--Abstract--
Aim and objectives
In many small rural communities, where health demands or
resources are insufficient to sustain a resident GP or attempts
to recruit a permanent GP have failed, health services are being
provided by non-resident GPs on a drive-in/drive-out (DIDO) or
fly-in/fly-out (FIFO) basis.
While DIDO and FIFO GP service models have been politically
unpopular due to concerns of lack of continuity of care, poor
understanding of local community issues and loss of social
capital, the perceptions of residents in communities receiving
these services have not previously been examined.
This study uses a collective case study approach to examine
community perceptions of GP service delivery models in two
discrete rural communities in Victoria – one with a long-term
resident GP and the other with a DIDO GP model serviced by
permanent GPs from the nearest regional centre.
We aim to:
Identify differences and similarities in community perceptions
of the two GP service delivery models and the key factors
contributing to these
Use this information to discuss implications for future GP
health service delivery in rural communities
Method/Design
Semi-structured interviews are currently being conducted with
permanent residents in two rural communities. Data will be
interpreted using thematic analysis, followed by cross-case
comparison.
Results Pending
Conclusions
Traditional resident GP models of care are likely to continue to
be the preferred model of GP service delivery in small rural
communities. However, for communities where recruiting and
retaining GPs has proved difficult, alternative models are
needed. A DIDO/FIFO GP service delivery model with permanent GPs
has the potential to provide a sustainable and locally responsive
workforce in many rural communities. This study will provide
critical information on how a DIDO/FIFO GP service delivery model
compares with a traditional model from a community perspective.
Poster presentation
History
Alternative title
Community perceptions of GP health service delivery models in rural Victoria and the implications for rural workforce planning