TY - JOUR
T1 - Faculties to support general practitioners working rurally at broader scope
T2 - A national cross-sectional study of their value
AU - McGrail, Matthew R.
AU - O’sullivan, Belinda G.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding: This work is part of the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) longitudinal study of Australian doctors. MABEL is funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (Health Services Research Grant 2007–2011 and Centre for Research Excellence in Medical Workforce Dynamics: 2012– 2017), with additional funding from the Commonwealth Department of Health (2008) and Health Workforce Australia (2013).
Funding Information:
This work is part of the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) longitudinal study of Australian doctors. MABEL is funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (Health Services Research Grant 2007?2011 and Centre for Research Excellence in Medical Workforce Dynamics: 2012? 2017), with additional funding from the Commonwealth Department of Health (2008) and Health Workforce Australia (2013). Acknowledgments: The authors acknowledge the initial project completed in 2017 by Akil Islam (FACRRM, FRACGP), undertaken as part of his Advanced Specialist Training in Academic Medicine with ACRRM. His project, which explored basic FACRRM member outcomes, was a strong inspiration for this study. We thank the other members of the MABEL team for their support and input and especially acknowledge the doctors who give their valuable time to participate in MABEL.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/7
Y1 - 2020/7
N2 - Strategies are urgently needed to foster rural general practitioners (GPs) with the skills and professional support required to adequately address healthcare needs in smaller, often isolated communities. Australia has uniquely developed two national-scale faculties that target rural practice: the Fellowship in Advanced Rural General Practice (FARGP) and the Fellowship of the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (FACRRM). This study evaluates the benefit of rural faculties for supporting GPs practicing rurally and at a broader scope. Data came from an annual national survey of Australian doctors from 2008 and 2017, providing a cross-sectional design. Work location (rurality) and scope of practice were compared between FACRRM and FARGP members, as well as standard non-members. FACRRMs mostly worked rurally (75–84%, odds ratio (OR) 8.7, 5.8–13.1), including in smaller rural communities (<15,000 population) (41–54%, OR 3.5, 2.3–5.3). FARGPs also mostly worked in rural communities (56–67%, OR 4.2, 2.2–7.8), but fewer in smaller communities (25–41%, OR 1.1, 0.5–2.5). Both FACRRMs and FARGPs were more likely to use advanced skills, especially procedural skills. GPs with fellowship of a rural faculty were associated with significantly improved geographic distribution and expanded scope, compared with standard GPs. Given their strong outcomes, expanding rural faculties is likely to be a critical strategy to building and sustaining a general practice workforce that meets the needs of rural communities.
AB - Strategies are urgently needed to foster rural general practitioners (GPs) with the skills and professional support required to adequately address healthcare needs in smaller, often isolated communities. Australia has uniquely developed two national-scale faculties that target rural practice: the Fellowship in Advanced Rural General Practice (FARGP) and the Fellowship of the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (FACRRM). This study evaluates the benefit of rural faculties for supporting GPs practicing rurally and at a broader scope. Data came from an annual national survey of Australian doctors from 2008 and 2017, providing a cross-sectional design. Work location (rurality) and scope of practice were compared between FACRRM and FARGP members, as well as standard non-members. FACRRMs mostly worked rurally (75–84%, odds ratio (OR) 8.7, 5.8–13.1), including in smaller rural communities (<15,000 population) (41–54%, OR 3.5, 2.3–5.3). FARGPs also mostly worked in rural communities (56–67%, OR 4.2, 2.2–7.8), but fewer in smaller communities (25–41%, OR 1.1, 0.5–2.5). Both FACRRMs and FARGPs were more likely to use advanced skills, especially procedural skills. GPs with fellowship of a rural faculty were associated with significantly improved geographic distribution and expanded scope, compared with standard GPs. Given their strong outcomes, expanding rural faculties is likely to be a critical strategy to building and sustaining a general practice workforce that meets the needs of rural communities.
KW - Advanced skills
KW - Family physicians
KW - General practitioners
KW - Medical faculty
KW - Postgraduate medical training
KW - Primary health care
KW - Rural population
KW - Rural workforce
KW - Scope of practice
KW - Vocational education
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85087286294
U2 - 10.3390/ijerph17134652
DO - 10.3390/ijerph17134652
M3 - Article
C2 - 32605246
AN - SCOPUS:85087286294
SN - 1661-7827
VL - 17
JO - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
JF - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
IS - 13
M1 - 4652
ER -