Background: An adequate health workforce is an essential building block of effective health systems. In South Africa, medical officers (MOs) are a key component of service delivery in district health services. The Stellenbosch University Family Physician Research Network in the Western Cape identified that retention of MOs was a key issue. The aim of this study was to explore the factors that influence the retention of MOs in public sector district health services in the Western Cape, South Africa.

Methods: This is a descriptive exploratory qualitative study. Medical officers were purposefully selected in terms of districts, facility types, gender, seniority and perceived likelihood of leaving in the next four years. Semi-structured interviews were performed by family physicians, and the qualitative data were analysed using the framework method.

Results: Fourteen MOs were interviewed, and four major themes were identified: career intentions; experience of clinical work; experience of the organisation; and personal, family and community issues. Key issues that influenced retention were: ensure that the foundational elements are in place (e.g. adequate salary and good infrastructure), nurture cohesive team dynamics and relationships, have a family physician, continue the shift towards more collaborative and appreciative management styles, create stronger career pathways and opportunities for professional development in the district health services, be open to flexible working hours and overtime, and ensure workload is manageable.

Conclusion: A number of important factors influencing retention were identified. Leaders and managers of the healthcare services could intervene across these multiple factors to enhance the conditions needed to retain MOs.

Keywords: district health services; district hospitals; primary healthcare; primary care; retention; workforce; medical officers; family physicians; staff satisfaction.

Introduction

The Sustainable Development goal 3, part c, emphasises the need to ‘substantially increase health financing and recruitment, development, training and retention of the health workforce in developing countries’.¹ The healthcare workforce is one of the essential building blocks of effective health systems.² Health systems must ensure that they have a sufficient number of healthcare workers with a combination of junior and senior staff to deliver services. Effective health services depend on the availability, competence and motivation of healthcare workers.³ District health services, including primary health care, are the foundation of effective health systems.^4,5 In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), district health services rely on community health workers, nurses, physician assistants and doctors.

Low- and middle-income countries, particularly in Africa, have a scarcity of human resources for health.⁶ Doctors are often maldistributed in urban areas and serve more affluent communities in private practice.⁷ In South Africa, doctors without a specialisation in the public sector are referred to as medical officers (MOs), while in the private sector they are referred to as general practitioners. The public sector looks after about 80% of the population.⁷ District hospitals rely on MOs, while primary care is mostly delivered by nurses, with support from MOs. Therefore, MOs are the backbone of service delivery in the district hospital and essential members of the primary healthcare team. District hospitals are often rural and remote, and the recruitment and retention of MOs in these locations are particularly challenging and important.⁸ Although interns and community service MOs are obligated to spend time in the district health services, there are concerns as to whether the services can retain MOs on a more permanent basis.^8,9

Attracting and retaining MOs in district health services is a complex problem. Most research has focused on health professionals in rural and remote areas,^10,11 and factors identified for rural retention include adequate income and incentives, appropriate workload, access to specialist care and outreach, availability of continuing education, spouse career opportunities, acceptable education for children, acceptable living and working conditions, safety, opportunities for career advancement, and recognition by managers, peers and patients.¹² Financial rewards, career development, continuing professional development, adequate infrastructure and resources, effective management and recognition have been identified as important factors in retaining the health workforce in LMICs.¹³ In Ghana, motivation and job satisfaction were related to retention or turnover of staff in district health services, and the corollary of this is that job stress and burnout are important.¹⁴ An additional issue related to retention amongst British general practitioners is the need for part-time and flexible working hours, particularly with the feminisation of health care and needs of mothers with young children.¹⁵

A recent ministerial task team on human resources for health in South Africa was unable to make any recommendations about MOs at district hospitals, but suggested there would be a gap of 2293 non-specialist medical practitioners in primary health care by 2025.⁸ The same strategy document emphasised the importance of retaining the health workforce, particularly in rural areas. In 2019, there were 33.1 medical practitioners per 100 000 population (range between provinces of 25.9–45.3 per 100 000) and 10.0 specialists per 100 000 (range 1.4–25.8 per 100 000). By 2025, the goal was to improve equity between provinces and have 37.8 medical practitioners per 100 000 and 15.2 specialists per 100 000.⁸ The proposed legislation for National Health Insurance also emphasises the need to address retention of the workforce.¹⁶ They suggest a number of factors that may be important, such as job design, performance management systems, remuneration policies, employment relationships, infrastructure, workplace culture, resources, workforce planning and career pathways.¹⁶

In South Africa, it has been possible to specialise as a family physician since 2007 and remain in the district health services as a specialist, thus offering a new career path for MOs. However, human resources for health policy has not fully understood or supported the contribution of family physicians and opportunities are highly variable between provinces.¹⁷ Specialising in family medicine is now a viable option for MOs who want career progression, while remaining as a generalist in the district health services. The Western Cape has embraced the deployment of family physicians in district hospitals and community health centres.¹⁸

