Rationale and protocol for the Nursing and Allied Health Graduate Outcomes Tracking (NAHGOT) study: a large-scale longitudinal investigation of graduate practice destinations.

INTRODUCTION: Inequitable distribution of health workforce limits access to healthcare services and contributes to adverse health outcomes. WHO recommends tracking health professionals from their points of entry into university and over their careers for the purpose of workforce development and planning. Previous research has focused on medical students and graduates' choice of practice location. Few studies have targeted nursing and allied health graduates' practice intentions and destinations. The Nursing and Allied Health Graduate Outcomes Tracking (NAHGOT) study is investigating factors affecting Australian nursing and allied health students and graduates' choice of graduate practice location over the course of their studies and up to 10 years after graduation by linking multiple data sources, including routinely collected university administrative and professional placement data, surveys of students and graduates, and professional registration data. METHODS: By using a prospective cohort study design, each year a new cohort of about 2000 students at each participating university (Deakin University, Monash University and the University of Newcastle) is tracked throughout their courses and for 10 years after graduation. Disciplines include medical radiation practice, nursing and midwifery, occupational therapy, optometry, paramedicine, pharmacy, physiotherapy, podiatry and psychology. University enrolment data are collected at admission and professional placement data are collected annually. Students' practice destination intentions are collected via questions added into the national Student Experience Survey (SES). Data pertaining to graduates' practice destination, intentions and factors influencing choice of practice location are collected in the first and third years after graduation via questions added to the Australian Graduate Outcomes Survey (GOS). Additionally, participants may volunteer to receive a NAHGOT survey in the second and fourth-to-tenth years after graduation. Principal place of practice data are accessed via the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) annually. Linked data are aggregated and analysed to test hypotheses comparing associations between multiple variables and graduate practice location. RESULTS: This study seeks to add to the limited empirical evidence about factors that lead to rural practice in the nursing and allied health professions. This prospective large-scale, comprehensive study tracks participants from eight different health professions across three universities through their pre-registration education and into their postgraduate careers, an approach not previously reported in Australia. To achieve this, the NAHGOT study links data drawn from university enrolment and professional placement data, the SES, the GOS, online NAHGOT graduate surveys, and Ahpra data. The prospective cohort study design enables the use of both comparative analysis and hypothesis testing. The flexible and inclusive study design is intended to enable other universities, as well as those allied health professions not regulated by Ahpra, to join the study over time. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates how the systematic, institutional tracking and research approach advocated by the WHO can be applied to the nursing and allied health workforce in Australia. It is expected that this large-scale, longitudinal, multifactorial, multicentre study will help inform future nursing and allied health university admission, graduate pathways and health workforce planning. Furthermore, the project could be expanded to explore health workforce attrition and thereby influence health workforce planning overall.

Post-diagnosis skin cancer follow-up in rural general practice: A mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The literature reveals a lack of consensus on recommendations for follow-up of skin cancer in general practice for all types of skin cancer. The objective of this paper was to evaluate post-treatment surveillance practices for both melanotic and non-melanotic skin cancers (NMSC) by general practitioners (GPs) in regional Victoria, and to identify challenges in follow-up for skin cancers in rural areas. METHOD: A mixed-method study involving a survey and semi-structured interviews with GPs and registrars in Gippsland was carried out in 2015. RESULTS: The survey of 65 participants showed that 69% (45/65) followed up NMSC opportunistically, while 66% (43/65) reported using a structured follow-up practice for melanoma. Six practitioners from the interviews identified the patient's level of education, time constraints, practitioner accessibility and specialists' availability as some common challenges in follow-up. DISCUSSION: We recommend that rural GPs review follow-up strategies for all skin cancers, through the establishment of guidelines and a recall system.