# Perception of the compatibility of Quebec residency program characteristics with the advanced access model: a cross-sectional study

## TL;DR

This study assesses how well Quebec residency programs align with the advanced access model for primary care, finding limited compatibility with key principles.

## Contribution

The study introduces a novel cross-sectional evaluation of residency programs' compatibility with the advanced access model's core pillars.

## Key findings

- Only 25% of residency programs were compatible with planning for needs and supply.
- 54% of programs were compatible with regularly adjusting supply to demand.
- 82% of programs had appointment systems not fully aligned with advanced access principles.

## Abstract

The advanced access (AA) model is among the most recommended innovations for improving timely access in primary care (PC). AA is based on core pillars such as comprehensive planning for care needs and supply, regularly adjusting supply to demand, optimizing appointment systems, and interprofessional collaborative practices. Exposure of family medicine residents to AA within university-affiliated family medicine groups (U-FMGs) is a promising strategy to widen its dissemination and improve access. Using four AA pillars as a conceptual model, this study aimed to determine the theoretical compatibility of Quebec’s university-affiliated clinics’ residency programs with the key principles of AA.

A cross-sectional online survey was sent to the chief resident and academic director at each participating clinic. An overall response rate of 96% (44/46 U-FMGs) was obtained.

No local residency program was deemed compatible with all four considered pillars. On planning for needs and supply, only one quarter of the programs were compatible with the principles of AA, owing to residents in out-of-clinic rotations often being unavailable for extended periods. On regularly adjusting supply to demand, 54% of the programs were compatible. Most (82%) programs’ appointment systems were not very compatible with the AA principles, mostly because the proportion of the schedule reserved for urgent appointments was insufficient. Interprofessional collaboration opportunities in the first year of residency allowed 60% of the programs to be compatible with this pillar.

Our study highlights the heterogeneity among local residency programs with respect to their theoretical compatibility with the key principles of AA. Future research to empirically test the hypotheses raised by this study is warranted.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-024-02386-5.