Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleTask Force Reports (Online Only)

Task Force 1. Report of the Task Force on Patient Expectations, Core Values, Reintegration, and the New Model of Family Medicine

Task Force 1 Writing Group, Larry A. Green, Robert Graham, Bruce Bagley, Charles M. Kilo, Stephen J. Spann, Stephen P. Bogdewic and John Swanson
The Annals of Family Medicine March 2004, 2 (suppl 1) S33-S50; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.134
Larry A. Green
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert Graham
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bruce Bagley
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charles M. Kilo
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen J. Spann
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen P. Bogdewic
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John Swanson
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Number of office-based physicians per 1,000 people in the United States

    Source: the Robert Graham Center, Washington, DC.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Positions offered and filled with US seniors in March 1992–2003.

    Source: American Academy of Family Physicians, Leawood, Kan.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Simulation of whole county primary care health professions shortage areas (PCHPSAs) without family physicians (FPs) in 1999.

    PC = primary care; FP = family physicians; HPSA = health professional shortage area. Source: The Robert Gaham Center: Policy Studies in Family Practice and Primary Care.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    The ecology of medical care revisited.

    Note: All numbers refer to discrete individual persons and whether or not they received care in each setting in a typical month. From: Green LA, Fryer GE Jr, Yawn BP, Lanier D, Dovey SM. The ecology of medical care revisited. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:2021–2025. Reprinted with permission from the Massachusetts Medical Society.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Percentage of physician population compared with percentage of visits seen.

    Source: American Medical Association Physician Masterfile and the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Six Aims for the 21st Century Health Care System

    Source: Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
    Safe—Avoiding injuries to patients from the care that is intended to help them
    Effective—Providing services based on scientific knowledge to all who could benefit and refraining from providing services to those not likely to benefit
    Patient-centered—Providing care that is respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences, needs, and values, and ensuring that patient values guide all clinical decisions
    Timely—Reducing waits and sometimes harmful delays for both those who receive and those who give care
    Efficient—Avoiding waste, including waste of equipment, supplies, ideas and energy
    Equitable—Providing care that does not vary in quality because of personal characteristics such as gender, ethnicity, geographic location, and socioeconomic status
    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Simple Rules for the 21st Century Health Care System

    Current ApproachNew Rule
    Source: Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
    Care is based primarily on visitsCare is based on continuous healing relationships
    Professional autonomy drives variabilityCare is customized according to patient needs and values
    Professionals control careThe patient is the source of control
    Information is a recordKnowledge is shared and information flows freely
    Decision making is based on training and experienceDecision making is evidence-based
    Do no harm is an individual responsibilitySafety is a system property
    Secrecy is necessaryTransparency is necessary
    The system reacts to needsNeeds are anticipated
    Cost reduction is soughtWaste is continuously decreased
    Preference is given to professional roles rather than the systemCooperation among clinicians is a priority
    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Major Challenges Facing Family Medicine

    Generating an understanding of family practice.
    Despite its 30-year history, neither the general public nor health care professionals understand all that family practice represents
    Organizing individuality.
    There is significant variance in practice scope from one family physician to the next. As a specialty, family medicine has deliberately resisted specific definition from the beginning
    Winning respect in academic circles.
    Family medicine suffers as a result of not having gained the respect and resultant endorsement of key academic institutions. Some medical schools feel that family medicine will bring neither money nor recognition to the school; as a result, they neither support the specialty nor encourage students to pursue it
    Making family medicine an attractive career option.
    Issues requiring attention include: inadequate remuneration, little recognition in the medical field, managed care challenges, quality of care yielding to pressures to increase the quantity of visits, and specialists thinking general internists are better diagnosticians than family physicians
    Addressing the obsession with science and technology in the United States.
    Family medicine is associated with neither; some people think family physicians are old-fashioned and cannot handle more critical health issues. There is a conspicuous absence of family medicine breakthrough research
    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Estimated Number of Professionals in the United States in 2000

    CategoryNumber
    Source: The Robert Graham Center, Washington, DC.
    Family physicians/general practitioners86,321 (71,106 FP+15,215 GP)
    General internists70,362
    General pediatricians39,176
    Osteopathic family physicians/general practitioners28,407
    Nurse practitioners102,829
    Physician assistants45,311
    • View popup
    Table 5.

    Distribution by Specialty of the Usual Source of Care for People With Selected Conditions and a Physician as That Usual Source

    ConditionFamily Medicine %General Internal Medicine %General Pediatrics %All Others %
    Note: Based on 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys.
    Arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease56310.014
    Stroke56340.99
    Hypertension63280.28
    Diabetes67230.610
    Cancer60262.311
    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease62225.411
    Asthma581520.86
    Anxiety, depression62207.011
    • View popup
    Table 6.