In the Western Cape, a research network of family physicians, linked to Stellenbosch University, prioritised the need to evaluate factors influencing the retention of MOs in district health services. The 2020–2021 Western Cape Government’s annual report on health found a vacancy rate of 5.9% for posts in the district health services, although no specific figure was given for MOs.¹⁹ They also commented that the vacancy rate was linked to their ability to fund all the available posts. This vacancy rate, however, does not determine what the turnover of staff is and how well individual MOs are retained in the system. Continuity of service from an individual MO over many years is likely to add more value than a MO post that is continuously re-filled. Family physicians, who are the lead clinicians at their facilities and responsible for clinical governance, identified this as a knowledge gap in the local context. Addressing this gap could help identify interventions to improve retention. Although many of the factors influencing retention are known, their relative importance in different contexts needs to be determined.¹³ The Stellenbosch University Family Physician Network (SUFPREN) identified a number of factors significantly associated with retention of MOs in a previous unpublished survey. These factors were older age and higher MO grades, long-term career plans, the overall rating of the facility, feeling supported in the workplace, staying with one’s partner and having good educational opportunities for children. The aim of this study was to explore these and other factors that may influence the retention of MOs in public sector district health services in the Western Cape, South Africa.

Methods

Study design

This was a descriptive exploratory, thematically analysed, qualitative study, which explored factors influencing the retention of MOs in the district health services of the Western Cape.

Setting

District health services in the Western Cape are offered via one metropolitan district that covers the City of Cape Town and five rural health districts (Figure 1). District health services are offered via district hospitals, community health centres and clinics. Medical officers are employed at district hospitals and community health centres.

District hospitals typically have adult male, adult female, child, maternity and labour wards, as well as an operating theatre and outpatients. In addition, district hospitals will have an emergency centre that receives referrals and walk-in patients from the primary health care platform. Medical officers typically work in one of these wards for a period, and then rotate between different wards. All MOs will work in the emergency centre and cover the whole hospital when doing overtime. During this study, many services were reorganised because of the coronavirus pandemic. So, for example, the adult male and adult female ward may have changed into a ward for those suspected or known to have coronavirus and a ward for those not suspected to have coronavirus. There is a hierarchy of MOs from interns, community service MOs, grades 1–3 MOs and finally the specialist family physician as the most senior clinician. Medical officers progress from grade 1 to grade 3 with every five years of service. In some facilities, there are also registrars in training to become a family physician. More senior MOs tend to develop areas of interest and may spend more time in one part of the hospital, for example, the operating theatre, labour ward, adult or child medicine. Medical officers are often also responsible for outreach and support to the primary health care platform, and some also develop a special interest in this aspect of the work.

Community health centres typically have a team of primary care providers, and most consultations are with a nurse practitioner. Health centres see people across the life course, burden of disease, and offer promotive, preventive and therapeutic services. Many health centres also offer palliative and rehabilitative care. Some health centres are open 24-h a day and may have an emergency centre and a midwife-led obstetric unit. Medical officers are responsible for supporting the nurse practitioners and seeing more complicated patients. For example, MOs may see people with poorly controlled chronic conditions or multimorbidity. The family physician at these health centres is again the most senior clinician and usually sees patients referred to them by the MOs and nurses. The MOs at community health centres may also provide outreach to the smaller clinics in the sub-district. The facility-based services also support the community-based teams of community health workers.

Sample size and selection

The SUFPREN includes family physicians from the district health services that are linked to Stellenbosch University.²⁰ This study was an initiative of SUFPREN. This network enables them to participate in collaborative applied research projects. Family physicians identify the key research questions and collect data within the network whilst researchers at the university assist with methodology, analysis and report writing. Family physician from 14 facilities throughout the Western Cape were involved in the study (Table 1). Facilities were equally split between rural and metropolitan areas and covered five districts in the Western Cape.

One of the MOs was purposively selected from each facility to give maximum variation in the sample. Medical officers were selected based on gender, grade and whether the family physician thought they were likely to leave within the next four years or stay (Figure 2). The family physicians lead these clinical teams, work closely with all the MOs, undertake their performance appraisals, and have a good idea of which MOs are thinking of staying or leaving the facility. Community service MOs and interns, who did not have a permanent contract at the facility were excluded. The family physicians suggested that a 4-year threshold was a practical divide between those who might stay long term and those who were likely to move on in the near future. This was seen as a more rigorous threshold than just looking at who would be retained in the next year.

Family physicians were asked to identify two MOs at their facilities, according to the criteria in Figure 2, who could be interviewed. The lead researcher (R.M.) then made the final selection of MOs to ensure that all facilities and all sections of the grid were included. A family physician from a different facility, who was responsible for interviewing that MO, then made contact to obtain consent and set up the interview. It was thought that this sample would achieve saturation of themes; however, further interviews could be undertaken if the analysis suggested that themes needed further exploration.

Data collection

A semi-structured interview guide was developed based on issues from the literature and the preceding survey of MOs.²¹ The opening question was as follows:

How likely is it that you will continue working here (i.e. in this facility) over the next few years and what are the main factors influencing your decision to stay or go?

