Prevalence and associations of rural practice location in early-career general practitioners in Australia: a cross-sectional analysis

OBJECTIVES: To: (1) establish the prevalence of urban, regional, rural and remote practice location of early-career general practitioners (GPs); and (2) examine demographic and training-related characteristics associated with working in regional, rural or remote areas post attainment of vocational general practice qualifications. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study, combined with contemporaneously collected data from participants’ prior vocational training. SETTING: Australian general practice. PARTICIPANTS: Newly vocationally qualified GPs (ie, within 6 months–2 years post fellowship) who had completed vocational training with regional training organisations in New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory, eastern Victoria, and Tasmania between January 2016 and July 2018. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Rurality of post-fellowship practice location, as defined by Modified Monash Model (MMM) geographical classifications, based on current practice postcode. Prevalence of regional/rural/remote (‘rural’) practice was described using frequencies, and associations of rural practice were established using multivariable logistic regression, considering a range of demographic factors and training characteristics as independent variables. RESULTS: A total of 354 participants completed the questionnaire (response rate 28%) with 319 providing information for their current practice location. Of these, 100 (31.4%) reported currently practising in a rural area (MMM2-7). Factors most strongly associated with practising in a rural area included having undertaken vocational GP training in a rural location OR 16.0 (95% CI 6.79 to 37.9); p<0.001; and undertaking schooling in rural area prior to university OR 4.21 (1.98, 8.94); p<0.001. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that vocational training experience may have a role in rural general practice location post fellowship, attenuating the previously demonstrated ‘leakage’ from the rural practice pipeline.