    Proportion of Visits to Family Physicians and General Practitioners for Selected Problems

    Problem1980–19921993–1999
    Source: Based on National Ambulatory Medical Care surveys, National Center for Health Statistics, US Public Health Service.
    General examination4037
    Pharyngitis4841
    Otitis Media3024
    N1 pregnancy1810
    Contraception2321
    Menopause3116
    Asthma2826
    Diabetes4134
    Obesity6248
    High blood pressure4941
    Migraine3834
    Benign prostatic hypertrophy815
    Depression3939
    All3025
    • View popup
    Table 7.

    Key Characteristics of Family Medicine

    CharacteristicDescription
    A deep understanding of the dynamics of the whole personThis approach leads family physicians to consider all the influences on a person’s health. It helps to integrate rather than fragment care, involving people in the prevention of illness and the care of their problems, diseases, and injuries
    A generative impact on patients’ livesThis terminology comes from Erik Erikson’s work on personality development. Family physicians participate in the birth, growth, and death of people and want to make a difference in the lives of their patients. While providing services that prevent or treat disease, family physicians foster personal growth in individuals and help with behavior change that may lead to better health and a greater sense of well-being
    A talent for humanizing the health care experienceThe intimate relationships family physicians develop with many of their patients over time enables family physicians to connect with people. This ability to connect in a human way with people allows family physicians to explain complex medical issues in ways that people can understand. Family physicians take into account the culture and values of their patients, while helping them get the best care possible
    A natural command of complexityFamily physicians are comfortable with uncertainty and complexity. They are trained to be inclusive, to consider all the factors that lead to health and well-being—not just pills and procedures
    A commitment to multidimensional accessibilityThis means not only to be physically accessible to patients and their families and friends, but to maintain open, honest, and sharing communications with all involved with the care process
    • View popup
    Table 8.

    Characteristics of a New Model Family Medicine Practice

    CharacteristicsDescription
    Patient-centered carePatients are active participants in their health and health care. The practice has a customer service orientation that embraces the importance of meeting patients’ needs, reaffirming that the fundamental basis for health care is “people taking care of people.”72
    Whole-person orientationA visible commitment to whole-person care through such mechanisms as developing cooperative alliances with services or organizations that extend beyond the practice setting, but are essential for meeting the complete range of needs for a given patient population.37 The practice has the ability to help guide a patient through the health care system by integrating their care—not simply coordinating it
    A team approachAn understanding that health care is not delivered by an individual, but rather by a system,40 which translates to the development of a multidisciplinary team approach for delivering and continually improving care for an identified population.73
    Elimination of barriers to accessElimination, to the extent possible, of barriers to access by patients through implementation of open scheduling, expanded office hours, and additional, convenient options for communication between patients and practice staff
    Advanced information systemsThe ability to use an information system to deliver and improve care, to provide effective practice administration, to communicate with patients, to network with other practices, and to monitor the health of the community.74,75 A standardized electronic health record, adapted to the specific needs of family physicians, constitutes the central nervous system of the practice
    Attractive, convenient, and functional officesOffice facilities that are attractive, convenient, and functional in order to meet a variety of patient needs and expectations
    Focus on qualityOngoing assessment of performance and outcomes and implementation of appropriate changes to enhance quality
    Equitable reimbursementPayment mechanisms that provide for equitable reimbursement for services from public and private payers
    • View popup
    Table 9.

    Core Services in the New Model

    Integration of personal care
    Health assessment (evaluation of health and risk status)
    Disease prevention (early detection of asymptomatic disease)
    Health promotion (primary prevention and health behavior/lifestyle modification)
    Patient education and support for self-care
    Diagnosis and management of acute injuries and illnesses, with referral as appropriate
    Diagnosis and management of chronic diseases
    Coordination and provision of rehabilitative services
    Supportive care, including end-of-life care
    Women’s health care
    Primary mental health care
    Advocacy for the patient within the health care system
    • View popup
    Table 10.