Each family physician was linked with one MO at a different facility. They conducted and recorded interviews in English via the internet using MS Teams or Zoom. Interviews lasted between 30 min and 60 min.

Retaining the MOs at their facilities was important to family physicians as this directly impacted the quality of care and stability of service delivery. While they were aware of issues affecting retention from their own experience, they all followed the same interview guide to explore the same topics with the respondents. Family physicians interviewed MOs from a different facility, where they did not work. During their postgraduate training, family physicians were trained in communication and interviewing skills. The interview process and guide were workshopped with the family physicians. The family physician interviewers were seven men and seven women, with all having a Masters of Medicine degree.

Data analysis

The recordings were transcribed verbatim, checked for errors and uploaded in Atlas-ti software (version 8) for analysis by the first author (R.M.). Thematic analysis used the framework method:²²

The themes emerging from the data were found across multiple interviews and the last few interviews that were coded did not identify new themes. The analysis was presented to all the family physicians that conducted interviews at a workshop for peer review and validation of the interpretation. The family physicians at the workshop and the researcher who conducted the analysis did not identify any themes that required further interviews. The research team were, therefore, satisfied that reasonable saturation of themes was reached.

Findings

Fourteen MOs were interviewed, and their characteristics are shown in Table 2. Overall, eight were in the rural health services and six in the metro health services; nine were based at district hospitals and five were in health centres. Nine were female and five were male; seven were grade 1, four were grade 2 and three were grade 3 MOs. Seven were planning to leave in the next four years and seven were planning to stay longer. It was not possible to interview an MO at Michael Mapongwana CHC, and therefore, two MOs were interviewed from Stellenbosch DH.

In the analysis, there did not seem to be a clear differentiation of themes between those who intended to stay versus leave. These groups are therefore not juxtaposed in the findings.

Personal career intentions

Ambivalence about specialising

Working in the district health services was considered as a good way to improve one’s skills while keeping many options open for future specialisation. Many of the grade-1 MOs expressed uncertainty about their future career and were still trying to identify their passion. A wide variety of options were being considered from private general practice, specialisation, management, teaching and research. One MO was also considering leaving medicine entirely:

Medical officers who preferred a wide variety of clinical work and exposure to multiple disciplines were more likely to stay in the district health services, while those who were attracted to one specific discipline or who wanted to avoid exposure to certain clinical areas were more likely to consider leaving or specialisation. Medical officers commented that people had left the one hospital that did not provide a full scope of practice. Larger district hospitals allowed MOs to focus more on one clinical area, which might encourage those more interested in one clinical area to remain. However, MOs at these larger hospitals might also be challenged to manage patients more appropriately to higher levels of care and outside their comfort zone:

The desire to leave and specialise in some MOs was in tension with the desire to stay working in the district health services, enjoy a rural lifestyle or avoid the disruption of parenting that being a registrar might cause:

Although MOs progressively became more competent and were promoted with years of service, the nature of the work remained the same. Leaving the district health services to specialise was seen as a way of improving one’s status, being more autonomous and mastering a particular field of medicine:

Grade 3 MOs were not usually considering a major change of career or specialisation. There was a sense that a combination of inertia, family commitments and being comfortable in the district health services had reached a point at which radical change was unlikely:

Not sure about family medicine

Few of the MOs were actively considering a career in family medicine. Some were clearly more interested in developing advanced skills in a specific area through specialisation, and a few felt that they were too old. Several were put off by the need to train in disciplines that they were not comfortable with such as surgery, obstetrics, anaesthetics, paediatrics or psychiatry. Several were concerned that the lack of family physician posts meant they might not be employed on qualifying. In addition, they might give up a permanent MO post for a temporary registrar post, with no guarantee of being able to stay at the end of their training. In rural areas, some of the MOs who were interested could not get a registrar post. One or two felt that family physicians spent too much time on administration and management and not enough time with patients:

Not keen on private sector

Only a few MOs were seriously considering a career in the private sector, and most preferred to stay in the public sector. They felt that they made more of a difference to the society and saw a wider variety of problems, which allowed them to develop more. In the public sector, there was also the opportunity to care for a patient in both primary care and district hospital. While you had to work hard in the public sector, MOs appreciated the predictable salary and benefits. They felt that you might have to work harder in the private sector to earn the same salary and then also had to deal with running a business. However, one could control one’s own working hours more. One of the MOs felt uncomfortable with the unequal quality of care offered in the private sector to those with and without insurance. There was also a view that the management plan was more influenced by patients’ demands and the business imperative, rather than evidence. However, one or two MOs thought that the private sector was attractive because the overall environment was better resourced, safer and more controlled:

Experience of clinical work

Being part of a great team

Maybe, the strongest sub-theme in deciding to stay was the quality of teamwork and relationships with colleagues. The overall impression was that a cohesive and supportive team was a critical factor in retention of MOs and might compensate for many other negative factors, while an unsupportive and unhappy team might have the opposite effect. The perception was that interns and community service MOs wanted to be re-employed at facilities that had good teamwork. Medical officers spoke about working within their ‘comfort zone’ when they were part of a well-functioning team:

