4.3 Article

The landscape of ophthalmologists in Canada: present and future

Publisher

CANADIAN OPHTHAL SOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2013.01.017

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To describe the current national and regional population distribution of ophthalmologists in Canada and provide national predictions up to 2030. Design: Cross-sectional, study. Participants: Ophthalmologists listed in the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) database and Canadian population. Methods: The CMA database was used to determine the number and location of currently licensed ophthalmologists in Canada. Using Statistics Canada population data, we determined the ratio of ophthalmologists to 100 000 population. Projections were also made for the supply of ophthalmologists up to 2030 using the CMA Physician Resource Evaluation Template and assuming a status quo scenario in terms of attrition and gain factors. Results: In Canada, there are currently 3.35 ophthalmologists per 100 000 population. There is, however, significant regional disparity; provincial ratios vary from 5.40 (Nova Scotia) to 1.96 (Saskatchewan) and 0.89 in the territories. If 3 ophthalmologists per 100 000 is the ideal ratio, then 4 provinces and the territories were below this ratio, and of the 104 regions with an ophthalmologist, 22 were below the ratio. The national projection to 2030 is a slight increase to 3.38; however, the full-time equivalent ratio is expected to decrease from 3.29 in 2012 to 3.06 in 2030. For the population >65 years old, with a projected growth 4 times greater than that of ophthalmologists, the ratio of ophthalmologists to population >65 years old is projected to decline by 34%. Conclusions: Although national estimates appear stable, there is significant regional variation. The projected marked growth of the population >65 years old may compromise our future ability to provide care at the current standard.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available