and there is a lack of guidelines on the necessary training and skills. Objectives To identify the fundamental applications and indications of ultrasound for family physicians, the necessary knowledge and skills, and the definition of a framework of academic and pragmatic training for the development of these competencies. Methods A modified 3-round Delphi study was carried out in Catalonia, with the participation of 65 family physicians experts in ultrasound. The study was carried out over six months (from September 2020 to February 2021). The indications of ultrasound for family physicians were agreed (the > = 75th percentile was considered) and prioritised, as was the necessary training plan. Results The ultrasound applications in primary care were classified into seven main categories. For each application, the main indications (according to reason for consultation) in primary care were specified. A progressive training plan was developed, characterised by five levels of competence: A (principles of ultrasound and management of ultrasound scanners); B (basic normal ultrasound anatomy); C (advanced normal ultrasound anatomy); D (pathologic ultrasound, description of pathological images and diagnostic orientation); E (practical skills under conditions of routine clinical practice). Conclusion Training family physicians in ultrasound may consider seven main applications and indications. The proposed training plan establishes five different levels of competencies until skill in real clinical practice is achieved.

Introduction: The health emergency caused by COVID-19 has led to substantial changes in the usual working system of primary healthcare centers and in relations with users. The Catalan Society of Family and Community Medicine designed a survey that aimed to collect the opinions and facilitate the participation of its partners on what the future work model of general practitioners (GPs) should look like post-COVID-19. Methodology: Online survey of Family and Community Medicine members consisting of filiation data, 22 Likert-type multiple-choice questions grouped in five thematic axes, and a free text question. Results: The number of respondents to the questionnaire was 1051 (22.6% of all members): 83.2% said they spent excessive time on bureaucratic tasks; 91.8% were against call center systems; 66% believed that home care is the responsibility of every family doctor; 77.5% supported continuity of care as a fundamental value of patient-centered care; and >90% defended the contracting of complementary tests and first hospital visits from primary healthcare (PHC). Conclusions: The survey responses describe a strong consensus on the identity and competencies of the GP and on the needs of and the threats to the PHC system. The demand for an increase in health resources, greater professional leadership, elimination of bureaucracy, an increase in the number of health professionals, and greater management autonomy, are the axes towards which a new era in PHC should be directed.