In general, MOs were very positive about the teams that they worked in and felt that people worked hard, shared the load and supported each other. Medical officers contrasted their positive experience of teamwork in the district health services of the Western Cape with more negative experiences elsewhere during community service and at specialised or tertiary hospitals. At district hospitals, people commented on how the team included everyone from the porters and cleaners to nurses and doctors. In some rural areas, their colleagues became friends and even felt like family:

Key aspects of this teamwork included getting to know everyone by name, accommodating each other’s needs, having complimentary skills, being respectful and collegial, having open communication, solving problems together, and being clear about different roles in the team and fulfilling those roles. Teams were not always perfect and MOs spoke about the pressures encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals bringing negative emotions to work, miscommunication and loss of cohesion from turnover of staff:

Good support and supervision

Overall, MOs felt that they could always obtain help with specific procedures. They looked to grade 3 MOs, senior registrars and family physicians to provide this clinical support. Senior clinicians were approachable and gave constructive feedback to help MOs improve their clinical management. In some district hospitals, there was a clear division of skills, for example, one MO would be the expert on orthopaedics, while another would know obstetrics:

A lack of support for junior MOs was seen as a key reason to leave, because it was stressful to feel out of one’s depth and make unnecessary mistakes. Such experiences could erode confidence and motivation in the longer term. It appeared that support had improved tremendously over the last few years, although MOs did not like relying on locums or local GPs for support. Having sufficient senior clinicians in the team created a supportive, safe and yet challenging environment in which people could learn:

Good outreach and linkage to the next level of expertise

Medical officers were also appreciative of support from specialists at the local referral hospital. Most facilities had some kind of outreach where specialists visited the facility to see patients and at the same time would conduct ward rounds, provide clinical training or continuing professional development. Although such visits stopped during the coronavirus pandemic, there was still telephonic support, virtual training (via zoom) and interaction on emergency patents via the Vula app:

Despite the benefits of supportive outreach, several MOs spoke about the frustrations of trying to refer patients and being inappropriately expected to manage patients at the district level:

Having a family physician

The family physicians were regarded very positively and fulfilled a number of different roles. They supported the MOs clinically as consultants and created a safe working environment. Sometimes, senior registrars or family physicians working in MO posts felt more approachable or available to the MOs. Having family physicians meant that the team could handle more complicated patients and avoid referrals to the next level of care. They were also mentioned as clinical role models who encouraged a more wholistic approach:

Family physicians were also considered as role models for clinical training and created a learning environment, in which MOs likewise supported more junior colleagues. Family physicians provided clinical training and teaching and encouraged MOs in their professional development. Usually it was the family physician who conducted performance appraisal during which such development was discussed. Family physicians also attracted registrars and medical students into the facility. They were frequently mentioned as being appreciative when providing feedback to MOs:

Family physicians were also observed for their ability to improve service delivery and processes within the facility and to advocate for important clinical issues. A few family physicians were criticised for being too distant and absorbed by administrative tasks. At district hospitals, some of the family physicians who were more dedicated to primary care were no longer seen as competent in the hospital skills set. Although having a family physician was not seen as the most critical factor in retaining MOs, it contributed to the intention to stay:

Recognition by patients and peers for clinical work

Appreciation and recognition of their work by patients were mixed, and there was an impression that this might be commoner in rural areas. Some of the junior MOs were quite frustrated at the way patients interrupted consultations and could be rude or disrespectful. This frustration could contribute to a desire to move to a different type of work environment:

Most MOs found their work meaningful and felt that they were making an important difference, although their contribution was not always appreciated by peers working in referral hospitals. A perception that one’s work was not respected by one’s peers could contribute to a desire to move on:

Experience of the organisation

Good salary and benefits

Medical officers were happy with their remuneration and felt that this provided them financial security. They noted that the salary increased progressively and was the same throughout the public sector, so moving somewhere else would not change the package. The rural allowance was observed as an added benefit for some MOs. They differed in their opinion as to whether colleagues in the private sector actually took home more at the end of the day:

Overtime is essential, but needs some flexibility

Medical officers regarded overtime as stressful, but as a necessary part of the job and an important source of income. Medical officers were more likely to leave facilities that were not willing to be flexible with overtime commitments, particularly in relation to parenting and children. Medical officers also appreciated facilities that allowed them to change the nature of overtime as they became more senior, for example, being on call from home to cover junior colleagues:

Collaborative, responsive and appreciative leadership is needed

Overall, most MOs were quite happy with the management style, and there was the impression that this had improved over the last few years. Most current problems with management were in the community health centres and not the district hospitals. At several district hospitals, family physicians had become part of the management team, particularly as clinical managers. Medical officers reported that their managers were approachable, responsive, supportive, and solved problems and were reasonably efficient. The performance appraisal process provided regular opportunities for MOs to give and receive feedback on any problems:

