| Literature DB >> 31289089 |
Vivian Isaac1, Craig S McLachlan2, Lucie Walters3, Jennene Greenhill1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate Australian medical student burn-out during rural clinical placement. Second, to examine the association between perceived burn-out and rural career intent at the time of finishing their rural placement. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: The 2016 Federation of Rural Australian Medical Educators evaluation survey is a cross-sectional study of medical students from 17 Australian universities. Specifically, those medical students who completed a full academic year or more at a Rural Clinical School (RCS). Responses from 638 medical students from regional Australia were analysed in the study of all eligible 756 medical students (response rate 84.3%). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary objective was to determine self-reported burn-out (emotional exhaustion) in rural placements for medical students. Secondary outcome measures were designed to explore interactions with rural practice self-efficacy and rural intentions. Logistic regression models explored factors associated with burn-out.Entities:
Keywords: Australia; burnout; rural clinical school; rural intention; rural practice self-efficacy
Year: 2019 PMID: 31289089 PMCID: PMC6615879 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029029
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Characteristics of the sample
| Characteristics | N | % |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 265 | 40.9 |
| Female | 373 | 57.6 |
| Rural background | ||
| No | 369 | 56.9 |
| Yes | 264 | 40.7 |
| Type of location living longest in Australia | ||
| Capital city | 309 | 47.4 |
| Major city | 68 | 10.5 |
| Regional | 106 | 16.4 |
| Rural | 79 | 12.2 |
| Small rural | 82 | 12.7 |
| Remote | 4 | 0.6 |
| Preference for RCS for Clinical training | ||
| Last choice | 29 | 4.5 |
| Low on list | 21 | 3.2 |
| Mid-choice | 40 | 6.2 |
| High on list | 117 | 18.1 |
| First choice | 435 | 67.1 |
| Preference on entry | ||
| General practice | 117 | 27.3 |
| General specialist | 234 | 36.1 |
| Sub specialist | 232 | 35.8 |
| Preferred location for work | ||
| Capital/major city | 240 | 37.0 |
| Regional | 247 | 38.1 |
| Rural | 113 | 17.4 |
| Small rural | 37 | 5.7 |
| Remote | 5 | 0.8 |
Percentages may not add up to 100% because of missing data.
RCS, Rural Clinical School.
Factors associated with self-perceived burn-out during rural clinical training
| N (%) | Burn-out | ||
| OR (95% CI) | P value | ||
| Gender | |||
| Male | 60 (22.6) | 1.0 | |
| Female | 111 (29.9) | 1.5 (1.0 to 2.1) | 0.04 |
| Rural background | |||
| No | 85 (23.1) | 1.0 | |
| Yes | 77 (29.3) | 1.4 (0.9 to 2.0) | 0.09 |
| Type of location living longest in Australia | |||
| Capital city/major city | 89 (23.7) | 1.0 | |
| Regional | 37 (34.9) | 1.7 (1.1 to 2.7) | 0.02 |
| Rural/remote | 45 (27.6) | 1.2 (0.8 to 1.8) | 0.34 |
| Preference for Rural Clinical School for clinical training | |||
| Others | 35 (38.9) | 1.0 | |
| First choice/high | 134 (24.3) | 0.5 (0.3 to 0.8) | 0.006 |
| Preference on entry | |||
| General practice | 48 (27.1) | 1.0 | |
| Generalist specialist | 65 (27.8) | 1.0 (0.6 to 1.6) | 0.88 |
| Sub specialist | 57 (24.7) | 0.8 (0.5 to 1.4) | 0.57 |
| Majority of placement in remote location | |||
| No | 150 (26.5) | 1.0 | |
| Yes | 19 (25.7) | 0.9 (0.5 to 1.6) | 1.0 |
| Perceived social isolation | |||
| Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral | 73 (17.0) | 1.0 | |
| Strongly agree/agree | 97 (45.5) | 4.0 (2.8 to 5.9) | <0.001 |
| Stress in the year prior to rural placement | |||
| Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral | 78 (18.2) | 1.0 | |
| Strongly agree/agree | 93 (43.3) | 3.4 (2.3 to 4.9) | <0.001 |
| Overall health was good in the year prior to rural placement | |||
| Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral | 59 (34.7) | 1.0 | |
| Strongly agree/agree | 112 (23.6) | 0.6 (0.4 to 0.8) | 0.006 |
| Self-efficacy | |||
| Low tertile | 88 (34.9) | 1.0 | |
| Middle tertile | 57 (25.1) | 0.6 (0.4 to 0.9) | 0.02 |
| High tertile | 26 (16.4) | 0.3 (0.2 to 0.6) | <0.001 |
| Future work Intention | |||
| Urban | 134 (27.6) | 1.0 | |
| Rural/remote | 36 (23.2) | 0.7 (0.5 to 1.2) | 0.29 |
Multivariate logistic regression analysis for associations with burn-out during rural placement
| Burn-out during rural placement | ||||||
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | ||||
| OR (95% CI) | Wald (df) p value | OR (95% CI) | Wald (df) p value | OR (95% CI) | Wald (df) p value | |
| Gender (female) | 1.5 (1.1 to 2.2) | 4.6 (1) 0.03 | 1.4 (0.9 to 2.0) | 2.3 (1) 0.12 | 1.4 (0.9 to 2.1) | 2.7 (1) 0.10 |
| Lived longest | ||||||
| Capital city/major city | 1.0 | 1.0 | Ref | |||
| Regional | 1.8 (1.1 to 2.9) | 5.9 (1) 0.02 | 1.6 (1.0 to 2.6) | 3.4 (1) 0.06 | 1.8 (1.1 to 3.1) | 5.1 (1) 0.024 |
| Rural/remote | 1.3 (0.8 to 2.0) | 1.7 (1) 0.19 | 1.3 (0.8 to 2.0) | 1.3 (1) 0.24 | 1.7 (1.1 to 2.7) | 1.2 (1) 0.27 |
| Preference for RCS training | 0.4 (0.3 to 0.7) | 0.4 (0.3 to 0.7) | 10.9 (1) 0.001 | 0.6 (0.4 to 1.0) | 3.3 (1) 0.06 | |
| Stress in the year prior to rural placement | 3.1 (2.1 to 4.6) | 34.2 (1)<0.001 | 3.1 (2.0 to 4.6)) | 28.8 (1)<0.001 | ||
| Overall health was good in the year prior to rural placement | 0.7 (0.5 to 1.1) | 1.3 (1) 0.24 | 0.7 (0.5 to 1.1) | 1.3 (1) 0.24 | ||
| Social Isolation | 3.1 (2.0 to 4.6) | 30.4 (1)<0.001 | ||||
| Low self-efficacy (lower tertile) | 2.1 (1.3 to 3.1) | 11.4 (1)<0.001 | ||||
| Model X2 | 19.2 | 60.9 | 110.9 | |||
| Nagelkerke R2 | 0.03 | 13.2 | 0.23 | |||
RCS, Rural Clinical School.