Auswirkungen der neuen Weiterbildungsordnung auf das Weiterbildungsverhalten der Assistenzärzte

Abstract

During the 106th "Deutschen Arztetag" (German Medical Assembly) in 2003 new model further training regulations were finalized. Further training was to be more clearly arranged and the targets more clearly defined. There are no uniform training regulations for Germany. The new training regulations promise more clarity: the numbers of the individual interventions and investigations are no longer specified. Instead operation groups which are connected with respect to content and organization in a defined minimum are to be identified. The new further training regulations are geared to a process orientation. For the first time trainers and trainees have the possibility to actively work together in the further training process. The joint logbook"Urological further training" from the GeSRU (German Society of Residents in Urology), DGU (German Society for Urology) and BDU (Professional Association of German Urologists) is a milestone in Germany. The further training will be continuously improved through constant evaluation.

“We talk it over” - mixed-method study of interdisciplinary collaborations in private practice among urologists and oncologists in Germany

“…Their intention was to facilitate and encourage the development of collaborations among physicians. These developments however, were accompanied by tensions between urologists and oncologists [ 24 – 26 , 28 , 32 ]. While the qualitative interviews showed the development of formal collaborations, the quantitative and qualitative data combined showed it would be misleading to suggest that private practice physicians have not collaborated in the care of their tumor patients previously.…”

“…Incentives were mostly based on higher reimbursement rates for physicians who maintain a certain level of conducting systematic therapies in their practices. These incentives were developed albeit little knowledge of actual private practice care of cancer patients at the time, and such a narrow approach has led to tensions between urologists and oncologists [ 21 , 24 – 28 ]. How interdisciplinary collaboration among physicians is organized outside hospital settings is still in question.…”