There were a few negative experiences of management, which could influence MOs to leave. Specific issues included rigidity towards change, inability to confront problems, not taking responsibility for a problem, being authoritarian or aggressive and victimising MOs:

Almost all the MOs described an organisational culture in which they were acknowledged and appreciated for their contribution by family physicians and managers, while not a critical factor such acknowledgement did appear to encourage retention. At the same time, MOs felt that their status in the health system was lower than colleagues working at referral hospitals:

Good staff numbers and mix are needed

A number of MOs described how the staffing levels and mix had improved along with the workload and working conditions. They described a well-functioning mix of expertise from interns, community service MOs, to permanent MOs (sometimes with special interests) and family physicians. Although community service MOs might want to stay, there were not enough posts to retain them. The team could be disrupted by turnover of staff and too many doctors taking maternity leave, which forced the use of locum doctors. One or two facilities appeared to be short-staffed, which put stress on the team and increased the likelihood of people leaving:

Manageable workload is important

Medical officers perceived that the daily workload was on a spectrum from ‘manageable’ to ‘overwhelming’, but no one was planning to leave because of the workload. Key factors that influenced the workload were the cohesiveness of the team (helping each other out), the staffing levels, the way patients’ flow was organised and the variation in activities from day to day. The relentlessness of the workload and the fact that it did not get better as you became more senior was perceived as a negative factor:

A rich learning environment

Medical officers described a rich learning environment in which teaching and training were role modelled by family physicians and cascaded downwards throughout the team with MOs supporting those more junior. As a result, MOs reported that they were constantly confronted with new challenges and learnt in a supportive environment. They were gradually given more responsibility and encouraged to set learning goals for themselves and to study further or attend courses, which were paid for by the facility. One or two MOs commented that the learning environment at the district hospital was better than at the tertiary hospital:

Adequate supplies, equipment and infrastructure

Medical officers complained about the temporary lack of some equipment and supplies; however, this was not perceived as a major problem. The lack of medication could cause friction with patients; however, the situation in the Western Cape was perceived as much better than elsewhere. There were no complaints about the infrastructure and several MOs commented on recent improvements:

Personal, family and community issues

Being with your partner

A very clear reason for leaving was to be with a long-term partner. Partners could influence how MOs felt about specialisation or require them to move to accommodate their own needs. Retaining a MO might also depend on how flexible the organisation was with overtime and contractual obligations to accommodate family life, childcare and the partner’s work commitments:

Prioritising parenting and childcare

Many MOs recognised the importance of parenting and childcare in their lives. Overtime and on-call commitments could at times directly compete with parenting and childcare responsibilities. A lack of flexibility to accommodate MOs’ needs at this point in their lives could lead to them resigning. Several MOs commented that they would stay because the local community had excellent schools and a child friendly environment. One MO felt the private sector would be attractive because you could determine you own hours of work to dovetail with childcare:

Being close to family

Having family close by so that you could regularly visit was an important factor in retaining MOs. Families helped MOs to debrief, helped with child care and were emotionally supportive. Sometimes, MOs needed to also take care of older parents. Family ties were clearly a key factor for many MOs in their choice of location:

Positive about local community

Medical officers were also influenced by the community and environment where they lived. One of the MOs had grown up in the community and felt like they were giving back. Several MOs expressed appreciation for good amenities, schools, accommodation, social opportunities and an active lifestyle. Safety and security was also an issue. Not having such a connection might prompt a desire or willingness to leave:

Living far from the hospital and travelling to work was also an issue for several MOs that made it unlikely they would stay in the long term. On the other hand living close by and having easy access to the hospital when on-call and the ability to quickly go home or sort out children was a positive factor.

Across all the themes, the key factors that were spontaneously mentioned as retaining MOs were: good relationships within the clinical team, the amount of support and clinical supervision, the positive learning environment, the variety of meaningful clinical work, the good salary and benefits, a manageable workload, being close to family, living in a good location and not having to travel too far to work.

Discussion

The key findings as a fishbone diagram of themes and sub-themes related to retention of MOs in the district health services are summarised, as shown in Figure 3.

The findings resonate with the results of the preceding survey and shed some light on the factors involved.²¹ Grade 3 and older MOs had clearly made a decision to stay long term, while Grade 1 and 2 MOs were still considering alternative career plans. Medical officers elaborated in detail on what made them feel supported in the workplace and this was clearly one of the stronger themes. The qualitative findings shed light on the factors influencing the overall rating of the facility (Figure 3) and being part of a cohesive team with good relationships was the strongest theme. Family and contextual factors also came out strongly as deal breakers in the decision to stay or leave, for example, living with one’s partner, providing for and parenting one’s children, and being close to family.

