Medical school rural programs: A comparison with international medical graduates in addressing state-level rural family physician and primary care supply

Howard K. Rabinowitz, Stephen Petterson, James G. Boulger, Matthew L. Hunsaker, James J. Diamond, Fred W. Markham, Andrew Bazemore, Robert L. Phillips

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Comprehensive medical school rural programs (RPs) have made demonstrable contributions to the rural physician workforce, but their relative impact is uncertain. This study compares rural primary care practice outcomes for RP graduates within relevant states with those of international medical graduates (IMGs), also seen as ameliorating rural physician shortages. METHOD: Using data from the 2010 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, the authors identified all 1,757 graduates from three RPs (Jefferson Medical College's Physician Shortage Area Program; University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth; University of Illinois College of Medicine at Rockford's Rural Medical Education Program) practicing in their respective states, and all 6,474 IMGs practicing in the same states and graduating the same years. The relative likelihoods of RP graduates versus IMGs practicing rural family medicine and rural primary care were compared. Results: RP graduates were 10 times more likely to practice rural family medicine than IMGs (relative risk [RR] = 10.0, confidence interval [CI] 8.7-11.6, P < .001) and almost 4 times as likely to practice any rural primary care specialty (RR 3.8, CI 3.5-4.2, P < .001). Overall, RPs produced more rural family physicians than the IMG cohort (376 versus 254). Conclusion: Despite their relatively small size, RPs had a significant impact on rural family physician and primary care supply compared with the much larger cohort of IMGs. Wider adoption of the RP model would substantially increase access to care in rural areas compared with increasing reliance on IMGs or unfocused expansion of traditional medical schools.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)488-492
Number of pages5
JournalAcademic Medicine
Volume87
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2012

Fingerprint

family physician
rural school
graduate
supply
physician
medicine
shortage
confidence
medical association
school
rural area

Cite this

Medical school rural programs : A comparison with international medical graduates in addressing state-level rural family physician and primary care supply. / Rabinowitz, Howard K.; Petterson, Stephen; Boulger, James G.; Hunsaker, Matthew L.; Diamond, James J.; Markham, Fred W.; Bazemore, Andrew; Phillips, Robert L.

In: Academic Medicine, Vol. 87, No. 4, 04.2012, p. 488-492.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rabinowitz, Howard K. ; Petterson, Stephen ; Boulger, James G. ; Hunsaker, Matthew L. ; Diamond, James J. ; Markham, Fred W. ; Bazemore, Andrew ; Phillips, Robert L. / Medical school rural programs : A comparison with international medical graduates in addressing state-level rural family physician and primary care supply. In: Academic Medicine. 2012 ; Vol. 87, No. 4. pp. 488-492.
@article{2a9ec8bfcd0444ce90036b74266344ee,
title = "Medical school rural programs: A comparison with international medical graduates in addressing state-level rural family physician and primary care supply",
abstract = "Purpose: Comprehensive medical school rural programs (RPs) have made demonstrable contributions to the rural physician workforce, but their relative impact is uncertain. This study compares rural primary care practice outcomes for RP graduates within relevant states with those of international medical graduates (IMGs), also seen as ameliorating rural physician shortages. METHOD: Using data from the 2010 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, the authors identified all 1,757 graduates from three RPs (Jefferson Medical College's Physician Shortage Area Program; University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth; University of Illinois College of Medicine at Rockford's Rural Medical Education Program) practicing in their respective states, and all 6,474 IMGs practicing in the same states and graduating the same years. The relative likelihoods of RP graduates versus IMGs practicing rural family medicine and rural primary care were compared. Results: RP graduates were 10 times more likely to practice rural family medicine than IMGs (relative risk [RR] = 10.0, confidence interval [CI] 8.7-11.6, P < .001) and almost 4 times as likely to practice any rural primary care specialty (RR 3.8, CI 3.5-4.2, P < .001). Overall, RPs produced more rural family physicians than the IMG cohort (376 versus 254). Conclusion: Despite their relatively small size, RPs had a significant impact on rural family physician and primary care supply compared with the much larger cohort of IMGs. Wider adoption of the RP model would substantially increase access to care in rural areas compared with increasing reliance on IMGs or unfocused expansion of traditional medical schools.",
author = "Rabinowitz, {Howard K.} and Stephen Petterson and Boulger, {James G.} and Hunsaker, {Matthew L.} and Diamond, {James J.} and Markham, {Fred W.} and Andrew Bazemore and Phillips, {Robert L.}",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182488b19",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "87",
pages = "488--492",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Medical school rural programs

