TY - JOUR
T1 - Rural specialists
T2 - The nature of their work and professional satisfaction by geographical location of work
AU - O'Sullivan, Belinda
AU - McGrail, Matthew
AU - Russell, Deborah
N1 - Funding Information:
This publication used data from the MABEL longitudinal survey of doctors conducted by the University of Melbourne and Monash University. Funding for MABEL comes from the National Health and Medical Research Council (Health Services Research Grant: 2008–2011; and Centre for Research Excellence in Medical Workforce Dynamics: 2012–2016) with additional support from the Commonwealth Department of health (in 2008) and Health Workforce Australia (in 2013).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 National Rural Health Alliance Inc.
PY - 2017/12
Y1 - 2017/12
N2 - Objective: Systematically describe the characteristics of rural specialists, their work and job satisfaction by geographical location of work. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting and participants: Three thousand, four hundred and seventy-nine medical specialists participating in the 2014 Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) survey of doctors. Main outcome measure: Location of practice, whether metropolitan, large (>50 000 population) or small regional centres (<50 000 population). Result: Specialists working in large regional centres had similar characteristics to metropolitan specialists, however, those in small regional centres were more likely men, later career, overseas-trained and less likely to work privately. Rural specialists had more on-call requirements and poorer professional development opportunities. However, satisfaction with work hours, remuneration, variety of work, level of responsibility, opportunities to use abilities and overall satisfaction did not differ. Specialists in general medicine and general surgery were significantly more likely to work rurally compared with anaesthetists, particularly in small regional centres, whereas a range of other relevant specialists had lower than the average rural distribution and paediatricians and endocrinologists were significantly less likely to work in large regional centres. Conclusion: Rural specialists are just as satisfied as metropolitan counterparts reporting equivalent variety and responsibility at work. Better support for on-call demands and access to professional development could attract more specialists to rural practice. Increased rural training opportunities and regional workforce planning is needed to develop and recruit relevant specialties. Specifically, targeted support is warranted for training and development of specialists in general medicine and general surgery and overseas-trained specialists, who provide essential services in smaller regional centres.
AB - Objective: Systematically describe the characteristics of rural specialists, their work and job satisfaction by geographical location of work. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting and participants: Three thousand, four hundred and seventy-nine medical specialists participating in the 2014 Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) survey of doctors. Main outcome measure: Location of practice, whether metropolitan, large (>50 000 population) or small regional centres (<50 000 population). Result: Specialists working in large regional centres had similar characteristics to metropolitan specialists, however, those in small regional centres were more likely men, later career, overseas-trained and less likely to work privately. Rural specialists had more on-call requirements and poorer professional development opportunities. However, satisfaction with work hours, remuneration, variety of work, level of responsibility, opportunities to use abilities and overall satisfaction did not differ. Specialists in general medicine and general surgery were significantly more likely to work rurally compared with anaesthetists, particularly in small regional centres, whereas a range of other relevant specialists had lower than the average rural distribution and paediatricians and endocrinologists were significantly less likely to work in large regional centres. Conclusion: Rural specialists are just as satisfied as metropolitan counterparts reporting equivalent variety and responsibility at work. Better support for on-call demands and access to professional development could attract more specialists to rural practice. Increased rural training opportunities and regional workforce planning is needed to develop and recruit relevant specialties. Specifically, targeted support is warranted for training and development of specialists in general medicine and general surgery and overseas-trained specialists, who provide essential services in smaller regional centres.
KW - development
KW - health policy
KW - medical specialist
KW - rural medicine
KW - rural workforce
KW - workforce service development
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85037702156&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/ajr.12354
DO - 10.1111/ajr.12354
M3 - Article
C2 - 28612934
AN - SCOPUS:85037702156
VL - 25
SP - 338
EP - 346
JO - Australian Journal of Rural Health
JF - Australian Journal of Rural Health
SN - 1038-5282
IS - 6
ER -