Overall, the district health services in the Western Cape appear to have established many of the foundational ingredients for retention and job satisfaction, such as good salaries and benefits, adequate equipment and supply chain and good infrastructure. Many studies have shown that once the salary is adequate, other factors are more important in retaining MOs.¹⁵ The staff numbers, mix of junior and senior clinicians, and turnover of team members were critical in terms of a manageable workload, team cohesion, supportive supervision, as well as professional development. Overall, staff numbers and mix appeared sufficient to ensure that these factors supported retention.

In terms of personal career intentions, there appeared to be a relationship between personal attributes, the scope of practice and retention. Those who were more attracted by a constant variety of work experiences across multiple disciplines were a better fit than those who preferred one specific area or were averse to some areas of the work, particularly in the district hospitals. Retention also appeared to be related to future expectations of career progression. Those who expected a future of relentless workload, constant overtime and performing the same tasks, albeit with increasing competency, seemed more likely to eventually leave. One of the implications was that the nature of the work should evolve as MOs gained seniority with, for example, the possibility of informal subspecialisation in a particular area or performing overtime from home to cover junior colleagues.¹⁵

The intensity and volume of the workload are identified as important factors in job satisfaction¹⁵ and the sense was that the workload was just manageable. Previous studies have identified burnout as prevalent amongst both rural and urban MOs in the Western Cape.^23,24 Workload, therefore, is one of the key issues to proactively manage. Most MOs felt that their work was meaningful, recognised and appreciated, which is likely to provide intrinsic motivation.¹⁴ There were some concerns with a lack of recognition by peers working in other parts of the health system and from the public, which has been linked to reduced job satisfaction.¹⁵

Most MOs expressed job satisfaction related to working in a supportive and cohesive team and this was maybe the strongest theme that encouraged retention. This also implies that a lack of support or dysfunctional team would be a key factor in leaving. Supportive supervision from family physicians and managers was highlighted and there appeared to be significant improvement in this over the last few years, particularly at district hospitals. Previous studies have suggested an unsupportive organisational culture and reliance on command and control styles of management.²⁵ This study suggests a move towards more collaborative leadership styles had occurred, which encouraged retention of MOs. The reasons for this shift are not clear, but could relate to leadership and management training in the department of health, as well as the employment of family physicians as managers in many facilities.

In addition, MOs reported the development of a strong learning environment with workplace-based clinical training and teaching and opportunities to attend external courses. Learning and quality improvement were part of the culture, and this was role modelled by family physicians and emulated by MOs. Opportunities for professional and personal development are recognised as key factors supporting retention.¹⁵ Outreach from specialists at the referral hospitals was appreciated and contributed to a stimulating learning environment, as has been shown in other studies.²⁶

Interestingly, there was little intention to specialise in family medicine, although widespread appreciation for the family physicians in their teams. Specialisation in family medicine could provide an opportunity for career development while remaining in the district health services. Human resource analysis of family medicine has found the need for creating more public sector posts and for resolving the discrimination against such specialists within the private sector.²⁷ Medical officers confirmed the contribution of family physicians to strengthening district health services and creating a positive work environment as clinicians and consultants, clinical trainers and capacity builders, as well as leaders of clinical governance. The attitudes towards private practice suggested that the perceived disadvantages outweighed the advantages: a finding in contradiction to the maldistribution of family doctors in private practice.²⁷ It is possible that improvements in the working environment in the public sector of the Western Cape have tipped the balance more in favour of the public sector.

The personal, family and community issues were powerful in influencing retention and yet also the factors most outside the control of health services. Studies on rural and remote settings have emphasised the importance of employment opportunities for the spouse, educational opportunities for the children and being close to family.²⁸ In the Western Cape context, it was important to be with your partner, to have family nearby, to enjoy social and recreational activities in the community, and to not have a long commute. There were no concerns expressed with basic living conditions, and safety was not seen as a substantial issue influencing retention.

Limitations

All the MOs worked in facilities with family physicians and we do not know what the findings would be in facilities without family physicians. In the Western Cape, most of the district hospitals and community health centres have family physicians and MOs were from all districts in both urban and rural locations. The findings may, therefore, be transferable to the majority of district health services in this province. The Western Cape, however, performs better in many aspects of service delivery when compared with other provinces in South Africa, and the findings are likely to be different in other provinces.²⁹

The interviews were conducted by family physicians within the SUFPREN network, and power dynamics could have influenced some of the responses. However, the MOs did not know the family physician who interviewed them and did not appear to have a social desirability bias in their responses, as shown by their honesty with regard to careers in family medicine. If a social desirability bias was present then respondents might have given more positive and favourable feedback about their work environment and the contribution of the family physician. It is also possible that family physicians put forward MOs for selection who they thought might be more positive about their facility or amenable to be interviewed, although they had to also select people they thought were likely to leave. Respondent validation with the MOs themselves was not attempted and could have added value to the analysis. A peer review by the family physicians who conducted the interviews allowed them to give feedback on whether the analysis by R.M. adequately interpreted the data they had collected.

