title: When the group practice breaks up: a qualitative study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Group practices are increasingly common for primary care physicians worldwide. Although breakups are likely to happen frequently within group practices, their process has not been studied to date. The aims of this study were therefore to explore the reasons for breakups of group practices of general practitioners and to describe the associated feelings.
  
  
  METHODS
  We conducted a qualitative study consisting of in-depth interviews of 21 general practitioners and one secretary from past group practices in the Rhône-Alpes region, France, who experienced a breakup.
  
  
  RESULTS
  When getting started in group practice for the first time, young doctors did not feel ready and supported, and did not necessarily share the same expectations as their partners. The reasons for the breakups involved imbalances within the groups, contrasting working and management styles, and breakdowns in communication. The breakup process often generated long-persistent feelings of suffering and failure for almost every partner who experienced a breakup, particularly for the partner who was leaving.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Weakening factors exist from the very beginning of a partnership, and problems are likely to increase at every change or event occurring in the group. We provide several recommendations, including fair management, a shared project based on a precise contract, the consultation of third parties as necessary and, in the worst case scenario, leaving the group practice in time.
authors: Département de médecine générale, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 8 avenue Rockefeller, Lyon Cedex 08 69373, France.
authors: François
authors: F
authors: Marechal
authors: Dorothée
authors: D
authors: Schmidt
authors: Evelyne
authors: E
authors: Lasserre
authors: Laurent
authors: L
authors: Letrilliart
mesh_terms: D005260:Female; D006123:Group Practice; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009936:Organizational Innovation; D036301:Qualitative Research
references: Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Aug;51(469):644-50
references: 11510394
references: Sante Publique. 2009 Jul-Aug;21(4):375-82
references: 20101816
references: Fam Pract. 1996 Apr;13(2):152-5
references: 8732326
references: BMJ. 2001 Oct 6;323(7316):784-7
references: 11588082
references: BMJ. 2002 Jul 20;325(7356):140
references: 12130611
references: BMJ. 1994 Jan 15;308(6922):179-82
references: 8312771
references: Br J Gen Pract. 1993 Nov;43(376):442-3
references: 8292412
references: Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982 Jan 9;284(6309):90
references: 6797673
references: Sante Publique. 2009 Mar 29;21 Spec No 1:27-38
references: 20441649
references: Fam Pract Manag. 2006 Jan;13(1):47-50
references: 16457464
references: Fam Pract Manag. 2012 May-Jun;19(3):26-30
references: 22612214
references: Br J Gen Pract. 1999 Jul;49(444):519-21
references: 10621983
references: J Manag Med. 1996;10(2):62-71
references: 10162760
references: BMJ. 2004 Aug 14;329(7462):381
references: 15265814
references: BMJ. 1990 Dec 1;301(6763):1258-60
references: 2271828
references: Fam Pract Manag. 2003 Oct;10(9):23-6
references: 14577266
references: Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1987 May 16;294(6582):1265-6
references: 3109610
references: Fam Pract. 2003 Apr;20(2):167-72
references: 12651791
references: Can Fam Physician. 2010 May;56(5):e183-90
references: 20463259
references: BMJ. 1992 Aug 15;305(6850):398-400
references: 1392922