Table 1.
Characteristics of FP survey respondents and their practices, as well as results of bivariate analyses: N=412 for the dependent variable (focused practice or non–focused practice). Bivariate analysis 1 compared characteristics of focused practice FPs (total) versus those of non–focused practice FPs; bivariate analysis 2 compared characteristics of NOBFFPs with those of OBFFPs and non–focused practice FPs.
| CHARACTERISTIC | OVERALL (N=420) | TYPE OF PRACTICE | BIVARIATE ANALYSIS 1 P VALUE* |
BIVARIATE ANALYSIS 2 P VALUE* |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FOCUSED PRACTICE FPS (n=149) | NON-FOCUSED PRACTICE FPS (n=263) | ||||||
| TOTAL | NOBFFP | OBFFP | |||||
| Sex, n (%) | |||||||
| • Male | 218 (51.9) | 79 (53.0) | 45 (58.4) | 34 (47.2) | 135 (51.3) |
.742 |
.742 |
| • Female | 202 (48.1) | 70 (47.0) | 32 (41.6) | 38 (52.8) | 128 (48.7) | ||
| Years since graduation from residency | |||||||
| • Mean (SD) | 13.2 (7.9) | 12.6 (7.4) | 13.0 (7.2) | 12.2 (7.6) | 13.3 (8.1) | .406 | .536 |
| Training site, n (%) | |||||||
| • Rural | 52 (12.4) | 21 (14.1) | 15 (19.5) | 6 (8.3) | 31 (11.8) |
.498 |
.498 |
| • Urban | 368 (87.6) | 128 (85.9) | 62 (80.5) | 66 (91.7) | 232 (88.2) | ||
| PGY3 training, n (%) | |||||||
| • Yes | 56 (13.3) | 46 (30.9) | 34 (44.2) | 12 (16.7) | 10 (3.8) |
<.0001 |
<.001 |
| • No | 364 (86.7) | 103 (69.1) | 43 (55.8) | 60 (83.3) | 253 (96.2) | ||
| Location,† n (%) | |||||||
| • Ontario | 365 (86.9) | 127 (85.2) | 68 (88.3) | 59 (81.9) | 231 (87.8) |
.453 |
.453 |
| • Other | 55 (13.1) | 22 (14.8) | 9 (11.7) | 13 (18.1) | 32 (12.2) | ||
| Population size served,‡ n (%) | |||||||
| • Inner city | 181 (43.1) | 76 (53.9) | 34 (47.2) | 42 (60.9) | 105 (42.5) |
.002 |
.001 |
| • Urban | 52 (12.4) | 21 (14.9) | 13 (18.1) | 8 (11.6) | 31 (12.6) | ||
| • Suburban | 44 (10.5) | 13 (9.2) | 10 (13.9) | 3 (4.3)¶ | 30 (12.1) | ||
| • Small town | 62 (14.8) | 25 (17.7) | 15 (20.8) | 10 (14.5) | 36 (14.6) | ||
| • Rural or remote§ | 52 (12.4) | 6 (4.3) | 0 (0.0)¶ | 6 (8.7) | 45 (18.2) | ||
| • Missing | 29 (6.9) | NA | NA | NA | NA | ||
| Primary payment model,‡ n (%) | |||||||
| • FFS | 86 (20.5) | 47 (34.3) | 20 (28.6) | 27 (40.3) | 38 (15.0) |
<.0001 |
<.001 |
| • Group payment models** |
224 (53.3) | 31 (22.6) | 1 (1.4)¶ | 30 (44.8) | 192 (75.9) | ||
| • Salary or CHC | 20 (4.8) | 13 (9.5) | 7 (10.0) | 6 (9.0) | 7 (2.8) | ||
| • AFP or APP | 62 (14.8) | 46 (33.6) | 42 (60.0) | 4 (6.0)¶ | 16 (6.3) | ||
| • Missing | 28 (6.7) | NA | NA | NA | NA | ||
AFP—alternative funding plan, APP—alternative payment plan, CHC—community health centre, FFS—fee-for-service, NA—not applicable, NOBFFP—non–office-based focused practice FP, OBFFP—office-based focused practice FP, PGY3—postgraduate third year.
Statistically significant at P<.05.
Locations were collapsed from the original categories that included 8 Canadian provinces, other, and United States to account for the small number of responses from individuals not based in Ontario.
Some respondents indicated the population size served or their primary payment model but then did not specify their type of practice; therefore, percentages according to type of practice are based on total available responses.
The original categories of rural and isolated or remote were collapsed into rural or remote because of the low number of responses in each.
For cell sizes <5, the significance values for Fisher exact tests are reported.
Group payment models include family health groups, family health networks, and family health organizations.