Elsevier

Health Policy

Volume 108, Issues 2–3, December 2012, Pages 133-139
Health Policy

International medical graduates mandated to practise in rural Australia are highly unsatisfied: Results from a national survey of doctors

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.10.003Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives

Rural communities worldwide are increasingly reliant on international medical graduates (IMGs) to provide health care access, with many countries utilising health policies which mandate IMGs to practise only in rural designated areas of (medical) workforce shortage for many years. The objective of this study is to analyse the satisfaction of IMGs in their current work location, particularly in relation to the effect of mandating IMGs to small rural communities.

Methods

We used data of 3502 general practitioners (GPs) from Wave 2 of the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) longitudinal study of Australian doctors. The main outcome measures were the level of professional and non-professional satisfaction expressed by GPs with respect to various job and social aspects.

Results

We found that non-professional satisfaction of mandated IMGs was significantly lower across all social aspects, whilst professional satisfaction was also significantly lower for most job aspects relating to their professional autonomy. In contrast, non-mandated IMGs were similarly satisfied compared to Australian trained GPs.

Conclusions

Mandated IMGs are currently filling a critical shortage in rural areas of Australia. However, long-term success of this policy is problematic unless outstanding issues affecting their significantly reduced professional and non-professional satisfaction can be addressed.

Introduction

Inadequate access to medical practitioners for rural populations is a significant problem that affects most countries worldwide [1]. Rural communities in higher-income countries too are characterised by a shortage of medical practitioners [2], [3], and by ongoing difficulties associated with recruiting and retaining locally-trained graduates practise in to rural areas [1], [4]. Effective health service delivery to these vulnerable populations continues to be problematic and increasingly reliant on policy interventions.

Health policies to address rural and remote workforce shortages include financial incentives, non-financial incentives and compulsory service programs. More than 70 countries have some kind of compulsory service program, which most commonly involves graduates working a short compulsory period in underserved areas [5]. Although there is little empirical evidence available regarding compulsory service, a number of potential negative effects have been identified on theoretical grounds [6]. First, there may be political difficulties in imposing restrictions or requirements on doctors, based on considerations of autonomy and justice. While such programs are intended by governments to address health inequities and ensure access to doctors in underserved areas, they are also an imposition on the professional independence and freedom of choice of the individual doctor [5], [7]. The health professions themselves are among the most vocal critics of such programs, whilst governments argue that such requirements are reasonable in the context of public investment in doctors’ education and training. Second, compulsory service may also decrease the likelihood of working in underserved areas voluntarily once the period of required service has ended. Finally, compulsory service programs may contribute to a perception of decreased attractiveness of jobs in the designated locations, leading to an ongoing cycle of workforce shortages rather than putting long-term solutions in place [6].

Australia has a related ‘condition of service’ program, used since the late 1990s, which dictates that most International medical graduates (IMGs) are initially restricted for up to 10 years to practise only in specific rural locations [8]. Under this policy (specifically Section 19AB of the Health Insurance Act), IMGs can only access private practice subsidies if they work in a government-designated district of workforce shortage area, where the undersupply of doctors is most acute. A large reason for the introduction of this policy was in fact to reduce the perceived excess of general practitioners (GPs) in metropolitan areas [9], [10], [11]; however, through this policy and ongoing difficulties attracting local graduates into rural areas, the number of IMGs has increased to around 41% of all doctors working in rural Australia [8].

Similar policies are employed in Canada and the United States of America (USA). In the USA, IMGs in training programs are granted J-1 visas with a proviso that they must return to their country of origin for at least 2 years upon completion of their education. However, the J-1 visa waiver program enables these IMGs to remain in the USA on the agreement that they work in a designated Health Professional Shortage Area (rural) for at least 3 years [12], [13]. In Canada, most IMGs start practising under provincial licences, which can only be used in rural areas experiencing a workforce shortfall until they become fully licenced [2], [14]. Available evidence suggests that retention of IMGs in rural areas beyond the timeframe of both these programs is poor [15], [16].

Australia's IMG 10-year moratorium sits within a context of both an expectation of national medical workforce self-sufficiency, and a global consensus on ethical international recruitment [17], [18]. Many first world countries currently rely on significant numbers of IMGs to augment their local supply of health professionals; however, the ethics of actively recruiting IMGs to these countries, particularly from poor countries who can least afford to lose their own health professionals, is highly questionable [19], [20]. Thus, the potential benefits of Australia's IMG 10-year moratorium in meeting population health needs remain in tension with the autonomy and freedom of choice of individual doctors, and unresolved questions about their effects on long term workforce retention in rural and remote areas.

One factor which is known to be critical in workforce retention is satisfaction. Both non-professional and professional satisfaction is central to rural medical workforce recruitment and represents a sentinel indicator of retention [21], [22], [23]. Retaining restricted IMGs in rural locations is likely only if they experience considerable non-professional and professional satisfaction [23], [24]. Several Australian studies have identified specific difficulties experienced by IMGs, including community integration, which can significantly impact on their satisfaction [25], [26], [27]. Moreover, in contrast to IMGs who can choose their practice location, restricted IMGs have limited autonomy relating to their work location and work activity. It seems likely therefore, compulsory service policies such as the 10-year IMG moratorium will be associated with lower satisfaction. To date, only one Australian government report has examined the satisfaction of IMGs, without any stratification of results by ‘restriction status’ or rurality [28], whilst another study examined the professional satisfaction of GPs by rurality, without any stratification by IMG or restriction status [29].

