Joe McGirr1, Alexa Seal2, Amanda Barnard3, Colleen Cheek4, David Garne5, Jennene Greenhill6, Srinivas Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan7, Georgina M Luscombe8, Jenny May9, Janet Mc Leod10, Belinda O'Sullivan11, Denese Playford12, Julian Wright13. 1. Rural Clinical School, School of Medicine Sydney, The University of Notre Dame, Australia joegmcgirr@gmail.com. 2. Rural Clinical School, School of Medicine Sydney, The University of Notre Dame, Australia alexa.seal@nd.edu.au. 3. Charles Sturt University and Western Sydney University Joint Program in Medicine amanda.barnard@anu.edu.au. 4. Rural Clinical School, School of Medicine, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania colleen.cheek@utas.edu.au. 5. Community, Primary, Remote and Rural, School of Medicine, University of Wollongong dgarne@uow.edu.au. 6. Flinders University Rural Clinical School (FURCS), Flinders University jennene.greenhill@flinders.edu.au. 7. Rural Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland s.kondalsamychennakes@uq.edu.au. 8. The School of Rural Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney georgina.luscombe@sydney.edu.au. 9. University of Newcastle Department of Rural Health, University of Newcastle jennifer.may@newcastle.edu.au. 10. School of Medicine, Deakin University j.mcleod@deakin.edu.au. 11. Monash University, School of Rural Health (Bendigo) belinda.osullivan@monash.edu. 12. Rural Clinical School of Western Australia, The University of Western Australia denese.playford@rcswa.edu.au. 13. Department of Rural Health, Rural Clinical School, The University of Melbourne julian.wright@unimelb.edu.au.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Many strategies have been implemented to address the shortage of medical practitioners in rural areas. One such strategy, the Rural Clinical School Program supporting 18 rural clinical schools (RCSs), represents a substantial financial investment by the Australian Government. This is the first collaborative RCS study summarising the rural work outcomes of multiple RCSs. The aim of this study was to combine data from all RCSs' 2011 graduating classes to determine the association between rural location of practice in 2017 and (i) extended rural clinical placement during medical school (at least 12 months training in a rural area) and (ii) having a rural background. METHODS: All medical schools funded under the RCS Program were contacted by email about participation in this study. De-identified data were supplied for domestic students about their gender, origin (rural background defined as having lived in an Australian Standard Geographic Classification-Remoteness Area (ASGC-RA) 2-5 area for at least 5 years since beginning primary school) and participation in extended rural clinical placement (attended an RCS for at least 1 year of their clinical training). The postcode of their practice location according to the publicly available Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) register was collected (February to August 2017) and classified into rural and metropolitan areas using the ASGC 2006 and the more recent Modified Monash Model (MMM). The main outcome measure was whether graduates were working in a 'rural' area (ASGC categories RA2-5 or MMM categories 3-7) or 'metropolitan' area. Pearson's χ2 test was used to detect differences in gender, rural background and extended placement at an RCS between rural and metropolitan practice locations. Binary logistic regression was used to determine odds of rural practice and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Although data were received from 14 universities, two universities had not started collecting origin data at this point so were excluded from the analysis. The proportion of students with a rural background had a range of 12.3-76.6% and the proportion who had participated in extended RCS placement had a range of 13.7-74.6%. Almost 17% (16.6%) had a principal practice postcode in a rural area (according to ASGC), range 5.8-55.6%, and 8.3% had a principal practice postcode in rural areas (according to MMM 3-7), range 4.5-29.9%. After controlling for rural background, it was found that students who attended an RCS were 1.5 times more likely to be in rural practice (95%CI 1.2-2.1, p=0.004) using ASGC criteria. Using the MMM 3-7 criteria, students who participated in extended RCS placement were 2.6 times as likely to be practising in a rural location (95%CI 1.8-3.8, p<0.001) after controlling for rural background. Regardless of geographic classification system (ASGC, MMM) used for location of practice and of student background (metropolitan or rural), those students with an extended RCS had an increased chance of working rurally. CONCLUSION: Based on the combined data from three-quarters (12/16) of the Australian medical schools who had a graduating class in 2011, this suggests that the RCS initiative as a whole is having a significant positive effect on the regional medical workforce at 5 years post-graduation.
