TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of the Allied Health Rural Generalist Program 2017-2019
AU - Barker, Ruth
AU - Chamberlain-Salaun, Jennifer
AU - Harrison, Helena
AU - Nash, Robyn
AU - Nielsen, Ilsa
AU - Harvey, Desley
AU - Sim, Jenny
AU - Ciccone, Natalie
AU - Carr, Jennifer
AU - Bird, Katrina
AU - Palermo, Claire
AU - Devine, Sue
N1 - Special Issue: Educating Health Professionals for Rural and Remote Practice.
Funding Information:
The study was funded by the Allied Health Professions Office of Queensland, Queensland Health. The authors would like to thank Leisyle Blanco for assistance with data collection and Dr Karen Cheer for assistance with data analysis. The authors would also like to thank those who participated: managers, supervisors and RGP participants from throughout Australia.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 National Rural Health Alliance Inc.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/4
Y1 - 2021/4
N2 - Objective: To evaluate the development and implementation of the Allied Health Rural Generalist Program, a two-level online post-graduate education program, which includes Level 1, an entry-level non-award pathway program, and Level 2, a Graduate Diploma in Rural Generalist Practice. Design: A convergent mixed methodology evaluation in two overlapping stages: a process evaluation on quality and reach, together with a mixed method case study evaluation on benefits, of the program. Setting: Rural and remote Australia across ten sites and seven allied health professions: dietetics; occupational therapy; pharmacy; physiotherapy; podiatry; radiography; speech pathology. Participants: Process evaluation included 91 participants enrolled in all or part of the Rural Generalist Program. Case study evaluation included 50 managers, supervisors and Rural Generalist Program participants from the ten study sites. Interventions: The Allied Health Rural Generalist Program. Main outcome measures: Process evaluation data were derived from enrolment data and education evaluation online surveys. Case study data were gathered via online surveys and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently, analysed separately and then integrated to identify consistency, expansion or discordance across the data. Results: The Rural Generalist Program was viewed as an effective education program that provided benefits for Rural Generalist Program participants, employing organisations and consumers. Key improvements recommended included increasing profession-specific and context-specific content, ensuring Rural Generalist Program alignment with clinical and project requirements, strengthening support mechanisms within employing organisations and ensuring benefits can be sustained in the long term. Conclusion: The Rural Generalist Program offers a promising strategy for building a fit-for-purpose rural and remote allied health workforce.
AB - Objective: To evaluate the development and implementation of the Allied Health Rural Generalist Program, a two-level online post-graduate education program, which includes Level 1, an entry-level non-award pathway program, and Level 2, a Graduate Diploma in Rural Generalist Practice. Design: A convergent mixed methodology evaluation in two overlapping stages: a process evaluation on quality and reach, together with a mixed method case study evaluation on benefits, of the program. Setting: Rural and remote Australia across ten sites and seven allied health professions: dietetics; occupational therapy; pharmacy; physiotherapy; podiatry; radiography; speech pathology. Participants: Process evaluation included 91 participants enrolled in all or part of the Rural Generalist Program. Case study evaluation included 50 managers, supervisors and Rural Generalist Program participants from the ten study sites. Interventions: The Allied Health Rural Generalist Program. Main outcome measures: Process evaluation data were derived from enrolment data and education evaluation online surveys. Case study data were gathered via online surveys and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently, analysed separately and then integrated to identify consistency, expansion or discordance across the data. Results: The Rural Generalist Program was viewed as an effective education program that provided benefits for Rural Generalist Program participants, employing organisations and consumers. Key improvements recommended included increasing profession-specific and context-specific content, ensuring Rural Generalist Program alignment with clinical and project requirements, strengthening support mechanisms within employing organisations and ensuring benefits can be sustained in the long term. Conclusion: The Rural Generalist Program offers a promising strategy for building a fit-for-purpose rural and remote allied health workforce.
KW - Australia
KW - post-graduate education
KW - professional development for rural practitioners
KW - rural and remote services
KW - rural workforce development
KW - teaching and learning
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85105665853&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/ajr.12745
DO - 10.1111/ajr.12745
M3 - Article
C2 - 33982849
AN - SCOPUS:85105665853
SN - 1038-5282
VL - 29
SP - 158
EP - 171
JO - Australian Journal of Rural Health
JF - Australian Journal of Rural Health
IS - 2
ER -