• S A Azer, D Simmons, and S L Elliott.
• Faculty Education Unit, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. s.azer@medicine.unimelb.edu.au
• Aust J Rural Health. 2001 Aug 1;9(4):178-85.

AbstractThe aim of this project is to investigate the relationship between medical students' background and their perception of the state of rural health services; willingness to undertake internship training or work as a doctor in a rural hospital; expected benefits and disadvantages of training or working as a doctor in a rural hospital; and factors interfering with acceptance of a job as a doctor in rural areas. A questionnaire-based survey was distributed to 100 first-year medical students attending the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne at the end of semester 1. The response rate was 97%, including 44 males and 53 females. A strong relationship was found between rural background and an intention to undertake internship training in a rural hospital (86% of students from a rural background expressed this desire vs 30% of students from an urban background). Furthermore, all students from a rural background expressed a desire to work as a doctor in a rural hospital after completing postgraduate training. Compared to urban students, students from a rural background showed a more positive attitude towards health services in rural areas including public hospitals ( P = 0.02), private general practice ( P = 0.004), ambulance service ( P = 0.0002) and baby health centres ( P = 0.005). Citizenship or gender was not significantly related to the perception of any of these services. The ranking of factors interfering with acceptance of a job as a doctor in rural areas were different for rural and urban students. Students from rural backgrounds reported spouse/partner needs (76% vs 49%, P = 0.038) and school availability for children (59% vs 30%, P = 0.023) as barriers more frequently than urban students, respectively). On the other hand, urban students rated the following factors higher: personal factors (76% vs 53%, respectively), education opportunities (56% vs 24%), social/cultural facilities (50% vs 41%) and the need for frequent travel (29% vs 12%). None of these interfering factors were significantly different. Urban students were more likely than rural students to report that their views were a result of adverse media reports. In conclusion, students from a rural background were more willing to be trained or to work as doctors in rural areas. This was associated with a greater adverse influence by the media upon students.

30 keywords...

hide…