INTRODUCTION: Many strategies have been implemented to address the shortage of medical practitioners in rural areas. One such strategy, the Rural Clinical School Program supporting 18 rural clinical schools (RCSs), represents a substantial financial investment by the Australian Government. This is the first collaborative RCS study summarising the rural work outcomes of multiple RCSs. The aim of this study was to combine data from all RCSs' 2011 graduating classes to determine the association between rural location of practice in 2017 and (i) extended rural clinical placement during medical school (at least 12 months training in a rural area) and (ii) having a rural background. METHODS: All medical schools funded under the RCS Program were contacted by email about participation in this study. De-identified data were supplied for domestic students about their gender, origin (rural background defined as having lived in an Australian Standard Geographic Classification-Remoteness Area (ASGC-RA) 2-5 area for at least 5 years since beginning primary school) and participation in extended rural clinical placement (attended an RCS for at least 1 year of their clinical training). The postcode of their practice location according to the publicly available Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) register was collected (February to August 2017) and classified into rural and metropolitan areas using the ASGC 2006 and the more recent Modified Monash Model (MMM). The main outcome measure was whether graduates were working in a 'rural' area (ASGC categories RA2-5 or MMM categories 3-7) or 'metropolitan' area. Pearson's χ2 test was used to detect differences in gender, rural background and extended placement at an RCS between rural and metropolitan practice locations. Binary logistic regression was used to determine odds of rural practice and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Although data were received from 14 universities, two universities had not started collecting origin data at this point so were excluded from the analysis. The proportion of students with a rural background had a range of 12.3-76.6% and the proportion who had participated in extended RCS placement had a range of 13.7-74.6%. Almost 17% (16.6%) had a principal practice postcode in a rural area (according to ASGC), range 5.8-55.6%, and 8.3% had a principal practice postcode in rural areas (according to MMM 3-7), range 4.5-29.9%. After controlling for rural background, it was found that students who attended an RCS were 1.5 times more likely to be in rural practice (95%CI 1.2-2.1, p=0.004) using ASGC criteria. Using the MMM 3-7 criteria, students who participated in extended RCS placement were 2.6 times as likely to be practising in a rural location (95%CI 1.8-3.8, p<0.001) after controlling for rural background. Regardless of geographic classification system (ASGC, MMM) used for location of practice and of student background (metropolitan or rural), those students with an extended RCS had an increased chance of working rurally. CONCLUSION: Based on the combined data from three-quarters (12/16) of the Australian medical schools who had a graduating class in 2011, this suggests that the RCS initiative as a whole is having a significant positive effect on the regional medical workforce at 5 years post-graduation.
Keywords:
graduate; medical education; rural background; rural clinical school; rural workforce; Australia
Authors: Tony Smith; Keith Sutton; Alison Beauchamp; Julie Depczynski; Leanne Brown; Karin Fisher; Susan Waller; Luke Wakely; Darryl Maybery; Vincent L Versace Journal: Aust J Rural Health Date: 2021-02-10 Impact factor: 1.662
Authors: Hannah Beks; Sandra Walsh; Laura Alston; Martin Jones; Tony Smith; Darryl Maybery; Keith Sutton; Vincent L Versace Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Matthew McGrail; Belinda O'Sullivan; Tiana Gurney; Diann Eley; Srinivas Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-11 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Alison Fielding; Dominica Moad; Amanda Tapley; Andrew Davey; Elizabeth Holliday; Jean Ball; Michael Bentley; Kristen FitzGerald; Catherine Kirby; Allison Turnock; Neil Spike; Mieke L van Driel; Parker Magin Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-04-26 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Beatriz Cuesta-Briand; Mathew Coleman; Rebekah Ledingham; Sarah Moore; Helen Wright; David Oldham; Denese Playford Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-01-15 Impact factor: 3.390