Rural Surgery Training: A Survey of Program Directors

BackgroundDifferences have been established between rural and urban surgery with regard to surgeon supply, demographics, and practices. This study attempts to determine the importance and prevalence of rural surgery training in American general surgery residency programs.Study designA survey was electronically submitted to and completed by surgery program directors in the fall of 2004. Respondents were divided into research or nonresearch programs. Survey items measured attitudes toward the necessity and ideal components of a rural surgery curriculum and whether or not the program had such a curriculum in place.ResultsThere was a 24.0% survey response rate, with 17.2% of respondents being classified as research programs. Research programs were less likely to believe that it was their mission to train rural surgeons (2.50 versus 4.36, p < 0.001) and were less likely to believe that a shortage of rural surgeons exists. Just over 36% of programs reported having a rural surgery curriculum. Programs that believed training rural surgeons was part of their mission and that believed such a curriculum was necessary to train rural surgeons were more likely to have a rural surgery curriculum in place.ConclusionsThe presence of a curriculum to train rural surgeons is related to the belief that such a curriculum is necessary and that training rural surgeons is part of that residency program’s mission. Residency programs have different attitudes and practices with regard to rural surgery training. Development of a rural surgery training designation can help trainees wishing to practice in a rural environment identify the programs best suited to equip them to do so.