T2 - A comparison with international medical graduates in addressing state-level rural family physician and primary care supply

AU - Rabinowitz, Howard K.

AU - Petterson, Stephen

AU - Boulger, James G.

AU - Hunsaker, Matthew L.

AU - Diamond, James J.

AU - Markham, Fred W.

AU - Bazemore, Andrew

AU - Phillips, Robert L.

PY - 2012/4

Y1 - 2012/4

N2 - Purpose: Comprehensive medical school rural programs (RPs) have made demonstrable contributions to the rural physician workforce, but their relative impact is uncertain. This study compares rural primary care practice outcomes for RP graduates within relevant states with those of international medical graduates (IMGs), also seen as ameliorating rural physician shortages. METHOD: Using data from the 2010 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, the authors identified all 1,757 graduates from three RPs (Jefferson Medical College's Physician Shortage Area Program; University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth; University of Illinois College of Medicine at Rockford's Rural Medical Education Program) practicing in their respective states, and all 6,474 IMGs practicing in the same states and graduating the same years. The relative likelihoods of RP graduates versus IMGs practicing rural family medicine and rural primary care were compared. Results: RP graduates were 10 times more likely to practice rural family medicine than IMGs (relative risk [RR] = 10.0, confidence interval [CI] 8.7-11.6, P < .001) and almost 4 times as likely to practice any rural primary care specialty (RR 3.8, CI 3.5-4.2, P < .001). Overall, RPs produced more rural family physicians than the IMG cohort (376 versus 254). Conclusion: Despite their relatively small size, RPs had a significant impact on rural family physician and primary care supply compared with the much larger cohort of IMGs. Wider adoption of the RP model would substantially increase access to care in rural areas compared with increasing reliance on IMGs or unfocused expansion of traditional medical schools.

AB - Purpose: Comprehensive medical school rural programs (RPs) have made demonstrable contributions to the rural physician workforce, but their relative impact is uncertain. This study compares rural primary care practice outcomes for RP graduates within relevant states with those of international medical graduates (IMGs), also seen as ameliorating rural physician shortages. METHOD: Using data from the 2010 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, the authors identified all 1,757 graduates from three RPs (Jefferson Medical College's Physician Shortage Area Program; University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth; University of Illinois College of Medicine at Rockford's Rural Medical Education Program) practicing in their respective states, and all 6,474 IMGs practicing in the same states and graduating the same years. The relative likelihoods of RP graduates versus IMGs practicing rural family medicine and rural primary care were compared. Results: RP graduates were 10 times more likely to practice rural family medicine than IMGs (relative risk [RR] = 10.0, confidence interval [CI] 8.7-11.6, P < .001) and almost 4 times as likely to practice any rural primary care specialty (RR 3.8, CI 3.5-4.2, P < .001). Overall, RPs produced more rural family physicians than the IMG cohort (376 versus 254). Conclusion: Despite their relatively small size, RPs had a significant impact on rural family physician and primary care supply compared with the much larger cohort of IMGs. Wider adoption of the RP model would substantially increase access to care in rural areas compared with increasing reliance on IMGs or unfocused expansion of traditional medical schools.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84859426383&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84859426383&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182488b19

DO - 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182488b19

M3 - Article

C2 - 22361802

AN - SCOPUS:84859426383

VL - 87

SP - 488

EP - 492

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 4

ER -