Selection, training and employment to encourage early-career doctors to pursue a rural postgraduate training pathway

Rural medical workforce pathways: exploring the importance of postgraduation rural training time

BACKGROUND

Inadequate distribution of the medical workforce in rural regions remains a key global challenge. Evidence of the importance of postgraduation (after medical school) rural immersion time and subsequent rural practice, particularly after accounting for other key factors, remains limited. This study investigated the combined impact of three key training pathway factors: (1) rural background, (2) medical school rural immersion, and (3) postgraduation rural immersion, and duration time of each immersion factor on working rurally.

METHODS

Data from a cross-sectional national survey and a single university survey of Australian doctors who graduated between 2000 to 2018, were utilised. Key pathway factors were similarly measured. Postgraduation rural training time was both broad (first 10 years after medical school, national study) and specific (prevocational period, single university). This was firstly tested as the dependent variable (stage 1), then matched against rural practice (stage 2) amongst consultant doctors (national study, n = 1651) or vocational training doctors with consultants (single university, n = 478).

RESULTS

Stage 1 modelling found rural background, > 1 year medical school rural training, being rural bonded, male and later choosing general practice were associated with spending a higher proportion (> 40%) of their postgraduation training time in a rural location. Stage 2 modelling revealed the dominant impact of postgraduation rural time on subsequent rural work for both General Practitioners (GPs) (OR 45, 95% CI 24 to 84) and other specialists (OR 11, 95% CI 5-22) based on the national dataset. Similar trends for both GPs (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.6-9.1) and other specialists (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.3-6.4) were observed based on prevocational time only (single university).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides new evidence of the importance of postgraduation rural training time on subsequent rural practice, after accounting for key factors across the entire training pathway. It highlights that developing rural doctors aligns with two distinct career periods; stage 1-up to completing medical school; stage 2-after medical school. This evidence supports the need for strengthened rural training pathways after medical school, given its strong association with longer-term decisions to work rurally.

Exploring Doctors' Emerging Commitment to Rural and General Practice Roles over Their Early Career

Producing enough doctors working in general practice or rural locations, or both, remains a key global policy focus. However, there is a lack of evidence about doctors' emerging commitment to these decisions. This study aimed to explore changes in the level of certainty about career interest in working in general practice and working rurally, as doctors pass through various early career stages. The participants were 775 eligible respondents to a 2019 survey of medical graduates of The University of Queensland from 2002-2018. Certainty levels of specialty choice were similar between GPs and specialists up until the beginning of registrar training. At that point, 65% of GPs compared with 80% of other specialists had strong certainty of their specialty field. Consistently (and significantly) less of those working rurally had strong certainty of the location where they wanted to practice medicine at each career time point. At the start of registrar training, a similar gap remained (strong certainty: 51% rural versus 63% metropolitan). This study provides new evidence that career intent certainty is more delayed for the cohort choosing general practice and rural practice than the other options. The low level of certainty in early career highlights the importance of regular positive experiences that help to promote the uptake of general practice and rural practice.