Amelia Goodfellow1, Jesus G Ulloa, Patrick T Dowling, Efrain Talamantes, Somil Chheda, Curtis Bone, Gerardo Moreno. 1. A. Goodfellow is a medical student, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California. J.G. Ulloa is a VA/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholar, UCLA, Los Angeles, California and Surgery Resident, Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. P.T. Dowling is professor and chair, Department of Family Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California. E. Talamantes at the time of this research was primary care research fellow, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California, and is now assistant professor, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Sacramento, California. S. Chheda is research assistant, Department of Family Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California. C. Bone at the time of this research was a third-year resident physician, Department of Family Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California. G. Moreno is assistant professor, Department of Family Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The authors conducted a systematic review of the medical literature to determine the factors most strongly associated with localizing primary care physicians (PCPs) in underserved urban or rural areas of the United States. METHOD: In November 2015, the authors searched databases (MEDLINE, ERIC, SCOPUS) and Google Scholar to identify published peer-reviewed studies that focused on PCPs and reported practice location outcomes that included U.S. underserved urban or rural areas. Studies focusing on practice intentions, nonphysicians, patient panel composition, or retention/turnover were excluded. They screened 4,130 titles and reviewed 284 full-text articles. RESULTS: Seventy-two observational or case-control studies met inclusion criteria. These were categorized into four broad themes aligned with prior literature: 19 studies focused on physician characteristics, 13 on financial factors, 20 on medical school curricula/programs, and 20 on graduate medical education (GME) programs. Studies found significant relationships between physician race/ethnicity and language and practice in underserved areas. Multiple studies demonstrated significant associations between financial factors (e.g., debt or incentives) and underserved or rural practice, independent of preexisting trainee characteristics. There was also evidence that medical school and GME programs were effective in training PCPs who locate in underserved areas. CONCLUSIONS: Both financial incentives and special training programs could be used to support trainees with the personal characteristics associated with practicing in underserved or rural areas. Expanding and replicating medical school curricula and programs proven to produce clinicians who practice in underserved urban or rural areas should be a strategic investment for medical education and future research.
PURPOSE: The authors conducted a systematic review of the medical literature to determine the factors most strongly associated with localizing primary care physicians (PCPs) in underserved urban or rural areas of the United States. METHOD: In November 2015, the authors searched databases (MEDLINE, ERIC, SCOPUS) and Google Scholar to identify published peer-reviewed studies that focused on PCPs and reported practice location outcomes that included U.S. underserved urban or rural areas. Studies focusing on practice intentions, nonphysicians, patient panel composition, or retention/turnover were excluded. They screened 4,130 titles and reviewed 284 full-text articles. RESULTS: Seventy-two observational or case-control studies met inclusion criteria. These were categorized into four broad themes aligned with prior literature: 19 studies focused on physician characteristics, 13 on financial factors, 20 on medical school curricula/programs, and 20 on graduate medical education (GME) programs. Studies found significant relationships between physician race/ethnicity and language and practice in underserved areas. Multiple studies demonstrated significant associations between financial factors (e.g., debt or incentives) and underserved or rural practice, independent of preexisting trainee characteristics. There was also evidence that medical school and GME programs were effective in training PCPs who locate in underserved areas. CONCLUSIONS: Both financial incentives and special training programs could be used to support trainees with the personal characteristics associated with practicing in underserved or rural areas. Expanding and replicating medical school curricula and programs proven to produce clinicians who practice in underserved urban or rural areas should be a strategic investment for medical education and future research.
Authors: Efrain Talamantes; Anthony Jerant; Mark C Henderson; Erin Griffin; Tonya Fancher; Douglas Grbic; Gerardo Moreno; Peter Franks Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Peter Meyers; Elizabeth Wilkinson; Stephen Petterson; Davis G Patterson; Randall Longenecker; David Schmitz; Andrew Bazemore Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2020-12-04
Authors: Sarah H Gordon; Erin Beilstein-Wedel; Amy K Rosen; Tianyu Zheng; Alan Taylor Kelley; James Cook; Sarah S Zahakos; Todd H Wagner; Megan E Vanneman Journal: Med Care Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 3.178