A return-on-investment analysis of impacts on James Cook University medical students and rural workforce resulting from participation in extended rural placements.

INTRODUCTION: Although all James Cook University (JCU) medical students complete multiple rural placements, some undertake extended 5-10 month rural placements in their final year. This study uses return-on-investment (ROI) methodology to quantify student and rural medical workforce benefits of these 'extended placements' from 2012 to 2018. METHODS: Forty-six medical graduates were sent a survey exploring the benefits to students and to the rural workforce from participation in extended placements, as well as estimated costs to students, deadweight (how much change would have occurred without participating), and attribution (how much change was due to other experiences). The key student and rural workforce benefits were each assigned a 'financial proxy' to allow calculation of ROI as a dollar value that could be compared with the costs to students and to the medical school. RESULTS: Of the graduates, 25/46 responded (54%), reporting the major benefit was 'greater depth and breadth of clinical skills'. The overall cost of undertaking extended placements for students was $60,264 (AUD), while the medical school costs were $32,560 (total costs: $92,824). Given the total value of benefits ($705,827) calculated for the key student benefit of increased clinical skills and confidence in the internship year ($32,197) and for the key rural workforce benefit of willingness to work rurally ($673,630), the ROI from the extended rural programs is $7.60 for every dollar spent. DISCUSSION: This study confirms significant positive impacts of extended placements on final-year medical students with longer-term benefits for rural workforce. This positive ROI is important evidence for shifting the conversation around supporting extended placements from one of cost to one of value.

Requesting air ambulance transport of patients with suspected appendicitis: The decision-making process through the eyes of the rural clinician.

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim is to explore rural clinicians' self-reported knowledge, skills and attitudes in the decision-making process for requesting aeromedical retrieval of patients with suspected appendicitis. A secondary aim is to understand the supports and barriers of rural clinicians experience in this clinical scenario. SETTING: Clinician interviews conducted face-to-face in three rural hospitals in Central Queensland. PARTICIPANTS: Rural doctors and nurses. DESIGN: A five-part qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The majority of 44 participants identified the strong and effective teamwork. The decision to request aeromedical retrieval was a shared, joint process and identified a supportive collegial culture which supported the asking of questions and not expecting to have all the answers. Perceived barriers were lack of receiving clinicians understanding of transfer agreements, and data connectivity. Clinician pessimism was identified for perceived patient outcomes. DISCUSSION: Effective teamwork can nurture trust and collaboration across multiple health service roles. High job satisfaction may counter the physical isolation in some rural environments. Fragmentation of care is the unintended consequence of interhospital transfer and may impact rural clinicians' perception of patients' outcomes and hinder receiving clinicians' understanding of rural service limitations. CONCLUSION: Future work in the area of linked electronic medical records could remove a barrier for rural clinicians and improve their reflective practice by challenging their perception of definitive patient outcomes. Increased awareness by receiving clinicians of the limitation of rural services, may minimize communication barriers and thereby, improve timely patient care transfers.

A return-on-investment analysis of impacts on James Cook University medical students and rural workforce resulting from participation in extended rural placements.

INTRODUCTION: Although all medical students at James Cook University (JCU), Queensland, Australia, undertake rural placements throughout their course, a proportion (currently about 20 per year out of 170-190 final-year students) undertake extended rural placements in rural and remote towns - 5-month Integrated Rural Placement (IRP) or 10-month Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship (LIC) programs. This study uses a return-on-investment (ROI) approach to quantify student and rural medical workforce benefits arising from these 'extended placements' between 2012 and 2018. METHODS: Seventy-two JCU MBBS graduates participated in extended rural placements between 2012 and 2018. In 2019, 46 of these graduates who had reached at least postgraduate year 2 and provided consent to be contacted for health workforce research were emailed a link to an online survey. Questions explored the key benefits to students' development of competencies and to rural medical workforce as a direct result of student participation in the IRP/LIC activities, as well as estimations of costs to students, deadweight (how much change would have occurred without participating in an extended placement), and attribution (how much change was due to other programs or experiences). The key student and rural medical workforce benefits were each assigned a 'financial proxy' to allow calculation of ROI from 2013 to 2019 as a dollar value, compared with the costs to students and to the JCU medical school from implementing the IRP/LIC programs between 2012 and 2018. RESULTS: Twenty-five of the 46 JCU medical graduates who undertook an extended placement responded (response rate 54%), reporting that the most common (96%) and most important benefit (56%) from their extended placement was 'greater depth and breadth of clinical skills'. Seventy-five percent (18/24; one missing response for this question) of the respondents also reported intending to have a full-time career in rural and remote practice. The overall cost of undertaking an IRP or LIC program for students between 2012 and 2018 was calculated to be $60,264, while the cost to the JCU medical school for sending 72 students out on extended rural placements was calculated as $32,560, giving total costs of $92,824. Given the total value of benefits ($705,827) calculated for the key student benefit of increased clinical skills and confidence in the internship year from participating in an extended placement ($32,197) and for the key rural medical workforce benefit of willingness to work in a rural or remote town ($673,630), the ROI from the extended rural programs between 2013 and 2019 (after students graduated and entered the workforce) is calculated at $7.60 for every dollar spent. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that undertaking an extended placement has significant positive impacts on final-year medical students' clinical confidence, clinical skills and communication skills into their internship year. In addition, the extended placements have longer-term impacts on the non-metropolitan health workforce by inspiring more JCU medical graduates to take up rural generalist, rural general practitioner or generalist specialist positions in rural and remote towns. This positive ROI from extended rural placements is important evidence for shifting the conversation around supporting these programs from one of cost to one of value.

The impact of interpersonal relationships on rural doctors' clinical courage.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical courage occurs when rural doctors push themselves to the limits of their scope of practice to provide the medical care needed by patients in their community. This mental strength to venture, persevere and act out of concern for one's patient, despite a lack of formally recognised expertise, becomes necessary for doctors who work in relative professional isolation. Previous research by the authors suggested that the clinical courage of rural doctors relies on the relationships around them. This article explores in more depth how relationships with others can impact on clinical courage. METHODS: At an international rural medicine conference in 2017, doctors who practised rural/remote medicine were invited to participate in the study. Twenty-seven semistructured interviews were conducted exploring experiences of clinical courage. Initial analysis of the material, using a hermeneutic phenomenological frame, sought to understand the meaning of clinical courage. In the original analysis, an emic question arose: 'How do interpersonal relationships impact on clinical courage'. The material was re-analysed to explore this question, using Wenger's community of practice as a theoretical framework. RESULTS: This study found that clinical courage was affected by the relationships rural doctors had with their communities and patients, with each other, with the local members of their healthcare team and with other colleagues and health leaders outside their immediate community of practice. CONCLUSION: As a collective, rural doctors can learn, use and strengthen clinical courage and support its development in new members of the discipline. Relationships with rural communities, rural patients and urban colleagues can support the clinical courage of rural doctors. When detractors challenge the value of clinical courage, it requires individual rural doctors and their community of practice to champion rural doctors' way of working.