A longitudinal evaluation of the Rural Clinical Placement Program at the University of Sydney Dental School. (16th November 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Johnson, George; Wright, Fredrick A. C.; Foster, Kirsty
• Is Part Of: European journal of dental education. Volume 23:Number 1(2019)
• Page Start: e59
• Page End: e70
• Publication Date: 2018-11-16
• Subjects: dentistry -- education -- longitudinal evaluation -- Rural Clinical Placement Program -- rural program impact -- workforce outcomes; Dentistry -- Study and teaching -- Europe -- Periodicals; Dentistry -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; 617.60071
• DOI: 10.1111/eje.12401
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1396-5883

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Australia has a lack of dental practitioners in rural and remote regions. This study evaluates the impact of a Rural Clinical Placement Program (RCPP) offered to final year students at the University of Sydney (USYD) Dental School on the graduates working locations. Materials and Methods: University of Sydney students who graduated between 2009 and 2013 (n = 404) were invited to complete a telephone interview. One hundred and thirty‐five graduates were interviewed, 90 RCPP participants and 45 non‐participants. Results: The majority of graduates interviewed were from a metropolitan background (87%), 47% were female, 77% worked full time, and 70% were employed in private practice. A higher proportion (33%) of the RCPP participants were working in rural Australia compared with 18% of the non‐participants. The graduates reported that the RCPP was a high‐quality program with excellent rural clinical supervisors, provided broad clinical dentistry; they met appreciative patients and enjoyed the rural lifestyle. Conclusions: The RCPP was a valuable and positive experience with many considering it as a highlight of their dental education. A large proportion reported the program positively influenced their employment location choices, and a higher proportion of the RCPP participants were identified as working rurally, compared to the non‐participants.