Pathman D E, Konrad T R, King T S, Spaulding C, Taylor D H
Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, CB #7590, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
J Rural Health. 2000 Summer;16(3):264-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2000.tb00471.x.
This study assesses how student loan debt and scholarships, loan repayment and related programs with service requirements influence the incomes young physicians seek and attain, influence whether they choose to work in rural practice settings and affect the number of Medicaid-covered and uninsured patients they see. Data are from a 1999 mail survey of a national probability sample of 468 practicing family physicians, general internists and pediatricians who graduated from U.S. medical schools in 1988 and 1992. A majority of these generalist physicians recalled "moderate" or "great" concern for their financial situations before, during and after their training. Eighty percent financed all or part of their training with loans, and one-quarter received support from federal, state or community-sponsored scholarship, loan repayment and similar programs with service obligations. In their first job after residency, family physicians and pediatricians with greater debt reported caring for more patients insured under Medicaid and uninsured than did those with less debt. For no specialty was debt associated with physicians' income or likelihood of working in a rural area. Physicians serving commitments in exchange for training cost support, compared to those without obligations, were more likely to work in rural areas (33 vs. 7 percent, respectively, p < 0.001) and provided care to more Medicaid-covered and uninsured patients (53 vs. 29 percent, p < 0.001), but did not differ in their incomes ($99,600 vs. $93,800, p = 0.11). Thus, among physicians who train as generalists, the high costs of medical education appear to promote, not harm, national physician work force goals by prompting participation in service-requiring financial support programs and perhaps through increasing student borrowing. These positive outcomes for generalists should be weighed against other known and suspected negative consequences of the high costs of training, such as discouraging some poor students from medical careers altogether and perhaps influencing some medical students with high debt not to pursue primary care careers.
本研究评估了学生贷款债务与奖学金、贷款偿还以及有服务要求的相关项目如何影响年轻医生期望获得和实际获得的收入,影响他们是否选择在农村医疗机构工作,以及影响他们诊治的医疗补助覆盖患者和未参保患者的数量。数据来自1999年对全国468名执业家庭医生、普通内科医生和儿科医生进行的邮件调查,这些医生于1988年和1992年毕业于美国医学院校。这些全科医生中的大多数回忆说,在培训前、培训期间和培训后,他们对自己的财务状况感到“中度”或“极大”担忧。80%的人通过贷款支付了全部或部分培训费用,四分之一的人获得了联邦、州或社区赞助的奖学金、贷款偿还及类似有服务义务项目的支持。在住院医师培训后的第一份工作中,债务较多的家庭医生和儿科医生报告称,他们诊治的医疗补助参保患者和未参保患者比债务较少的医生更多。对于任何专业而言,债务与医生的收入或在农村地区工作的可能性均无关联。与没有服务义务的医生相比,以承担服务承诺换取培训费用支持的医生更有可能在农村地区工作(分别为33%和7%,p<0.001),并为更多医疗补助覆盖患者和未参保患者提供诊治(分别为53%和29%,p<0.001),但他们的收入并无差异(99,600美元对93,800美元,p = 0.11)。因此,在接受全科培训的医生中,医学教育的高成本似乎通过促使他们参与有服务要求的财政支持项目以及可能通过增加学生借贷,促进而非损害国家医生劳动力目标的实现。对于全科医生而言,这些积极成果应与培训成本高昂的其他已知和疑似负面后果相权衡,比如完全打消一些贫困学生从事医学职业的念头,以及可能影响一些身负高额债务的医学生不选择从事初级保健职业。