Assessment of dual practice among physicians in Cambodia

BACKGROUND: Dual practice and multiple job holding are widespread among health workers throughout the world. Although dual practice can help the financially strained public sector retain skilled workers, there are also potential negative consequences if it is not regulated. In Cambodia, there is substantial anecdotal evidence of dual practice among physicians but there is very little data on the extent and prevalence of the practice. This study was conducted by the University of Health Sciences (UHS) to gain insight in to the employment practices of UHS alumni. Results from this survey may help to inform policymakers in rational planning for future health system development related to capacity building and regulation of human resources for health. METHODS: Data were collected from a self-administered survey of UHS graduates who graduated between 1999 and 2012. A total of 162 medical graduates were randomly sampled from a total of 1867 medical graduates between 1999 and 2012. Contacted individuals were asked to complete a written structured questionnaire regarding demographic characteristics, current employment and types of employment, compensation, and job satisfaction. The response rate of graduates sampled was 49% (79 completed questionnaires). The low response rate was primarily due to the difficulty in locating individuals. RESULTS: Of 79 respondents, 96% were currently employed at the time of the survey. However, only 63 of the respondents (80%) were working in the healthcare sector. The 16 respondents (20%) not working in healthcare were excluded from further analyses since they are not relevant to dual practice analysis. The vast majority (87%) of respondents are public sector employees (61.9% in public sector only and 25.4% in both public and private sector). 12.7% of respondents only work in the private sector. Almost half (47.6%) of respondents hold more than one job. For income satisfaction, physicians employed in both sectors have higher satisfaction than physicians employed in the public sector only. CONCLUSIONS: As policymakers in Cambodia consider new approaches to regulation of the practice, it is important to know the context of the practice, the benefits to the healthcare system, and the costs. Recognizing the high prevalence of multiple job holding in Cambodia, as evidenced in our survey of UHS medical graduates, contributes to the discussion as important information that can be used toward meaningful reform.