Each interview was conducted by a different family physician, and there was a possibility for loss of fidelity or quality in the interviews. The first author, however, who listened to all the recordings, observed good fidelity to the interview guide and adequate interviewing skills. The first author performed the data analysis alone, but the interpretation was peer reviewed by the family physicians in a workshop.

Although community service MOs were excluded, because they were not in permanent positions, it might have been useful to explore their perspectives on staying employed within the district health services, even if not at the same facility. This could be the focus of another study.

The themes did not clearly differ between those staying and going. The impression was that MOs were actually on a spectrum from staying to going and were influenced by the same issues, particularly in the more junior grades. The motivation to finally stay or go may relate more to the strength and combination of these factors in a specific individual and their context.

Recommendations

There is no single magic bullet for retaining MOs and a ‘bundle of interventions’ is probably required.¹¹ Recommendations for retaining MOs are as follows:

Conclusion

Retention of MOs in district health services was linked to personal career intentions, their experience of clinical work, their experience of the organisation, as well as personal, family and community issues. Junior MOs saw the district health services as a good place to learn skills and from which to decide on future career plans. Those who enjoyed the wide variety of clinical work were more likely to feel comfortable remaining. Most were not considering specialising in family medicine, which would retain them in the district health services, while appreciating the contribution of family physicians to their work experience. Having the opportunity for career progression that went beyond an increase in salary might encourage people to remain in the organisation. Few were attracted by the private sector. Being part of a close and cohesive team was the strongest factor in retaining MOs. Having supportive clinical supervision and working in a positive learning environment were also important. An appreciative, collaborative and supportive management style was also influential in retaining MOs. Management that was flexible to meet the evolving needs of MOs, particularly for childcare and parenting, was needed. A foundation of functioning supply chain, good salaries and benefits, adequate staff numbers and mix, and good infrastructure were present. Being with your partner and close to family and living close to work were important factors. Being in a community with educational, social and recreational resources was influential. Leaders and managers of the healthcare services should intervene across multiple factors to create the conditions needed to retain MOs.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the following family physicians who helped to collect data: Dr Beverley Williams and Dr Stefanie Perold from the Rural Health Services of the Western Cape Government.

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

R.J.M., W.V., S.S., M.A., L.W., H.S., G.H., D.S., A.W., A.A., J.S. and P.K. participated as members of the Stellenbosch University Family Physician Research Network. R.J.M., W.V., S.S., M.A., L.W., H.S., G.H., D.S., A.W., A.A., J.S. and P.K. provided input into the conceptualisation of the study, study design and methods, data collection, interpretation of data and approved the final manuscript. R.J.M. led the project and performed the data analysis.

Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Ethics Committee at Stellenbosch University (Reference number: N20/01/001) and permission to conduct the research from the Department of Health, Government of the Western Cape.

This study was supported by the Division of Family Medicine and Primary Care at Stellenbosch University.

The data are not publicly available because of participants not giving consent to transfer their data to other researchers.

The views expressed in the submitted article are those of the authors and not an official position of the institution.

