Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKitchener, S
dc.contributor.authorDouyere, J
dc.contributor.authorBond, D
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-30T23:46:01Z
dc.date.available2021-05-30T23:46:01Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.issn0156-5788en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1071/AH19158en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/404752
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to learn from trainees separating from the Queensland Rural Generalist Pathway (QRGP) the reasons and circumstances around their decision so as to improve the efficiency of the program and experience of trainees. Forty-one QRGP trainees who separated without achieving a Rural Generalist (RG) end point to training were interviewed regarding their reasons for separation and thoughts on improving the program. The mean period of time enrolled in the QRGP was 2.87 years. Broadly, the cohort divided into those separating for specialist training, those moving into non-RG general practice and those undecided. Separation for specialist training tended to occur during prevocational years and that to general practice later in the program before trainees had completed advanced skill training. Female trainees were over-represented among trainees separating without completing training. This cohort provided their opinions on the strengths of the QRGP and possible improvements. Understanding and addressing the reasons for early separation suggested several strategies to improve the efficiency of the QRGP in selecting and retaining trainees. Lessons learned included the value of employer-provided coordinated prevocational placements and training, potential benefits of guiding rural-interested medical graduates who ultimately enter other specialist training and the need for greater liaison with external Australian General Practice Training administration organisations to coordinate transition of trainees. There is a need to further address accessibility of advanced training for all trainees. What is known about the topic?: Policies to generate RG medicine programs are now present in most state jurisdictions and nationally in Australia, with reports of successes appearing. However, little information is available regarding non-completion of trainees selected. What does this paper add?: As programs grow in number and throughput, lessons learned from those choosing not to complete will inform the selection and management of trainees to improve the efficiency of these programs. This paper provides lessons learned by the QRGP regarding trainees not completing the program to inform the selection and management of trainees to make the program more efficient. What are the implications for practitioners?: RG programs may facilitate retention or efficient separation of trainees by addressing potential reasons for separation at relevant times in the program.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherCSIRO Publishingen_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalAustralian Health Reviewen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPublic Health and Health Servicesen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1117en_US
dc.titleQueensland Rural Generalist Pathway: Why do trainees separate without achieving a Rural Generalist end point?en_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articlesen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationKitchener, S; Douyere, J; Bond, D, Queensland Rural Generalist Pathway: Why do trainees separate without achieving a Rural Generalist end point?, Australian Health Review, 2021en_US
dc.date.updated2021-05-30T23:31:31Z
gro.description.notepublicThis publication has been entered in Griffith Research Online as an advanced online version.en_US
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorKitchener, Scott J.


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record