Diferencias de género en la percepción del logro profesional en especialistas de medicina familiar y comunitaria

BACKGROUND The concept of achievement is important to study the professional development. In medicine there are gender inequalities in career. The purpose was to know and compare the professional achievement's perceptions and attributions of female and male primary care physicians in Andalusia. METHOD Qualitative study with 12 focus groups (October 2009 to November 2010). POPULATION primary care physicians. SAMPLE intentionally segmented by age, sex and health care management. Were conducted by sex: two groups with young physicians, two groups with middle aged and two with health care management. TOTAL: 32 female physician and 33 male physicians. Qualitative content analysis with Nuddist Vivo. RESULTS Female and male physicians agree to perceive internal achievements and to consider aspects inherent to the profession as external achievements. The most important difference is that female physician related professional achievement with affective bond and male physician with institutional merit. Internal attributions are more important for female physician who also highlight the importance of family, the organization of working time and work-family balance. Patients, continuing education, institutional resources and computer system are the most important attributions for male physician. CONCLUSIONS There are similarities and differences between female and male physicians both in the understanding and the attributions of achievement. The differences are explained by the gender system. The perception of achievement of the female physicians questions the dominant professional culture and incorporates new values in defining achievement. The attributions reflect the unequal impact of family and organizational variables and suggest that the female physicians would be changing gender socialization.

Oral and general health-related quality of life in patients treated for oral cancer compared to control group.

BACKGROUND Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is gaining importance as a valuable outcome measure in oral cancer area. The aim of this study was to assess the general and oral HRQoL of oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients 6 or more months after treatment and compare them with a population free from this disease. METHODS A cross-sectional study was carried out with patients treated for oral cancer at least 6 months post-treatment and a gender and age group matched control group. HRQoL was measured with the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12); oral HRQoL (OHRQoL) was evaluated using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP). Multivariable regression models assessed the association between the outcomes (SF-12, OHIP-14 and OIDP) and the exposure (patients versus controls), adjusting for sex, age, social class, functional tooth units and presence of illness. RESULTS For patients (n = 142) and controls (n = 142), 64.1% were males. The mean age was 65.2 (standard deviation (sd): 12.9) years in patients and 67.5 (sd: 13.7) years in controls. Patients had worse SF-12 Physical Component Summary scores than controls even in fully the adjusted model [β-coefficient = -0.11 (95% CI: -5.12-(-0.16)]. The differences in SF-12 Mental Component Summary were not statistically significant. Regarding OHRQoL patients had 11.63 (95% CI: 6.77-20.01) higher odds for the OHIP-14 and 21.26 (95% CI: 11.54-39.13) higher odds for OIDP of being in a worse category of OHRQoL compared to controls in the fully adjusted model. CONCLUSION At least 6 months after treatment, oral cancer patients had worse OHRQoL, worse physical HRQoL and similar psychological HRQoL than the general population.