Will subspecialisation benefit the practice of Australasian emergency medicine? No

S. Parnis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.12633

2016-08-01

Emergency Medicine Australasia

Abstract:Proponents of specialisation and subspecialisation in medicine believe that specialists provide better quality of care to their patients than generalists because they have a better knowledge base of the conditions being treated. The ‘jack of all trades and master of none’ reasoning is often applied to generalism. I argue that subspecialisationwill not improve the practice of Australasian emergency medicine (EM), and our specialty – as with the wider health system – must shift to a greater focus on generalist care to meet the patient and service demand being driven by changing disease patterns and demography, as well as the public’s increasing expectations for availability and quality of services. Generalist medical practitioners (generalists) are defined in many different ways. Based on the former Health Workforce Australia’s (HWA) definition, generalists are general practitioners, rural generalists and general specialists such as general surgeons and physicians who retain a broad scope of practice. Generalists have played a crucial role in delivering healthcare in Australia and New Zealand for many decades and are particularly important for the rural and regional communities that rely on them for essential emergency and procedural services. The medical workforce has become increasingly specialised in recent decades, driven by changes in knowledge, technology, health service delivery and healthcare financing. This is not necessarily a positive development. There is strong evidence in the literature that subspecialised care is not always in the best interests of the patient or cost-effective for the health system. The overuse of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in some specialties can lead to increased costs with no benefit to patients. Emergency medicine is a generalist specialty. EM departments and other triage settings receive a broad range of acutely unwell patients presenting with undifferentiated conditions. EM physicians deliver the clinical assessments and arrange the appropriate next steps for the full spectrum of conditions that present to us. Similar to generalist physicians, hospital-based EM physicians work and communicate with teams of other health professionals to coordinate inpatient care in hospitals. Changing population health trends mean that more generalists will be needed to meet the healthcare needs of both rural and metropolitan communities. These include rising rates of obesity and an ageing population, with the associated rates of chronic and complex disease. It is my recollection as an intern in the early 1990s that it was uncommon to have elderly patients with complex needs presenting at EM departments. However, currently frail and aged patients account for a large number of all ED presentations. Emergency medicine departments therefore need to rely on generalists who have the scope of practice to diagnose and treat patients with varied comorbidities. Generalist practice enables patients to be treated holistically. Conversely, subspecialisation with narrower skill sets focused on one particular area with limited experience in emergency work can result in the fragmentation of expertise and patient care. Hospitals will need more EM physicians with generalist skills rather than more narrowly skilled acute care physicians to manage the surge of acute care patients presenting with multiple illnesses. Subspecialisation does, despite this, have a limited place in modern EM. Some subspecialties may have a role in specific settings to meet the healthcare needs of particular groups in the community. These include toxicology, trauma management, paediatric and geriatric EM. Hospital in the home is an emerging model for caring for acute care patients with specific conditions where an evolving subspecialty is emerging. Some geographical areas need services provided by subspecialists, such as retrieval services, although reducing regional and rural towns to retrieval points without the necessary local services would be a retrograde step for many patients. The attraction of subspecialisation for some doctors is understandable. Subspecialists may require a narrower skill base and less expansive CME requirements. It is also understandable that some doctors would want to become accomplished in certain areas of Correspondence: Dr Stephen Parnis, Australian Medical Association, Level 4, 42 Macquarie Street, Barton, ACT 2600, Australia. Email: ama@ama.com.au