Working situation and problems in practice of Thai gynecologic oncologists: Thai gynecologic cancer society survey

• Main Authors: S. Tangjitgamol, S. Chanpanitkitchot, K. Charoenkwan, J. Srisomboon, P. Kasemsarn, W. Temrungruanglert, V. Linasmita
• Format: Journal
• Published: 2020
• Subjects: Medicine
• Online Access: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85089833858&origin=inward; http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/70824
• Institution: Chiang Mai University

© Journal of The Medical Association of Thailand Objective: To assess working situation and problems related to work of Thai gynecologic oncologists. Materials and Methods: The present study was a part of the Thai Gynecologic Cancer Society (TGCS) survey about clinical practice of the Thai gynecologic oncologists who had been in practice in Thailand for at least 1 year. A web-based survey was opened for response between August and October 2019. This study abstracted general data of the gynecologic oncologists, hospital features, working features and problems related to work or personal problems. Results: Among 258 gynecologic oncologists who met inclusion criteria, 170 responded to the questionnaires (65.9%). The mean age was 41.1+8.25 years, with nearly two thirds (63.5%) being female. Median duration of practice was 5 years (range 1 to 42 years). Majority (over 80%) worked in the government or tertiary-level hospitals. Approximately half (50.6%) were hospitals involving gynecologic oncology fellowship training. The number of gynecologic oncologists in each hospital ranged from 1 to 19 (median 6), with 28.2% of the respondents reporting inadequacy. The inadequacy was reported to be significantly more frequent in service-only hospitals (especially in government and tertiary-level hospitals) compared to training hospitals. Among 75.9% of the respondents who reported having problems, the most common was work-related (68.2%) especially over-workload or inadequate colleagues. Financial problem was encountered more frequently in government or training hospitals. Conclusion: Most respondents worked in government or tertiary hospitals, whereas half involved in fellowship training. A wide range of numbers of gynecologic oncologists was reported in each institution of the respondents, with slightly more than one-fourth reporting inadequacy. Approximately three-fourths of the respondents reported one or more problems, being work-related as the most common.