Skip to main content
. 2019 Jul 9;9(7):e029029. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029029

Table 2.

Factors associated with self-perceived burn-out during rural clinical training

N (%) Burn-out
OR (95% CI) P value
Gender
 Male 60 (22.6) 1.0
 Female 111 (29.9) 1.5 (1.0 to 2.1) 0.04
Rural background
 No 85 (23.1) 1.0
 Yes 77 (29.3) 1.4 (0.9 to 2.0) 0.09
Type of location living longest in Australia
 Capital city/major city 89 (23.7) 1.0
 Regional 37 (34.9) 1.7 (1.1 to 2.7) 0.02
 Rural/remote 45 (27.6) 1.2 (0.8 to 1.8) 0.34
Preference for Rural Clinical School for clinical training
 Others 35 (38.9) 1.0
 First choice/high 134 (24.3) 0.5 (0.3 to 0.8) 0.006
Preference on entry
 General practice 48 (27.1) 1.0
 Generalist specialist 65 (27.8) 1.0 (0.6 to 1.6) 0.88
 Sub specialist 57 (24.7) 0.8 (0.5 to 1.4) 0.57
Majority of placement in remote location
 No 150 (26.5) 1.0
 Yes 19 (25.7) 0.9 (0.5 to 1.6) 1.0
Perceived social isolation
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral 73 (17.0) 1.0
 Strongly agree/agree 97 (45.5) 4.0 (2.8 to 5.9) <0.001
Stress in the year prior to rural placement
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral 78 (18.2) 1.0
 Strongly agree/agree 93 (43.3) 3.4 (2.3 to 4.9) <0.001
Overall health was good in the year prior to rural placement
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral 59 (34.7) 1.0
 Strongly agree/agree 112 (23.6) 0.6 (0.4 to 0.8) 0.006
Self-efficacy
 Low tertile 88 (34.9) 1.0
 Middle tertile 57 (25.1) 0.6 (0.4 to 0.9) 0.02
 High tertile 26 (16.4) 0.3 (0.2 to 0.6) <0.001
Future work Intention
 Urban 134 (27.6) 1.0
 Rural/remote 36 (23.2) 0.7 (0.5 to 1.2) 0.29