Internationally, no published research has investigated the association between restriction status of IMGs and their satisfaction. The aim of this paper is to investigate the satisfaction (both professional and non-professional) of IMGs in their current location using Australian data, primarily distinguishing between those who are restricted to practise only in an area of workforce shortage and those who are free to choose their practice location. We hypothesise that satisfaction is likely to be less for those IMGs who are restricted to practise in particular locations, in addition to any effect of working in smaller locations. We contend that these locational restrictions are likely to exacerbate any other potential problems confronting IMGs, such as language and communication difficulties, working within a different health system, working in isolation from their cultural peers, and difficulties getting their home country qualifications recognised and attaining full accreditation.

Section snippets

Methods

This paper uses data from the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) study, a large longitudinal panel survey of Australian doctors who participate in annual waves of data collection. The primary aim of the MABEL study is to investigate labour supply decisions and their determinants among Australian doctors. We report results for GPs and GP registrars from data collected in Wave 2 between June and December 2009 (n = 3502). Wave 2 questionnaires can be accessed from the

Results

Twenty-seven per cent (940) of the 3502 GPs were identified as IMGs. There were proportionally more IMG respondents in rural areas, ranging from 22% in metropolitan and regional centres to 36–38% across all sized rural communities (<50,000 residents). Almost half of all IMG respondents (n = 440, 47%) identified themselves as being ‘restricted’ in their work location, with the proportion rising to 60–70% for IMGs across all sized rural communities (<50,000 residents). In our cohort, rural

Discussion

This is the first study to examine the effect of mandating IMGs to practise in rural areas of workforce shortage. We investigated the satisfaction of IMGs, distinguishing between those who are ‘restricted’ and those who are ‘unrestricted’ in their choice of practice location. Our results show clearly that these two groups exhibit significantly different patterns of non-professional and professional satisfaction. Additionally with regards to non-professional aspects, our study reveals the

Conclusion

This study has clearly shown that IMGs currently mandated to practise in rural communities are significantly unsatisfied with respect to both professional and non-professional aspects. By separating this cohort from unrestricted IMGs, and accounting for community size and other likely explanatory variables, we have demonstrated a strong association between practice restriction of IMGs in Australia and reduced job and social satisfaction. It follows that the long-term retention of

Acknowledgements

We thank the doctors who continue to give their valuable time to participate in MABEL. Thanks to the other members of the MABEL team for their support, in particular Guyonne Kalb (chief investigator) from the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne.

This work, part of the MABEL study, was supported by Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council through both a project grant (454799) and Centre of Research Excellence grant (1019605), and by

References (39)

  • A. Cavender et al.

    Compulsory medical service in Ecuador: the physician's perspective

    Social Science and Medicine

    (1998)
  • M. Cutchin

    Physician retention in rural communities: the perspective of experiential place integration

    Health and Place

    (1997)
  • World Health Organization

    Increasing access to health workers in remote and rural locations through improved retention: global policy recommendations

    (2010)
  • N. Dove

    Can international medical graduates help solve Canada's shortage of rural physicians?

    Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine

    (2009)
  • R.A. Rosenblatt

    A view from the periphery – health care in rural America

    New England Journal of Medicine

    (2004)
  • L. Grobler et al.

    Interventions for increasing the proportion of health professionals practising in rural and other underserved areas

    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

    (2009)
  • S. Frehywot et al.

    Compulsory service programmes for recruiting health workers in remote and rural areas: do they work?

    Bulletin of the World Health Organisation

    (2010)
  • T. Barnighausen et al.

    Financial incentives for return of service in underserved areas: a systematic review

    BMC Health Services Research

    (2009)
  • Commonwealth of Australia

    Lost in the labyrinth: report on the inquiry into registration processes and support for overseas trained doctors.

    (2012)
  • B. Birrell

    Immigration and the surplus of doctors in Australia

    People and Place

    (1995)
  • B. Birrell

    Implications of controls on access to Medicare billing for GPs

    People and Place

    (1997)
  • R. Doherty

    Committee of inquiry into medical education and the medical workforce: Australian medical education and workforce into the 21st century

    (1988)
  • T.R. Kahn et al.

    Retention of J-1 visa waiver program physicians in Washington state's health professional shortage areas

    Academic Medicine

    (2010)
  • A. Hagopian et al.

    Health departments’ use of international medical graduates in physician shortage areas

    Health Affairs

    (2003)
  • R. Audas et al.

    The use of provisionally licensed international medical graduates in Canada

    Canadian Medical Association Journal

    (2005)
  • B.J. Crouse et al.

    The effect of the physician J-1 visa waiver on rural Wisconsin

    Wisconsin Medical Journal

    (2006)
  • R. Audas et al.

    Where did the doctors go? A study of retention and migration of provisionally licensed international medical graduates practising in Newfoundland and Labrador between 1995 and 2006

    Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine

    (2009)
  • J. Buchan et al.

    Is health workforce sustainability in Australia and New Zealand a realistic policy goal?

    Australian Health Review

    (2011)
  • World Health Organization

    The WHO global code of practice on the international recruitment of health personnel

    (2010)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text