References

United Nations. Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York, NY: United Nations; 2015.
World Health Organization. Everybody’s business: Strengthening health systems to improve health outcomes [homepage on the Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007 [2022 Mar 28]. Available from: https://www.who.int/healthsystems/strategy/everybodys_business.pdf
Primary health care performance initiative [homepage on the Internet]. [cited 2021 Dec 11]. Available from: https://improvingphc.org/
World Health Organization. World health report – Primary health care: Now more than ever. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.
World Health Organization. Astana declaration on primary health care [homepage on the Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 18]. Available from: https://www.who.int/primary-health/conference-phc/declaration
Agyepong IA, Sewankambo N, Binagwaho A, et al. The path to longer and healthier lives for all Africans by 2030: The Lancet Commission on the future of health in sub-Saharan Africa. Lancet. 2017;390(10114):2803–2859. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31509-X
Matsoso M, Fryatt R, Andrews G. The South African health reforms, 2009–2014: Moving towards universal coverage. Cape Town: Juta; 2015.
National Department of Health. 2030 human resources for health strategy: Investing in the health workforce for universal health coverage. Pretoria: Department of Health; 2020.
Healthcare 2030: The road to wellness [homepage on the Internet]. Western Cape Government; 2014 [cited 2014 Apr 20]. Available from: https://www.westerncape.gov.za/assets/departments/health/healthcare2030.pdf
Mbemba G, Gagnon M, Hamelin-Brabant L. Factors influencing recruitment and retention of healthcare workers in rural and remote areas in developed and developing countries: An overview. J Public Health Africa. 2016;7(2):565. https://doi.org/10.4081/jphia.2016.565
Lehmann U, Dieleman M, Martineau T. Staffing remote rural areas in middle- and low-income countries: A literature review of attraction and retention. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:19. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-19
World Health Organization. WHO guideline on health workforce development, attraction, recruitment and retention in rural and remote areas. Geneva: World health Organization; 2021.
Willis-Shattuck M, Thomas S, Wyness L, Blaauw D, Ditlopo P. Motivation and retention of health workers in developing countries: A systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:247. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-247
Bonenberger M, Aikins M, Akweongo P, Wyss K. The effects of health worker motivation and job satisfaction on turnover intention in Ghana: A cross-sectional study. Hum Resour Health. 2014;12:43. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-12-43
Marchand C, Peckham S. Addressing the crisis of GP recruitment and retention: A systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2017;67(657):e227–e237. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X689929
National Department of Health. National health insurance policy: Towards universal health coverage. Pretoria: Department of Health; 2017.
Mash R, Ogunbanjo G, Naidoo SS, Hellenberg D. The contribution of family physicians to district health services: A national position paper for South Africa. S Afr Fam Pract. 2015;57:54–61.
Mash B. Reflections on the development of family medicine in the Western Cape: A 15-year review. S Afr Fam Pract. 2011;53(6):557–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/20786204.2011.10874152
Western Cape Government: Health. Annual report 2020–21 [homepage on the Internet]. Cape Town; 2021 [cited 2022 Mar 28]. Available from: https://www.westerncape.gov.za/assets/annual_report_2020_2021_0.pdf
Mash R. Establishing family physician research networks in South Africa. S Afr Fam Pract. 2020;62:a5216. https://doi.org/10.4102/safp.v62i1.5216
Van Der Westhuizen N. Factors associated with retention of medical officers in the district health services of the Western Cape, South Africa [homepage on the Internet]. 2021 [cited 2022 Mar 01]. Available from: http://www.sun.ac.za/english/faculty/healthsciences/Family Medicine and Primary Care/Pages/Research.aspx
Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess R, editors. Qualitative data analysis. London: Routledge, 1994; p. 173–194.
Rossouw L, Seedat S, Emsley R, Hagemeister D. The prevalence of burnout and depression in medical doctors working in the Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality community healthcare clinics and district hospitals of the Provincial Government of the Western Cape : A cross-sectional study. S Afr Fam Pract. 2013;55(6):567–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/20786204.2013.10874418
Liebenberg AR, Coetzee JF, Conradie HH, Coetzee JF. Burnout among rural hospital doctors in the Western Cape: Comparison with previous South African studies. Afr J Prim Health Fam Med. 2018;10(1):e1–e7. https://doi.org/10.4102/phcfm.v10i1.1568
Mash RJ, Govender S, Isaacs AA, De Sa A, Schlemmer A. An assessment of organisational values, culture and performance in Cape Town’s primary healthcare services. S Afr Fam Pract. 2013;55(5):459–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/20786204.2013.10874396
Schoevers J, Jenkins L. Factors influencing specialist outreach and support services to rural populations in the Eden and Central Karoo districts of the Western Cape. Afr J Prim Health Fam Med. 2015;7(1):9. https://doi.org/10.4102/phcfm.v7i1.750
Tiwari R, Mash R, Karangwa I, Chikte U. A human resources for health analysis of registered family medicine specialists in South Africa: 2002–19. Fam Pract. 2021;38(2):88–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmaa084
Verma P, Ford JA, Stuart A, Howe A, Everington S, Steel N. A systematic review of strategies to recruit and retain primary care doctors. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16:126. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1370-1
Massyn N, Barron P, Day C, Ndlovu N, Padarath A. District health barometer 2018/19 [homepage on the Internet]. Cape Town; 2020 [cited 2020 Nov 05]. Available from: https://www.hst.org.za/publications/Pages/DISTRICT-HEALTH-BAROMETER-201819.aspx
Schaefer R, Jenkins LS, North Z. Retaining doctors and reducing burnout through a flexible work initiative in a rural South African training hospital. Afr J Prim Health Fam Med. 2021;13(1):5. https://doi.org/10.4102/phcfm.v13i1.2799

Original Research

Retention of medical officers in the district health services of the Western Cape, South Africa: An exploratory descriptive qualitative study

Robert J. Mash, Werner Viljoen, Steve Swartz, Mumtaz Abbas, Leigh Wagner, Herma Steyn, Gavin Hendricks, Dusica Stapar, Andrew Williams, Adeloye Adeniji, Johan Schoevers, Paul Kapp

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Study design

Setting

Sample size and selection

Data collection

Data analysis

Findings

Personal career intentions

Ambivalence about specialising

Not sure about family medicine

Not keen on private sector

Experience of clinical work

Being part of a great team

Good support and supervision

Good outreach and linkage to the next level of expertise

Having a family physician

Recognition by patients and peers for clinical work

Experience of the organisation

Good salary and benefits

Overtime is essential, but needs some flexibility

Collaborative, responsive and appreciative leadership is needed

Good staff numbers and mix are needed

Manageable workload is important

A rich learning environment

Adequate supplies, equipment and infrastructure

Personal, family and community issues

Being with your partner

Prioritising parenting and childcare

Being close to family

Positive about local community

Discussion

Limitations

Recommendations

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Competing interests

Authors’ contributions

Ethical considerations

Funding information

Data availability

Disclaimer

References