Exploring rural doctors’ early experiences of coping with the emerging COVID‐19 pandemic

Abstract

Purpose To understand how rural doctors (physicians) responded to the emerging COVID‐19 pandemic and their strategies for coping. Methods Early in the pandemic doctors (physicians) who practise rural and remote medicine were invited to participate through existing rural doctors’ networks. Thirteen semi‐structured interviews were conducted with rural doctors from 11 countries. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using NVivo. A thematic analysis was used to identify common ideas and narratives. Findings Participants’ accounts described highly adaptable and resourceful responses to address the crisis. Rapid changes to organizational and clinical practices were implemented, at a time of uncertainty, anxiety, and fear, and with limited information and resources. Strong relationships and commitment to their colleagues and communities were integral to shaping and sustaining these doctors’ responses. We identified five common themes underpinning rural doctors’ shared experiences: (1) caring for patients in a context of uncertainty, fear, and anxiety; (2) practical solutions through improvising and being resourceful; (3) gaining community trust and cooperation; (4) adapting to unrelenting pressures; and (5) reaffirming commitments. These themes are discussed in relation to the Lazarus and Folkman stress and coping model. Conclusions With limited resources and support, these rural doctors’ practical responses to the COVID‐19 crisis underscore strong problem‐focused coping strategies and shared commitments to their communities, patients, and colleagues. They drew support from sharing experiences with peers (emotion‐focused coping) and finding positive meanings in their experiences (meaning‐based coping). The psychosocial impact on rural doctors working at the limits of their adaptive resources is an ongoing concern.

Differences between Rural and Urban Practices in the Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic: Outcomes from the PRICOV-19 Study in 38 Countries

“…The literature shows that, globally, chronic disease monitoring was postponed, with possible consequences in the course of disease of patients [ 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 ]. According to Windak et al [ 36 ], family physicians experienced that acute care was compromised because patients consulted practices less frequently for non-COVID-19 problems.…”

Exploring the impact of recovery funding on the well‐being and health workforce capability of rural practices during natural disasters and emergencies

“…This amplified their own emotional response and feelings they carried the responsibility for the well-being of their community and colleagues. 31 The findings indicate the importance of recovery funding to facilitate access to professional development for rural practitioners during natural disasters which was said to improve their mental health and well-being, ability to support clients and feelings of capability. While the authors acknowledge that favourable feedback may be due to the provision of a grant, the finding is consistent with the views expressed in the literature that stable funding is required to build expertise and capacity into the longer-term health response.…”

“…Participants were dealing with the problems relating to resource and skill shortages at the same time they were dealing with their own emotional response and that of their clients. This amplified their own emotional response and feelings they carried the responsibility for the well‐being of their community and colleagues 31 …”

COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas: A scoping review

“…Attitudes and practices in IPC. In several countries, rural IPC and other health workers reported major challenges including a lack of access to PPE, overwhelming workloads and multiple responsibilities, which impeded the implementation of IPC measures and contributed to fear of infection for themselves and their patients [103][104][105][106][107].…”