GASTROENTEROLOGY IN GERMANY - WHERE IT IS AT AND PROSPECTS - RESULTS OF A SURVEY AMONG THE MEMBERS OF THE GERMAN-SOCIETY-OF-GASTROENTEROLOGY-AND-METABOLISM
G. Lux et al., GASTROENTEROLOGY IN GERMANY - WHERE IT IS AT AND PROSPECTS - RESULTS OF A SURVEY AMONG THE MEMBERS OF THE GERMAN-SOCIETY-OF-GASTROENTEROLOGY-AND-METABOLISM, Zeitschrift fur Gastroenterologie, 34(9), 1996, pp. 542-548
The present survey carried out among the members of the German Society
of Gastroenterology and Metabolism (GSGM) was intended 1. to provide
information on a) age, professional experience and nature of present a
ctivities, b) the service spectrum, c) career prospects, and 2. to ref
lect the views of those questioned on a) the ability of non-gastroente
rologists to furnish gastroenterological services, b) the performance
of invasive procedures on an ambulatory basis, c) requirements to be m
et by gastroenterological training, d) quality asssurance measures and
e) the public image of the specialty gastroenterology, method, A ques
tionnaire was sent to the members of the GSGM, of whom 629 responded a
nd whose questionnaires were; evaluated. Results. The median age of th
e responders was 48,2 years, median duration of professional activity
was 15 years; 73% work in a hospital setting. Some 76-88% of those wor
king in hospitals consider their future activities to be in the hospit
als. Provided that strict, in part yet to be defined, specialty-relate
d Conditions are mel, gastroenterological services can also be provide
d by non-gastroenterologists. Some 50% of the responders were against
the performance of invasive endoscopic procedures on an ambulatory bas
is (e. g. EPT, lithotripsy, stent implantation). In the opinion of the
majority, the number of doctors undergoing specialist training with t
he aim of becoming qualified gastroenterologists should not be limited
. The majoritiy of responders were also in favour of quality assurance
measures as well as clinical research in this area. Almost three-quar
ters of the responding members of the GSGM perceived shortcomings in t
he public image of gastroenterology. Conclusion: The analysis of the r
esults of the present survey indicate prospects for the future, but al
so a need for action in the field of the specialty gastroenterology.