Challenges to Rural Medical Education: A Student Perspective

Abstract

The key feature of the Greater Murray Clinical School model is the attachment of students to patients. Students follow their patients through the health care system, in contrast to the standard approach where students are attached to doctors or speciality based clinical units. The patient/student coupling occurs at the primary care level, which mostly but not exclusively will occur in the GP's office. Students anchor their knowledge by seeing the natural progression of common illnesses, the impact of behavioural aspects on health and disease, and by experiencing continuity of care. Along their path they develop good problem solving skills and learn to understand the health care system they will become part of. The main obstacle in teaching a medical undergraduate curriculum in a rural setting is that large geographical distances separate students, teachers and resources. Consequently, information technology will play an important role in terms of delivery of the GMCS curriculum. Moreover, there is potential for flow-on benefits to the community following integration of new information technology into the local health infrastructure.

Medical student radiology teaching in Australia and New Zealand

“…As more rural clinical schools are established in Australia, there is genuine concern among these students about the teaching and learning materials available to them and access to didactic teaching and case conferences in rural centres. 12 One of the ways to overcome this challenge and bridge the gap between rural and urban teaching is to use Web-based and CD-ROM learning modules in radiology to supplement direct teaching. Because most medical students are exposed to personal computers throughout their education, students are more comfortable using computer-based information resources within clinical interactions.…”

Telerehabilitation and Clinical Applications: Research, Opportunities, and Challenges

“…Telerehabilitation may not only provide cost-effective treatment options to patients, but may also permit more convenient training of healthcare professionals (Callas et al, 2000;Delaney et al, 2002;Grigsby, Schlenker, Kaehny, Shaughmessy, & Sandberg, 1995;Jennett et al, 2000;Lemaire et al, 2001;Taylor, 1998;Zollo, Kienzle, Henshaw, Crist, & Wakefield, 1999). Cost effectiveness of "tele" projects is being studied as there considerable controversy about how to measure the cost of these efforts (Kitt & Clayton, 2002;Mair, Haycox, May, & Williams, 2000;Ohinamaa & Hailey, 2002;P.…”