• Randall Longenecker, Natalia V Oster, Lars Peterson, AndrillaC Holly ACHAUniversity of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA., David F Schmitz, David V Evans, Zachary J Morgan, Samantha W Pollack, and Davis G Patterson.
• Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Athens, OH.
• Fam Med. 2023 Jul 1; 55 (7): 426432426-432.

Background And ObjectivesAlthough rural family medicine residency programs are effective in placing trainees into rural practice, many struggle to recruit students. Lacking other public measures, students may use residency match rates as a proxy for program quality and value. This study documents match rate trends and explores the relationship between match rates and program characteristics, including quality measures and recruitment strategies.MethodsUsing a published listing of rural programs, 25 years of National Resident Matching Program data, and 11 years of American Osteopathic Association match data, this study (1) documents patterns in initial match rates for rural versus urban residency programs, (2) compares rural residency match rates with program characteristics for match years 2009-2013, (3) examines the association of match rates with program outcomes for graduates in years 2013-2015, and (4) explores recruitment strategies using residency coordinator interviews.ResultsDespite increases in positions offered over 25 years, the fill rates for rural programs have improved relative to urban programs. Small rural programs had lower match rates relative to urban programs, but no other program or community characteristics were predictors of match rate. Match rates were not indicative of any of five measures of program quality nor of any single recruiting strategy.ConclusionsUnderstanding the intricacies of rural residency inputs and outcomes is key to addressing rural workforce gaps. Match rates likely reflect challenges of rural workforce recruitment generally and should not be conflated with program quality.

15 keywords...

hide…