    Comparison of Traditional vs New Model Practices

    Traditional Model of PracticeNew Model of Practice
    Care is provided to both genders and all ages; includes all stages of the individual and family life cycles in continuous, healing relationshipsCare is provided to both genders and all ages; includes all stages of the individual and family life cycles in continuous, healing relationships
    The doctor is center stageThe patient is center stage
    Unnecessary barriers to access by patientsOpen access by patients
    Care is mostly reactiveCare is reactive and prospective
    Care is often fragmentedCare is integrated
    Paper medical recordElectronic health record
    An unpredictable package of services is offeredA defined package of services is offered reliably
    Individual patient orientedIndividual and population oriented
    Communication with practice is synchronous (in person or by telephone)Communication with the practice is both synchronous and asynchronous (e-mail, Web portal, voice mail)
    Quality of care is assumedQuality of care is continuously measured and improved
    The physician is the main source of careA multidisciplinary team is the source of care
    Individual physician-patient visitsIndividual and group visits involving several patients and members of the health care team
    Consumes knowledgeConsumes and produces knowledge
    Safety is assumedSystems to insure safety are built in
    Experience basedEvidence based
    Haphazard chronic disease managementPurposeful, organized chronic isease management
    Struggles financially, undercapitalizedPositive financial margin, adequately capitalized
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 2 (suppl 1)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 2 (suppl 1)
Vol. 2, Issue suppl 1
1 Mar 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Task Force 1. Report of the Task Force on Patient Expectations, Core Values, Reintegration, and the New Model of Family Medicine
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 5 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Task Force 1. Report of the Task Force on Patient Expectations, Core Values, Reintegration, and the New Model of Family Medicine
Task Force 1 Writing Group, Larry A. Green, Robert Graham, Bruce Bagley, Charles M. Kilo, Stephen J. Spann, Stephen P. Bogdewic, John Swanson
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2004, 2 (suppl 1) S33-S50; DOI: 10.1370/afm.134

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Task Force 1. Report of the Task Force on Patient Expectations, Core Values, Reintegration, and the New Model of Family Medicine
Task Force 1 Writing Group, Larry A. Green, Robert Graham, Bruce Bagley, Charles M. Kilo, Stephen J. Spann, Stephen P. Bogdewic, John Swanson
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2004, 2 (suppl 1) S33-S50; DOI: 10.1370/afm.134
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • THE PROBLEM IN CONTEXT
    • RESEARCH
    • CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE FUTURE
    • THE WAY FORWARD
    • ANTICIPATED RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
    • RECOMMENDATIONS
    • OTHER SOURCES
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • CORRECTION
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • "They Go Hand in Hand": Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Core Values of Family Medicine and Abortion Provision Among Family Physicians Who Do Not Oppose Abortion
  • "They Go Hand in Hand": Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Core Values of Family Medicine and Abortion Provision Among Family Physicians Who Do Not Oppose Abortion
  • Time for Family Medicine to Stop Enabling a Dysfunctional Health Care System
  • Priorities for Artificial Intelligence Applications in Primary Care: A Canadian Deliberative Dialogue with Patients, Providers, and Health System Leaders
  • Priorities for Artificial Intelligence Applications in Primary Care: A Canadian Deliberative Dialogue with Patients, Providers, and Health System Leaders
  • Forces for Integration
  • Holding On and Letting Go: A Perspective from the Keystone IV Conference
  • Health Is Primary: Family Medicine for America's Health
  • A Method for Estimating Relative Complexity of Ambulatory Care
  • Implementing the Patient-Centered Medical Home: Observation and Description of the National Demonstration Project
  • Methods for Evaluating Practice Change Toward a Patient-Centered Medical Home
  • Summary of the National Demonstration Project and Recommendations for the Patient-Centered Medical Home
  • Elements of the Patient-Centered Medical Home in Family Practices in Virginia
  • Initial Lessons From the First National Demonstration Project on Practice Transformation to a Patient-Centered Medical Home
  • Perceived Complexity of Care, Perceived Autonomy, and Career Satisfaction Among Primary Care Physicians
  • The nature of informational continuity of care in general practice
  • The Medical Home: Growing Evidence to Support a New Approach to Primary Care
  • The Medical Home: Locus of Physician Formation
  • Annals Journal Club: Novel Staffing for Improved Patient Disease Management
  • Family Medicine and the Life Course Paradigm
  • In This Issue: Glimpses of a Transformed Model of Care
  • Stimulus, Response, Interpretation
  • In This Issue: New Model Finances, Systematic Reviews, Patients and Health Care
  • Report on Financing the New Model of Family Medicine
  • Religion, Spirituality, and the Practice of Medicine
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Task Force Report 2. Report of the Task Force on Medical Education
  • Task Force Report 4. Report of the Task Force on Marketing and Communications
Show more Task Force Reports (Online Only)

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Other research types:
    • Health policy
  • Core values of primary care:
    • Access
  • Other topics:
    • Health informatics
    • Quality improvement
    • Organizational / practice change
    • Patient perspectives

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine