Nursing in Rural and Small Town Canada 2000 - finalJan29-2. · Table 17 Profile of RNs Employed in Nursing in Rural and Small Town Canada, 1994 and 2000.....69. Supply and Distribution

Supply and Distribution of

Registered Nurses in Ruraland Small Town Canada

Canadian Institute for Health Information

Institut canadien d�information sur la santé

2000

Supply and Distribution ofRegistered Nurses in Rural and

Small Town Canada, 2000

All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced ortransmitted in any form or by any means,electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,recording, or by any information storage andretrieval system now known or to be invented,without the prior permission in writing from theowner of the copyright, except by a reviewer whowishes to quote brief passages in connection witha review written for inclusion in a magazine,newspaper or broadcast.

Requests for permission should be addressed to:

Canadian Institute for Health Information377 Dalhousie Street, Suite 200Ottawa, ON K1N 9N8

Telephone: 613-241-7860Fax: 613-241-8120www.cihi.ca

ISBN 1-894766-49-0

© 2002 Canadian Institute for Health Information

Cette publication est disponible en français sous le titre « Nombre et répartition des infirmières et infirmiersautorisés dans les régions rurales et petites villes du Canada, 2000 » ISBN 1-894766-51-2

Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses inRural and Small Town Canada, 2000

Table of Contents

Preface .................................................................................................................. i

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................... iii

Introduction...........................................................................................................1

Highlights..............................................................................................................4

Methodological Notes .............................................................................................8

Target Population ................................................................................................8Data Sources ......................................................................................................9

Registered Nurses Database...............................................................................9External Data Sources.......................................................................................9

RNDB Variables.................................................................................................10RNDB and Census Geography..............................................................................14Computations ...................................................................................................19Privacy, Confidentiality and Data Suppression........................................................20Precision and Accuracy ......................................................................................21Methodological References .................................................................................22

Descriptive Analysis .............................................................................................24

Number of Registered Nurses ..............................................................................24Number of RNs per 10,000 Population ..............................................................27

Demographic Characteristics ...............................................................................37Age..............................................................................................................37Gender .........................................................................................................40

Education Characteristics....................................................................................42Initial/Entry to Practice Education......................................................................42Age Upon Graduation......................................................................................45Highest Education in Nursing............................................................................45Non-Nursing Degrees ......................................................................................47

Employment Characteristics ................................................................................48Place of Work ................................................................................................48Primary Area of Responsibility ..........................................................................52Position ........................................................................................................54Employment Status ........................................................................................57Full-Time/Part-Time Status...............................................................................58Multiple Employment ......................................................................................59

Provincial Migration Patterns ...............................................................................61International Nursing Graduates ...........................................................................64

Summary ............................................................................................................66


Table of Contents (cont�d)

Provincial/Territorial Profiles ...................................................................................71

Data Tables.........................................................................................................87

Appendix A�CIHI RNDB 2000 Methodological Notes ..............................................A�1

Appendix B�Population Estimates ........................................................................ B�1

Appendix C�Registered Nursing Contact Information ..............................................C�1

Appendix D�Project Participants: Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada..........D�1

Appendix E�Supplementary Maps........................................................................ E�1

Map E-1 Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population byCensus Division, Eastern Canada, 2000 .......................... E�1

Map E-2 Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population byCensus Division, Western Canada, 2000......................... E�2

Map E-3 Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Populationby Census Division, Eastern Canada, 2000...................... E�3

Map E-4 Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Populationby Census Division, Western Canada, 2000 .................... E�4

Map E-5 Percent Change in the Total Number of RNs per 10,000Population by Census Division, Eastern Canada,1994 to 2000............................................................. E�5

Map E-6 Percent Change in the Total Number of RNs per 10,000Population by Census Division, Western Canada,1994 to 2000............................................................. E�6

Map E-7 Percent Change in the Number of Rural RNs per 10,000Rural Population by Census Division, Eastern Canada,2000 ......................................................................... E�7

Map E-8 Percent Change in the Number of Rural RNs per 10,000Rural Population by Census Division, Western Canada,2000 ......................................................................... E�8


List of Tables

Table 1 Percent Change in the Numbers of RNs by Rural/Urban Location,Province/Territory of Registration, and Canada, 1994 to 2000................. 25

Table 2 Numbers of Census Divisions by Changes in Total Population Comparedwith Changes in Total Numbers of RNs, Canada, 1994 to 2000............... 36

Table 3 Numbers of Census Divisions by Changes in Rural Population Comparedwith Changes in the Numbers of Rural RNs, Canada, 1994 to 2000 ......... 36

Table 4 Average Age (in years) of RNs by Rural/Urban Location andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and 2000..................... 37

Table 5 Frequency Distribution of Canadian Rural and Urban Communities byAverage Age Groupings for Communities with 5 or more RNs,Canada, 2000 .................................................................................. 39

Table 6 Frequency Distribution of Canadian Rural and Urban Communitiesby Age Groupings for Communities with Only 1 RN, Canada, 2000.......... 39

Table 7 Percentage of Rural RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree as Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation by Age Group and Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000 .................................................................................. 44

Table 8 Number and Average Age (in years) of RN graduates by ProgramType and Decade of Graduation, Canada, 2000..................................... 45

Table 9 Percent Distribution of RNs by Place of Work and Rural/Urban Location,Canada, 1994 and 2000.................................................................... 48

Table 10 Percent Distribution of RNs by Selected Place of Work and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and 2000 ................................. 51

Table 11 Number and Percent Distribution of RNs by Area of Responsibility andRural/Urban Location, Canada, 1994 and 2000 ..................................... 52

Table 12 Percent Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Area ofResponsibility and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ......... 53

Table 13 Percent Distribution of Rural RNs by Province/Territory of Graduationand Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 ............................. 61


List of Tables (cont�d)

Table 14 Percent Distribution of Rural RNs by Province/Territory of Graduationand Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ............................. 62

Table 15 Number and Percentage of Foreign-Trained RNs Located in RuralAreas, Canada, 2000 ........................................................................ 65

Table 16 Profile of RNs Employed in Nursing in Rural and Urban Canada, 2000 ....... 68

Table 17 Profile of RNs Employed in Nursing in Rural and Small Town Canada,1994 and 2000 ................................................................................ 69


List of Figures

Figure 1 Locations of Rural (Rural and Small Town) and Urban (CMA/CA)Areas of Canada, 2000...................................................................... 16

Figure 2 Census Geographical Units of the Wood Buffalo Area of Alberta .............. 17

Figure 3 Numbers of RNs Employed in Nursing in Canada for Selected Years:1994, 1998, 1999 and 2000 ............................................................. 24

Figure 4 Proportions of Rural and Urban RNs by Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000 .................................................................................. 26

Figure 5 Proportions of Rural and Urban Populations by Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000 ................................................................ 26

Figure 6 Registered Nurse to Population Ratios (for all RNs), Canada,1988-2000 ...................................................................................... 27

Figure 7 Registered Nurse to Population Ratios (for RNs Employed in Nursing) byProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and 2000..................... 28

Figure 8 Registered Nurse to Population Ratios for Urban RNs by Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and 2000 ................................. 29

Figure 9 Registered Nurse to Population Ratios for Rural RNs by Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and 2000 ................................. 29

Figure 10 Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Census Division,Canada, 2000 .................................................................................. 31

Figure 11 Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Population by Census Division,Canada, 2000 .................................................................................. 32

Figure 12 Changes in nurse to population ratios for all RNs by Census Division,Canada, 1994 to 2000 ...................................................................... 33

Figure 13 Changes in nurse to population ratios for rural RNs by Census Division,Canada, 1994 to 2000 ...................................................................... 34

Figure 14 Age Distribution of Rural RNs, Canada, 1994 and 2000.......................... 38

Figure 15 Age Distributions of Rural RNs, Urban RNs and all RNs, Canada, 2000 ..... 38


List of Figures (cont�d)

Figure 16 Proportions of Male RNs in Urban Areas of Canada, 1994 and 2000 ........ 40

Figure 17 Proportions of Male RNs in Rural Areas of Canada, 1994 and 2000.......... 40

Figure 18 Proportions of RNs Located in Rural and Small Town Canada byGender and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 .................. 41

Figure 19 Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree as Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation by Rural/Urban Location and Decade of Graduation, Canada,2000 .............................................................................................. 42

Figure 20 Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree as Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation by Rural/Urban Location, Canada, 1994 and 2000................... 42

Figure 21 Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree as Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation by Rural/Urban Location and Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000 .................................................................................. 43

Figure 22 Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree as Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation by Rural/Urban Location and Age Group, Canada, 2000 ........... 44

Figure 23 Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree as Highest Level of NursingEducation by Rural/Urban Location, Canada, 1994 and 2000................... 46

Figure 24 Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree as Highest Level of NursingEducation by Rural/Urban Location and Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000 .................................................................................. 46

Figure 25 Proportions of RNs with Degrees in Programs Other Than Nursing byRural/Urban Location and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada,2000 .............................................................................................. 47

Figure 26 Percentage of Rural RNs by Place of Work and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000 ................................................................ 49

Figure 27 Percentage of Urban RNs by Place of Work and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000 ................................................................ 49

Figure 28 Percentage of RNs by Place of Work and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000 ................................................................ 50


List of Figures (cont�d)

Figure 29 Percentage of RNs by Rural/Urban Location and Position (excludingStaff/Community Heath Nurses), Canada, 1994 .................................... 54

Figure 30 Percentage of RNs by Rural/Urban Location and Position (excludingStaff/Community Health Nurses), Canada, 2000.................................... 54

Figure 31 Proportions of Rural RNs by Grouped Position and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000 ................................................................ 55

Figure 32 Proportions of Urban RNs by Grouped Position and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000 ................................................................ 56

Figure 33 Percentage of Rural RNs by Employment Status and Province/Territoryof Registration, Canada, 2000 ............................................................ 57

Figure 34 Percentage of RNs with Regular Employment by Rural/Urban Locationand Age Group, Canada, 2000............................................................ 57

Figure 35 Percentage of Rural RNs with Full-Time Employment by Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................................ 58

Figure 36 Percentage of RNs with Full-Time Employment by Rural/Urban Locationand Age Group, Canada, 2000............................................................ 59

Figure 37 Percentage of RNs with Full-Time Employment by Rural/Urban Locationand Gender, Canada, 2000................................................................. 59

Figure 38 Percentage of RNs with Multiple Employers by Rural/Urban Locationand Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ............................. 60

Figure 39 Percentage of RNs with Multiple Employers by Rural/Urban Locationand Age Group, Canada, 2000............................................................ 60

Figure 40 Percentage of RNs for which Province/Territory of Graduation MatchesProvince/Territory of Registration by Rural/Urban Location, Canada,2000 .............................................................................................. 63

Figure 41 Major World Region Origins of the International Nursing Graduate RNsof Canada, 2000 .............................................................................. 64


List of Data Tables

Table 1.0 Numbers and Proportions of RNs by Rural/Urban Location andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and 1998..................... 89

Table 1.0a Numbers and Proportions of RNs by Rural/Urban Location andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1999 and 2000..................... 89

Table 2.0 Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Rural/Urban Location, andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada: 1994, 1998,1999 and 2000 ................................................................................ 90

Table 3.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Age Group and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................................ 91

Table 3.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Age Groupand Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ............................. 92

Table 4.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Gender and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................................ 93

Table 4.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Gender andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................... 93

Table 5.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000............... 94

Table 5.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Initial/Entry toPractice Education and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada,2000 .............................................................................................. 94

Table 6.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Decade of Graduation andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................... 95

Table 6.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Decade ofGraduation and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ............. 96

Table 7.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Highest Education in Nursingand Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ............................. 97

Table 7.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, HighestEducation in Nursing and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada,2000 .............................................................................................. 98


List of Data Tables (cont�d)

Table 8.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Other Education in Nursing(Non-Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 .......... 99

Table 8.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Other Educationin Nursing (Non-Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada,2000 .............................................................................................. 99

Table 9.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Other Education in Nursing(Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 .............. 100

Table 9.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Other Educationin Nursing (Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada,2000 ............................................................................................ 101

Table 10.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Non-Nursing Education andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................. 102

Table 10.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Non-NursingEducation and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000............. 103

Table 11.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Place of Work andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................. 104

Table 12.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Area of Responsibility andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................. 107

Table 13.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Position and Province/Territoryof Registration, Canada, 2000 .......................................................... 110

Table 13.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Position andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................. 112

Table 14.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Regular/Casual Basis andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................. 114

Table 14.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Regular/Casual Basis and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000......... 114

Table 15.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Full-Time/Part-Time Statusand Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ........................... 115


List of Data Tables (cont�d)

Table 15.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Full-Time/Part-Time Status and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada,2000 ............................................................................................ 115

Table 16.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, Multiple Employment andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000................................. 116

Table 16.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location, MultipleEmployment and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000 ......... 116

Table 17.0 Number of International Nursing Graduates by Rural/Urban Location,World Region of Graduation and Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000 ................................................................................ 117

Table 17.0a Percentage Distribution of International Nursing Graduates by Rural/Urban Location, World Region of Graduation and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000 .............................................................. 118

Registered Nurses Database i

PrefaceThe Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) and the Health Human ResourcesTeam are pleased to be associated with an elite team of researchers in the presentation ofSupply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Rural and Small Town Canada, 2000.

This special analytical report is the first national comprehensive publication aboutregistered nurses working in rural and small town Canada. Using data from the RegisteredNurses Database (RNDB), this report establishes a demographic, educational andemployment profile of registered nurses in rural and small town Canada between 1994 and2000.

Developed by the Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada Study Group, this report isa summary for Phase 1 of a three-year research project about the nature of nursingpractice in rural and remote Canada. Judith Shamian, Executive Director of Nursing Policyfor Health Canada believes �The findings from the �Nature of Nursing of Practice in Ruraland Remote Canada� research project will help to enhance nurses� contributions inachieving healthy and productive rural and remote communities in the 21st Century.�

CIHI recognizes and appreciates the tremendous work of Study Group members Dr. RogerPitblado and Dr. Jennifer Medves in the creation and development of this report.

We hope that this report will provide a strong base for the future work of the NursingPractice in Rural and Remote Canada Study Group, and for those with an interest innursing resources and rural health issues in Canada.

Yours,

Francine Anne RoyConsultant, Nursing DatabasesCanadian Institute for Health Information377 Dalhousie Street, Suite 200Ottawa, ON K1N 9N8

Tel: 613-241-7860Fax: 613-241-8120E-mail: [email protected]

www.cihi.ca

Registered Nurses Database iii

AcknowledgementsThe Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Rural and Small Town Canada, 2000 isa special project publication of the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). It isbased on the Registered Nurses Database (RNDB) and has been prepared by the followingmembers of the Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada Study Group(see Appendix C):

� Roger Pitblado PhD, Department of Geography and Centre for Rural and NorthernHealth Research, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ontario

� Jennifer Medves PhD RN, School of Nursing, Queen�s University, Kingston, Ontario

� Martha MacLeod PhD RN, Nursing Program, University of Northern British Columbia,Prince George, British Columbia

� Norma Stewart PhD RN, College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon,Saskatchewan

� Judith Kulig DNSc RN, School of Health Sciences, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge,Alberta

This publication would not have been possible without the contributions and support of thefollowing:

� In addition to financial support, the Canadian Institute for Health Information generouslyprovided us with access to the Registered Nurses Database and the skills and expertiseof their Publications and Translation departments for the timely and efficient productionand printing of this publication.

� Francine Anne Roy, CIHI Consultant, Nursing Databases, Health Human Resources, wasinstrumental in developing this publication and in obtaining the necessary agreementswith the provincial/territorial regulating authorities for registered nurses that allowed usto employ the RNDB at subprovincial levels of analyses. This made possible theseparation of rural from urban RNs.

� Paul Sajan, CIHI Research Analyst, Nursing Databases, Health Human Resources, hasprovided outstanding technical expertise related to RNDB data transfers, data checking,and illumination of the RNDB data dictionary and changes to variable definitions in thedatabase that have occurred throughout the past ten years.

� Brent Barber, CIHI Consultant, Health Human Resources, provided the initial support forthis project and was particularly helpful in establishing the links with the CIHI Privacyand Confidentiality Committee.

� Jill Strachan, CIHI Manager, Health Human Resources, is a �researcher�s administrator�dedicated to the productive use of CIHI health human resources databases as tools toimprove the health of Canadians and their health care system. None of this work wouldhave been accomplished without Jill�s support and endorsement.

We extend our thanks to the registered nurses of Canada and the Registrars and staff ofthe provincial/territorial regulating authorities for registered nurses (see Appendix B). The

iv Registered Nurses Database

full cooperation of the subjects and providers of the data has made possible the CIHI healthhuman resources databases and the publications derived from them.

Dr. Ray Bollman, Statistics Canada, has not been directly involved with the preparation ofthis publication. However, over many years he has been an extremely valuable resourceperson in terms of the continuing debate surrounding definitions of rural. Rural Canadaowes a great deal to Ray for his long-time advocacy and analyses of things rural.

And finally, the authors would like to thank Jane Pitblado for her editorial assistance withseveral of the initial drafts of this report.

Supply and Distribution of Registered NursesCIHI 2002 in Rural and Small Town Canada, 2000

Registered Nurses Database 1

IntroductionIn the executive summary of the Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada,2000 report, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) made some of thefollowing observations:

� There was a moderate rise of 1.7% in the total number of registered nurses (RNs)employed in nursing in Canada from 1999 to 2000;

� General population growth rates have exceeded the increase in the number of RNs,resulting in fewer nurses employed in nursing per 10,000 population;

� The average age of RNs in Canada increased by almost two years, from 41.4 years to43.3 years, during the period from 1994 to 2000;

� Casual employment rates decreased from 18.2% in 1999 to 14.9% in 2000;

� 54.8% of RNs were employed full time in 2000, compared to 51.1% in 1999;

� While there has been a slight increase in 2000 compared to 1999 in the proportion ofRNs working in community-based settings, hospitals remain the predominant place ofwork;

� An increasing percentage of Canada�s RN workforce has obtained a bachelor�s degreeas their highest education in nursing; and

� For the less than 8% of RNs who graduated outside of Canada, the most commoncountries where they were educated were the United Kingdom, the Philippines, and theUnited States.

Registered nurses provide care to approximately 6.6 million Canadians living in rural andremote areas, but the nature of nursing in these parts of the country is poorly understood.This report seeks to answer the following questions: Are the observations above andsimilar statistics also characteristic of RNs working in generally rural areas of Canada? Howmany RNs work in rural and small town Canada? What can the CIHI Registered NursesDatabase (RNDB) tell us, at least numerically, about registered nurses who practise in thatpart of the country?

To address those questions, this report provides data summaries that include demographiccharacteristics of age and gender and the employment characteristics of place of work,primary area of responsibility, employment status (regular/casual), full-time/part-timestatus, position, and multiple employment. Selected educational characteristics include ageupon nursing graduation, initial/entry to practice education, highest education attained innursing, and place of graduation (international nursing graduates).

This volume in the CIHI series on the Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses inCanada focuses on nurses in rural Canada in the year 2000. In addition, the demographic,employment and educational characteristics of these nurses are compared with those forregistered nurses working in urban locations as well as with nurses working in Canada as awhole.

Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Rural and Small Town Canada, 2000 CIHI 2002

2 Registered Nurses Database

This report also features:

� Selected historical information from the 1994 RNDB;

� Summary profiles for each province/territory; and

� RNDB 2000 data tables that include counts and percentages for registered nursesemployed in rural and small town Canada, urban Canada, and Canada as a whole.

As this report is a data summary, it does not attempt to explain the characteristics anddistribution of rural nurses in Canada or provide the reasons for some of the differencesthat exist when urban RNs are compared with RNs in rural and small town Canada. Nordoes the report attempt to examine the many policy-related matters surrounding the supplyand distribution of registered nurses in rural and remote areas of the country.

This data summary is only the first of four components of a much broader research project,the Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada Study. The complementary componentsof that three-year (2001-2004) project will address these issues of explanation and relatedpolicy matters. The project aims to describe and examine the nature of registered nursingpractice in primary care, acute care, community health, continuing care (home care), andlong-term care settings within rural and remote Canada. The participants and the sponsorsof the study are listed in Appendix D. The project will:

� Articulate the roles and functions of registered nurses in rural and remote Canada;

� Develop a definition of rural and remote nursing;

� Identify what is common and different among nurses� roles and functions in variouspractice settings;

� Articulate important factors in the context of registered nurse practice and how thesefactors contribute to the development of expertise;

� Identify areas of priority for organizational and policy support, and for basic andongoing education for registered nurses in different rural and remote practice settings;and

� Contribute to policy and management discussions on the practice, recruitment,retention, and education of nurses in rural and remote Canada.

It is intended that this study will give policy-makers, managers, and educators informationthat will help them create policies, programs, and organizational structures to bettersupport nurses and their practice at regional, provincial/territorial, and national levels. Aswell, the study has been designed to provide rural and remote communities withinformation about how better to attract, retain, and support registered nurses.

The four components of the Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada research projectare:

� An analysis of the CIHI RNDB to provide statistical demographic and workplace profilesof rural and remote nurses;



� A documentary analysis to critically review standards and policies of nursing practicethat have been implemented or proposed and that provide a contextual understandingof the policy and practice environments within which rural and remote nurses function;

� A questionnaire survey administered to 6,500 registered nurses who practise in ruraland remote areas of Canada, randomly selected from all provinces and territories. Thedimensional elements of this survey include demographics, personal information (e.g.health, career plans), roles and functions, the work environment, context (e.g.community characteristics within which the nurses practise), and the availability andacceptability of practice supports;

� A narrative analysis that provides an opportunity for nurses nation-wide to describetheir experiences in everyday nursing practice.

While these four components of the study are being conducted simultaneously, eachinforms the others, providing supportive linkages in a comprehensive analysis of the natureof nursing practice in rural and remote Canada. The present publication represents theinitial stage of the first component, an empirical analysis of the CIHI Registered NursesDatabase. It has been written to provide a retrospective, statistical framework for theoverall study. At the same time, this publication can be read without reference to theNursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada research project. Anyone interested in thedemographic and workplace profiles of registered nurses in Canada should find the reportuseful.

Additional RNDB analyses and the progress of the overall study may be monitored bylinking to the project�s website at http://ruralnursing.unbc.ca.



HighlightsAs a data summary and as a foundation for the Nursing Practice in Rural and RemoteCanada study, this report no doubt raises more questions than it can possibly answer.Listed below are a number of highlights drawn from the data summaries in this report.Some of the related issues that need to be explored further, by the Nursing Practice inRural and Remote Canada study or other projects, are indicated either explicitly orimplicitly. Unless indicated otherwise, all of the figures included in these highlights arederived from the Registered Nurses Database at CIHI.

Number of Registered Nurses� 41,502 registered nurses are located in rural and small town Canada.

� 17.9% of all RNs employed in nursing in Canada work in rural areas, where 21.7% ofthe Canadian population live.

� As in Canada as a whole, the absolute number of RNs working in rural Canada hasdecreased while the absolute numbers of people living in rural and small town Canadahas increased.

� Are these continuing trends? If so, what impact will this have on the workloads of ruralRNs? Will this lead to even poorer access to health care in rural Canada?

Registered Nurse to Population Ratios� Over the past decade, the decreases in the absolute numbers of RNs accompanied by

the increase in the absolute numbers of Canadians have led to decreases in nurse topopulation ratios in both rural and urban areas of Canada. Currently, the overall nurseto population ratio stands at 75.6 nurses per 10,000 population, down from 82.0 in1992 (see Figure 6).

� The prevailing ratios of 62.3 nurses per 10,000 (rural) population in rural Canada and78.0 nurses per 10,000 (urban) population in urban Canada are not directlycomparable, as they do not take into consideration the differences in nursing servicesprovided in those areas.

� In general there is an east to west trend in nurse to population ratios with the higherratios being found in eastern Canada. What are the factors that are responsible for thistrend? What policies have impacted on nursing staffing patterns and job availability?What role do regional cutbacks and general population shifts play in Canada? How havehealth regions responded to these decreases and trends?

� While nurse to population ratios are useful general descriptors, they fail to recognizethe geographical problems (e.g. distance, isolation) that rural RNs must cope with andthe problems of health care access that rural populations face. These ratios also fail todifferentiate between various practice patterns and the context (e.g. proximity ofphysicians and other health care providers) within which nurses work.



Age� The RN workforce is aging. In less than a decade (1994 to 2000) the average age of

RNs who live in rural and small town Canada has increased from 40.6 to 42.9 years.Currently, the average age of urban nurses is 43.4 years. Are general workforce agingand the relative lower age of rural RNs continuing trends?

� The frequency distribution of age groupings will reveal more dramatic contrastsbetween rural and urban RNs than does the comparison of average ages. Somecommunities have younger, inexperienced nurses whereas others have older nurses.What recruitment and retention implications are reflected in these differing agegrouping distributions? Is sufficient orientation, clinical and continuing educationsupport in place for younger nurses? Have the older nurses received upgrading andcontinuing education to keep up with the latest knowledge and resources? Are youngernurses attracted to the northern rural areas because of the "thrill of the work" andlifestyle? If so, how can southern rural areas build this into their recruitment andretention packages? Overall, what is the impact on the provision of nursing care?

� At the same time, there are almost 100 rural communities in Canada where the averageage of RNs is greater than 50 years. Where are these communities? Are they located inremote areas of Canada or are they in close proximity to other nursing and medicalservice providers? More detailed analyses are required to identify the recruitmentinitiatives that can best be developed for these rural communities.

� Similarly, further analysis will be required to examine the significant number of ruralcommunities where nursing care is provided by a sole RN. In this initial analysis of theRNDB, 22 rural communities in Canada are each served by one RN aged 60 years orolder. Another 93 rural communities are each served by a sole RN aged 50-59 years.At the other end of the age spectrum, 54 rural communities are each served by one RNunder the age of 30.

Gender� Despite the fact that there are more male RNs in the workforce than in the past, fewer

than 5% of all RNs are male (4.4% in rural Canada; 4.8% in urban Canada).

� Demographic and workplace profiles of male and female RNs differ and need to beexamined in more detail. In rural and small town areas, for example, why are 70% ofmale RNs employed full time compared to only 48.7% of female RNs? Do male RNs,like female RNs, return to practise nursing in the rural areas they are from?

� What aspects of rural nursing practice would attract men into nursing?

Education� Increasingly, RNs are entering the profession with a bachelor�s degree in nursing: in

rural Canada, 9.2% in 2000 compared with 6.4% in 1994; in urban Canada, 12.3% in2000 compared with 8.8% in 1994.

� This trend reflects the demand for increased skills and qualifications in the nursingprofession and has already had an impact on nursing education programs (e.g. the



phasing out of diploma programs in some provinces) throughout the country that willcontinue.

� This demand for increased skills and qualifications in the nursing profession can also beseen when examining highest education in nursing statistics and the proportions of RNswho are completing degrees in areas other than nursing. In rural areas of Canada in2000, 18.0% of RNs had attained a bachelor�s degree in nursing as their highesteducation in nursing compared with 12.5% in 1994. The equivalent figures for urbanRNs are 17.6% in 1994 and 23.8% in 2000.

� Initial/entry to practice and highest education in nursing statistics vary widely fromjurisdiction to jurisdiction. The reasons for these regional variations have yet to beexamined.

� The lower numbers of rural RNs who have acquired additional academic qualificationssuggests that new ways of working with rural RNs and their employers need to beexplored to make advanced educational opportunities relevant and accessible.

� There is an apparent contradiction between the expanded role of practice demanded ofRNs in rural areas and the comparatively lower level of their formal education.

Employment� Overall, approximately 85% of RNs provide direct patient care. This general proportion

has not changed since 1994. However, in 2000, 87.1% of rural RNs were engaged indirect patient care compared with 85.1% of urban RNs.

� The majority (53.8%) of rural RNs work in hospitals but increasingly higher proportionsof rural RNs are employed in long-term care and home care compared with RNs in urbanareas of Canada. Will this trend continue, influenced by such factors as populationaging, downsizing, shorter hospital stays, etc.? If so, then workforce planning andeducational programs will be impacted.

� In 2000: 49.6% of RNs in rural and small town Canada who were employed full time(56.1% in urban Canada); 15.8% of RNs in rural areas were employed on a casualbasis (14.9%); and younger RNs, especially in rural Canada, are more likely to beemployed casually and part time. All of these lead to questions in terms of theadequate provision of professional (and personal) support as well as recruitment andretention challenges.

� Although there are variations from province to province, based on the proportions ofRNs by primary area of responsibility and by position, it is apparent that overlappingroles tend to be higher in rural areas of Canada. The implications for role conflict fornurses with multiple responsibilities (e.g. managerial/administrative as well as directpatient care) merit further study, as does their need for organizational and educationsupport. What impact does this have on their ability to work effectively ininterdisciplinary teams and to provide quality care? The numerical information providedby the RNDB cannot address these questions directly but it can, with additionalanalyses, identify some of the statistical background for such analyses.

� Multiple employment (RNs with more than one employer) tends to be higher for males,younger RNs, and RNs located in rural and small town areas of Canada. Are themultiple employers some distance apart from each other? What impact has this on the



provision of quality care or stress? Do these RNs have to juggle knowledge and skillsbetween different institutions with different patterns of working? The Nursing Practicein Rural and Remote Canada study may be able to answer some of these questions.

Provincial Migration Patterns� For Canadian-trained nurses, the majority of RNs practise in the province in which they

were first trained. This is not unexpected, but there are very significant regionalvariations, e.g. out-migration from Saskatchewan is particularly high. Higherproportions of rural RNs, compared with urban colleagues, remain in the province inwhich they were first trained. Rural RN recruitment and retention policies should reflectthis.

� Many factors that might explain these variations should be explored further. Theyinclude: the general migration patterns of Canadians, the influence of spousalmigration, provincial wage differentials, and aggressive recruitment strategies by somejurisdictions.

International Nursing Graduates� International nursing graduates working in rural and small town areas of Canada come

from a very small number of countries, principally the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates.

� Only 5.6% of the foreign-trained RNs in Canada work in rural and small town areas ofthe country compared with 18.7% of Canadian-trained RNs; only 1.9% of rural RNs inCanada are international nursing graduates.

� These numbers likely reflect overall immigrant settlement patterns or trends for Canadaas a whole. If so, recruitment of foreign-trained nurses would probably have littleimpact on the numbers of RNs in rural Canada.



Methodological NotesThe following information, and Appendix A, should be used to ensure a clearunderstanding of the basic concepts that define the data provided in this publication, of theunderlying methodology of data collection, and of key aspects of data quality. Theterminology that is used throughout the remainder of the report is explained here. Anunderstanding of the concepts and terms that have been employed will provide readerswith an appreciation for both the strengths and limitations of the data, especially whendrawing conclusions regarding changes over time.

Target PopulationThe methodological notes are of particular importance in terms of the geographicalmethods and terms used in this publication. The primary goal of this report is to provide asummary of the numbers and characteristics of registered nurses working in rural Canada,supplemented by comparisons with their urban colleagues. In Canada, there is nouniversally accepted definition of rural. On the other hand, the Statistics Canadadesignation of rural and small town Canada, as rural, has been widely adopted fornumerous rural/urban comparisons and we use it here. By rural nurses, therefore, we meanthose living in towns and municipalities outside the commuting zone of larger urbancentres, i.e. outside the commuting zone of centres with a population of 10,000 or more.As defined by Statistics Canada in association with provincial/territorial governments, alarger urban centre is designated as either a Census Metropolitan Area or a CensusAgglomeration Area. The derivation of these terms is described in these notes under theheading RNDB and Census Geography.

In terms of the nurses who are included in the Registered Nurses Database (RNDB), thecurrent report is restricted to the Registered Nurses (RNs) who are employed in nursing. Inthe year 2000 this represented 91.2% of Registered Nurses (RNs) in Canada. The analysisexcludes RNs who, at the time that they registered, were employed in occupations otherthan nursing (1.8%), were unemployed (1.8%), or did not provide their employment status(5.2%).

In summary, the target population for this study is all registered nurses with active-practising registration in a Canadian province/territory who are:

� employed in nursing (on a regular or casual basis)

� reside in rural areas of Canada, identified by Statistics Canada with the term rural andsmall town; with comparisons made with registered nurses who

� reside in urban areas of Canada, identified by Statistics Canada with the terms CensusMetropolitan and Census Agglomeration Areas.

A relatively small number of registered nurses in Canada register in more than oneprovince/territory. In this report RNs are counted only once, with duplicate registrationsremoved using the technique outlined in the methodological notes provided in Appendix A.



Data Sources

Registered Nurses DatabaseThe Registered Nurses Database (RNDB) contains supply and distribution information forregistered nurses in Canada from 1980 to the present and is maintained by the CanadianInstitute for Health Information.

Historically, Statistics Canada was responsible for the collection and dissemination ofregistered nursing data, producing the publication series Revised Registered Nurses DataSeries from 1980 to 1988, and Registered Nurses Management Data from 1989 to 1998.CIHI assumed responsibility for data collection and management in the 1996 data year, andfor dissemination in the 1999 data year. The CIHI publication series is now titled Supplyand Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada. Details on the data collection proceduresfor the RNDB are provided in Appendix A.

In the present report, the focus is on year 2000 RNDB data. As well, RNDB 1994 data areemployed to provide information on overall changes in RN statistics as well as changesspecifically in rural and urban Canada. In addition, limited use is made of RNDB 1998 and1999 data to show some of the changes in overall numbers of RNs in comparison with the1994 and 2000 data. The RNDB variables that have been examined are itemized elsewherein these methodological notes.

External Data SourcesIn addition to the RNDB, two important databases were employed in preparing this report.

Population DataDetailed, annual population estimates for the past decade were acquired from StatisticsCanada in June of 2001. These estimates (for July 1 of the respective years) wereobtained for subprovincial geographical units so that we could generate registered nurse topopulation ratios for both rural and urban areas of Canada. The methods employed byStatistics Canada for computing these estimates can be found in the publication AnnualDemographic Statistics (April, 2001), [See: www.statcan.ca/english/IPS/Data/91-213-XPB.htm].

Digital Cartographic DataThis report contains a series of maps and numerical calculations that are dependent on anumber of digital boundary location files. These files were made available through the DataLiberation Initiative of Statistics Canada. In particular, the digital files that have been usedto produce the paper maps for this report provided boundary locations forprovinces/territories, Census Divisions, and Census Subdivisions of Canada. The lattergeographical units are discussed in greater detail in the section of these methodologicalnotes that deals with RNDB and census geography.



RNDB VariablesEach of the data elements listed here corresponds to a variable field that appears on eachregistered nurse record of the RNDB. Only data elements used in tabulations for Supplyand Distribution of Registered Nurses in Rural and Small Town Canada, 2000 are describedhere. A complete list of the data elements in the 2000 RNDB is available at:

http://www.cihi.ca/Roadmap/RNPD/RNDB/pdf/DictSub2000dec22.pdf

A more recent description may be found in version 2 of Registered Nurses System DataDictionary and Data Submission Specifications available at:

http://www.cihi.ca/Roadmap/RNPD/RNDB/pdf/DataDictSub2001_2.pdf

These documents outline all of the data elements (and their definitions) collected for theRNDB, as well as the file specifications sent to the provincial/territorial regulatingauthorities for data submission. The information provided below is a moderately abridgedversion of the RNDB variables description that was included in Supply and Distribution ofRegistered Nurses in Canada, 2000 (CIHI, 2001).

Data YearRNs register in the present year (reference year) to work in the following year (data year).

Province/Territory of RegistrationThe province/territory in which an RN is licensed to practise nursing.

SexValues of Male, Female, and Not Stated are submitted to CIHI. All �Not Stated� values areconverted to Female in the editing process.

Year of BirthFour-digit year of birth.

Actual AgeGenerated from Year of Birth. If Year of Birth is valid then Actual Age = Data Year � Yearof Birth.

Initial/Entry to Nursing EducationBasic education program used to prepare an RN for entry into practice, leading to initialregistration/licensure as an RN. Accepted responses include:

� Diploma in nursing� Bachelor�s degree in nursing� Master�s degree in nursing� Not statedAll not stated records are converted to Diploma in nursing status in the editing process.



Province/Country of GraduationProvince/territory/country in which initial/entry nursing education was completed.

Other Education in Nursing�Non-DegreeNursing education of at least 300 hours, other than entry/initial nursing education, whichresulted in a non-degree certificate or diploma. Accepted responses include:

� No� Yes� Not stated

Other Education in Nursing�DegreeHighest degree education achieved in nursing education beyond entry/initial nursingeducation. Accepted responses include:

� Bachelor�s degree in nursing� Master�s degree in nursing� Doctorate in nursing� None� Not stated

Highest Education in NursingGenerated from Entry/Initial Nursing education and Other Nursing Education�Degree.Accepted responses include:

� Diploma in nursing� Bachelor�s degree in nursing� Master�s degree in nursing� Doctorate in nursing

Education in Other Than NursingHighest education achieved in a program/field other than nursing. Accepted responsesinclude:

� Bachelor�s degree� Master�s degree� Doctorate� None� Not stated

Employment StatusCurrent employment in a field or fields directly related to nursing practice: direct care,administration, education, or research. This reflects employment status at the time theregistrant is completing the form or at the time registration comes into effect. Theaccepted responses applicable in this report include:

� Employed in Nursing�Regular BasisReflects an employment schedule that guarantees a fixed number of hours of work perpay period. May be defined by the employer as full-time or part-time, but reflectspermanent employment even though it may be time-limited.



� Employed in Nursing�Casual Basis

Reflects employment that does not guarantee a fixed number of hours of work per payperiod.

Multiple EmploymentCurrently employed as an RN by more than one employer. Accepted responses include:

� No� Yes� Not stated

Full-time/Part-time StatusStatus is self-reported and based on hiring practices of the employer and/or the unioncontract. It is based on primary employer. Accepted responses include:

� Full-time EmploymentEmployed for a fixed number of hours per pay period that equal full-time hours.

� Part-time EmploymentEmployed for a fixed or flexible number of hours per pay period that usually do notequal or exceed full-time hours.

� Not stated

Province/Country of EmploymentProvince/territory or country of primary employment.

Place of WorkPrimary place of employment, based on primary employer. Accepted responses include:

� Hospital (general, maternal, paediatric, psychiatric)� Mental Health Centre� Nursing Stations (outposts or clinics)� Rehabilitation/Convalescent Centre� Nursing Home/Long-Term Care� Home Care Agency� Community Health/Health Centre� Business/Industry/Occupational Health Office� Private Nursing Agency/Private Duty� Self-employed� Physician�s Office/Family Practice Unit� Educational Institution� Association/Government� Other� Not stated



Primary Area of ResponsibilityWithin agency/facility of primary employment, the major focus of activities. Four primarynursing practice area categories are identified: direct care, administration, education, andresearch. Accepted responses include:

Administration� Nursing Service� Nursing Education� Other Administration

Education� Teaching�students� Teaching�employees� Teaching�patients/clients� Other Education

Research� Nursing Research only� Other Research

Direct Care� Medical/Surgical� Psychiatric/Mental Health� Paediatric� Maternal/Newborn� Geriatric/Long-Term Care� Critical Care (Burn)� Community Health� Ambulatory Care� Home Care� Occupational Health� Operating Room/RR� Emergency Room� Several Clinical Areas� Oncology� Rehabilitation� Other Direct Care

Not Stated

PositionCurrent assigned role at primary place of employment as per title/job description. Acceptedresponses include:

� Chief Nursing Officer/Chief Executive Officer� Director/Assistant Director� Manager/Assistant Manager� Clinical Nurse Specialist� Staff Nurse/Community Health Nurse� Instructor/Professor/Educator� Researcher� Consultant� Other� Not stated

Province/Country of ResidenceProvince/territory or country of primary residence.



RNDB and Census GeographyThe fundamental geographic variables that are provided in the RNDB and used extensivelyin the CIHI publication series Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada arethe province/territory of registration, the province/territory/country of employment, and theprovince/territory/country of residence. Currently, there is no rural/urban field in the RNDBand clearly these provincial/territorial/country variables are inadequate for the presentpublication. It would be very useful if a �community of place of work� variable or a postalcode that could be translated into �community of place of work� were part of the RNDB.That is not the case at present. However, the majority of RNs do provide their postal codeof residence when filling in their registration forms. These postal codes can be linked tocensus geographical units and then rural/urban designations applied.

Earlier it was indicated that this report uses the Statistics Canada definition of rural andsmall town Canada for the term �rural� and defines �urban� as areas identified by StatisticsCanada as Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomeration Areas. The constructionor derivation of these terms comes from the following census geographical units and theirhierarchical association (adapted from Statistics Canada, 1997 and 1999b):

Census Subdivision (CSD)Census Subdivisions are made up of groupings of Enumeration Areas, the smalleststandard geographical area for which census data have been reported. CSD is the censusgeographical term that is applied to the municipalities (as determined by provinciallegislation) or their equivalent (for example, Indian reserves, Indian settlements, andunorganized territories). For the 1996 census, 5,984 CSDs were designated. InNewfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and British Columbia, the term also describesgeographic areas that have been created by Statistics Canada in cooperation with theprovinces as equivalents for municipalities for the dissemination of statistical data.

Census Metropolitan Area (CMA)Each of the 25 CMAs in Canada contains a very large urban area (known as the urbancore) plus adjacent urban and rural areas (known as urban and rural fringes) that have ahigh degree of social and economic integration with the urban core. A CMA has an urbancore population of at least 100,000 and includes all neighbouring municipalities (CSDs)where:

� 50% or more of the employed labour force living in the neighbouring CSDs commutesto work in the urban core, or

� 25% or more of the employed labour force working in the neighbouring CSDscommutes to work from the urban core.

Census Agglomeration Area (CA)The 112 CAs in Canada have similar characteristics to CMAs except for the size of theirurban cores which may range from 10,000 to 99,999 people. CAs, like CMAs, have anurban core plus adjacent urban and rural areas (known as urban and rural fringes) that havea high degree of social and economic integration with the urban core. The determination of



the degree of integration of neighbouring CSDs is based on the same commuting flowcriteria outlined for CMAs. In addition to these census definitions, McNiven et al. (2000)provide a detailed discussion of the concept of commuter flows and the rationale behindStatistics Canada�s use of this measure for the delineation of CMAs and CAs.

Rural and Small Town CanadaRural and small town Canada refers to municipalities and towns outside of CMA/CAdesignated areas. By definition, these are locales with significantly lower degrees of socialand economic integration with the urban cores of CMAs and CAs.

While the use of rural and small town may pose difficulties for some analysts, theadvantages are many. The emphasis of this definition of rural is the community ormunicipality (du Plessis et al., 2001) and may therefore be considered to be highlydesirable as a geographical unit of analysis when considering access to or the provision ofhealth-care services. This rural designation has already been used to examine thepossibilities of constructing health indicators for rural Canada (Pitblado and Pong, 1999)and to describe the geographical distribution of Canada�s physicians (Pitblado et al., 1999).As well, while it is recognized that defining rural may be difficult (see, for example: Pongand Pitblado, 2001; or Wootton, 1996), there is a growing body of knowledge (labourforce, population dynamics, etc.) about rural and small town Canada that can be used inconjunction with models of population health in general or with more specialized ruralhealth workforce analyses such as the present publication. Examples (authored or co-authored by R.D. Bollman) of these related studies are listed in the methodologicalreferences section of this report. Many additional analyses are included in the Rural andSmall Town Canada Analysis Bulletin: [See: http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/21-006-XIE/free.htm].



The initial entry point for this study of RNs, in terms of a subprovincial location variable, isthe census subdivision; that is, CIHI translated the postal code of residence into anequivalent CSD of residence for each RN in the RNDB. This CSD, in turn, can be identifiedas a community located either within a CMA/CA (urban) or outside a CMA/CA (rural).Figure 1, based on the census geography for 1996, outlines these two designated areas ofCanada.

Figure 1. Locations of Rural (Rural and Small Town) and Urban (CMA/CA) Areas of Canada,2000

One of the disadvantages of employing this rural and small town designation emergeswhen people unfamiliar with the concepts involved in the derivation of the expression arepresented with a map such as that shown in Figure 1. A number of areas just don�t seem�right� or are anomalous in terms of their own perception of rural. The cause of theirdiscomfort with this designation usually derives from the fact that on a map the boundariesof the rural CSD or groups of CSDs are defined administratively and cover much more landthan one might expect. On closer examination they are in fact properly classified using thedefinitions/designations provided above.

The most extreme example of this is the CA in Alberta known as Wood Buffalo. This CA iseasily identified in Figure 1 as the large area in northern Alberta that borders Saskatchewan

Rural and SmallTown Canada

Census Metropolitan andCensus Agglomeration Areas

Source: Statistics Canada



and the Northwest Territories. An enlargement of that area is illustrated in Figure 2. In thecentral southern area of the CA is a Census Subdivision that Statistics Canada and theprovince of Alberta have agreed to use for statistical reporting purposes. This CSD has thesame name as the CA, Wood Buffalo. But this is for convenience only. The core of theCSD is the municipality of Fort McMurray! Close to 90% (35,213 people in 1996) of thepopulation in the Wood Buffalo CA live in this municipality. As it happens, all 235 RNs inthe year 2000 who are located in the Wood Buffalo CA provided postal codes that wouldlocate them in this municipality and are, therefore, correctly counted in this report asurban.

Other large, rural CAs can be found where the distinctions between rural and urban aremore blurred than is the case for Wood Buffalo. On the whole, however, the StatisticsCanada definition of rural and small town does provide a useful framework for a discussionof the numbers and characteristics of rural RNs in Canada.

In a format such as this publication, it is not feasible to list or even to map numbers orcharacteristics of RNs using CSDs, the major building block of rural and small townCanada. As previously indicated, there were 5,984 CSDs used in the 1996 census, far toomany to display or discuss individually. For mapping purposes, to portray graphically someof the temporal and spatial characteristics of nurse to population ratios, the CensusDivision has been used.

Boundary of Census Division(CD #4816), Wood Buffalo

Wood Buffalo NationalPark (Alberta portion)

Census Agglomeration(CMA/CA #860), Wood Buffalo

Census Subdivision(CSD #4816037), Wood Buffalo:better known as Fort McMurray

Figure 2. Census Geographical Units of the Wood Buffalo Area of Alberta

Source: Statistics Canada



Census Division (CD)The general term applied to areas established by provincial law that are intermediategeographic areas between the municipality (Census Subdivision) and the province level.Grouping CSDs, the 288 Census Divisions of Canada represent counties, regional districts,regional municipalities and other types of provincial legislated areas. In Newfoundland andLabrador, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, provincial law does not provide for theseadministrative geographic areas. Therefore, Census Divisions have been created byStatistics Canada in cooperation with these provinces for the dissemination of statisticaldata. In the Yukon, the census division is equivalent to the entire territory.



ComputationsAll RN counts, percentages, and ratios that are presented in this report are based onregistered nurses employed in nursing.

Nurse to population ratios (the number of RNs per 10,000 population) have been computedusing the following general calculation:

Nurse to population ratios have been computed for combinations of three geographicalunits, three groups of RNs, and three groups of the population:

Geographical Units� For Canada as a whole� By province/territory� By census division

Groups of RNs� All RNs� RNs in CMAs/CAs (urban)� RNs in rural and small town Canada (rural)

Population� Total population� Population in CMAs/CAs (urban)� Population in rural and small town Canada (rural)

For the determination of a provincial nurse to population ratio, the general calculation givenabove might then become, for example:

Or, for a rural nurse to rural population ratio:

Number of RNs Employed in Nursingx 10,000

Population

Number of RNs in Saskatchewanx 10,000

Total Population of Saskatchewan

Number of RNs in rural Saskatchewanx 10,000

Population of rural Saskatchewan



Please note that CIHI regularly revises historical data with population-based calculations,such as �Number of RNs per 10,000 population�, to reflect more accurate populationestimates available from the Demography Division of Statistics Canada. Therefore,historical figures presented in this publication will not necessarily match figures presentedin previous publications, media releases, ad-hoc queries, or special studies.

In addition, the population figures used in this publication are revised from those used byCIHI in the publication Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 2000.Therefore, calculations involving population data will differ between this publication andthe previous CIHI publication.

Privacy, Confidentiality and Data SuppressionThe Privacy Secretariat at CIHI has developed a set of guidelines to safeguard the privacyand confidentiality of data received by CIHI. The document Privacy and Confidentiality ofHealth Information at CIHI: Principles and policies for the protection of health information(1999) may be obtained from the CIHI website (http://wwww.cihi.ca/pdf/priv99.pdf).These policies govern the release of data in publications, media releases, the CIHI website,and through ad hoc requests and special studies.

To ensure the anonymity of individual registered nurses, data tables with cell counts withvalues from 1 to 4 have been replaced by a single asterisk (*). However, presentingaccurate row and column totals necessitates the suppression of a second value as well, toprevent the reader from determining the suppressed value through subtraction. Therefore,in each row and column with only one suppressed value, a second value is suppressed aswell. Generally, the next smallest value is chosen for the second additional suppression.However, if the second value suppressed is greater than 4, it must be replaced by adifferent symbol, a double asterisk (**).

Therefore, single asterisks (*) designate suppressed values from 1 to 4; double asterisks(**) designate suppressed values greater than 4. The following footnotes are included intables where data suppression was necessary:

* Figure too small to be expressed.** Figure suppressed to ensure confidentiality.

The authors of this publication have adopted these CIHI guidelines. It should be noted,however, that in many instances this has limited the number of tables or table cells thatcan be used or presented. This is a characteristic of virtually all research studiesundertaken for rural Canada, especially at subprovincial levels of geography. Rural entailssmall numbers, whether one is counting the number of nurses or physicians, or reportingon the number of individuals with a specific health condition. In this report, the impact ofthese data suppression rules is felt most severely when providing information for theterritories where the numbers of RNs are relatively small. Counts and percentages for theregistered nurses in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut are often combined in thispublication, especially those that involve numbers and characteristics of RNs from earlierRNDB releases.



Precision and AccuracyThroughout this report numbers, percentages, and ratios are rarely rounded off. Forexample, the total number of RNs employed in Canada in 2000 is reported as 232,412(not 232,000 or 232,400). Similarly, 19.6% (not 19% or 20%) of RNs employed inCanada in 2000 fall within the age group 25-34 years. This apparent precision in numericalreporting must be viewed with a degree of caution.

Almost every RNDB variable contains some proportion of �Not Stated� responses. As well,some of the numerical reporting for the RNs in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut arebased on the identification of the RNs in these territories using postal codes rather thanprovince/territory of registration. The methodology for separating RNs in Nunavut from RNsin the Northwest Territories, and the associated undercounting that results, is detailed inthe methodological notes provided in Appendix A.

The separation of RNs into rural and urban categories is based on linking postal codes ofresidence with Census Subdivision of residence. Several methodological issues arise withthis procedure: an RN may not have included a postal code of residence on her/hisregistration form; the postal code may have been written down in error or recorded in errorby the provincial/territorial registrar; or, the postal code to CSD match may have been inerror. All of these will lead to undercounting, of rural as well as urban RNs. In the datatables presented in this report, readers will note that the total number of rural RNs plus thetotal number of urban RNs does not equal the total number of RNs employed in nursing. Inthe year 2000, for example, a rural/urban identification could not be made for 1.3%(3,091) of the RNs in Canada.

An associated methodological issue arises in this analysis that stems from the fact thatprovince of registration, province of employment, and province of residence may not beidentical for an individual RN. However, the majority (95.5% in 2000) of RNs register in,work in, and live in the same province/territory. Or, an RN living in a rural area mayactually work in an urban area, a very common commuting pattern in many areas ofCanada. And, of course, the alternate commuting pattern may also occur where an RNliving in an urban area actually works in rural or small town areas of Canada. At thepresent time these are difficulties that cannot be overcome given the information nowincluded in the RNDB.

In spite of the reservations about precision, it is felt that this report provides an accuratesummary of the numbers and characteristics of the RNs in rural and small town Canada. Ifall of the data limitations identified here and in Appendix A were overcome, the numbers,percentages, and ratios that are presented in this report would change only marginally.



Methodological ReferencesBeshiri, R. and Bollman, R.D. (2001). Population structure and change in predominantlyrural regions. Rural and Small Town Canada Analysis Bulletin 2:1-12.(http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/21-006-XIE/free.htm).

Bollman, R.D., ed. (1992). Rural and Small Town Canada. Toronto: Thompson EducationalPublishing, Inc.

Bollman, R.D. and Biggs, B. (1992). Rural and small town Canada: an overview. pp. 3-44,in Bollman, R.D., ed. (1992). Rural and Small Town Canada. Toronto: ThompsonEducational Publishing, Inc.

CIHI. (1999). Registered Nurses System Data Dictionary and Data SubmissionSpecifications. Version 1 (For use with 2000 submission). Ottawa: Canadian Institute forHealth Information. Version 2 (For use with 2001 submission) is also available.(http://www.cihi.ca/Roadmap/RNPD/RNDB/pdf/DictSub2000dec22.pdf).(http://www.cihi.ca/Roadmap/RNPD/RNDB/pdf/DataDictSub2001_2.pdf).

CIHI. (2000). Health Personnel in Canada, 1988 to 1997. Ottawa: Canadian Institute forHealth Information.

CIHI. (2000). Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 1999. Ottawa:Canadian Institute for Health Information.

CIHI. (2001). Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 2000. Ottawa:Canadian Institute for Health Information.

Du Plessis, V., Beshiri, R., Bollman, R.D., and Clemenson, H. (2001). Definitions of rural.Rural and Small Town Canada Analysis Bulletin 3:1-16.(http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/21-006-XIE/free.htm).

Health Canada (1995). Health Personnel in Canada, 1992. Ottawa, Ontario: Supply andServices Canada.

Mendelson, R. and Bollman, R.D. (1998). Rural and small town population is growing in the1990s. Rural and Small Town Canada Analysis Bulletin 1:1-9.(http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/21-006-XIE/free.htm).

Pitblado, J.R. and Pong, R.W. (1999). Geographic Distribution of Physicians in Canada.Report prepared for Health Canada. Sudbury, Ontario: Centre for Rural and Northern HealthResearch, Laurentian University.(See online CRaNHR reports at: http://www.laurentian.ca/cranhr/rep_on.htm)

Pitblado, J.R., Pong, R.W., Irvine, A., Nagarajan, K.V., Sahai, V., Zelmer, J., Dunikowski,L., and Pearson, D.A. (1999). Assessing Rural Health: Toward Developing Health



Indicators for Rural Canada. Report prepared for Health Canada. Sudbury, Ontario: Centrefor Rural and Northern Health Research, Laurentian University.(See online CRaNHR reports at: http://www.laurentian.ca/cranhr/rep_on.htm)

Pong, R.W. and Pitblado, J.R. (2001). Don�t take �geography� for granted! Somemethodological issues in measuring geographic distribution of physicians. Canadian Journalof Rural Medicine 6:103-112. (The online edition of the Canadian Journal of Rural Medicinecan be reached through the publications section of the Canadian Medical Associationwebsite: http://www.cma.ca).

Research Sub-Committee of the Interdepartmental Committee on Rural and Remote Canada(1995). Rural Canada: A Profile. LM-347-02-95E. Ottawa: Government of Canada.

Statistics Canada. (1997). GeoRef User�s Guide: 1996 Census - Reference Products.Catalogue No. 92F0085XCB. Ottawa: Minister of Industry.

Statistics Canada. (1999a). Registered Nurses Management Data, 1998. Catalogue No.83F0005XPB. Ottawa: Health Statistics Division, Statistics Canada.

Statistics Canada. (1999b). 1996 Census Dictionary. Catalogue No. 92-351. Ottawa:Statistics Canada.

Statistics Canada. (2001). Annual Demographic Statistics. Catalogue No. 91-213-XPB.Ottawa: Minister of Industry.(http://www.statcan.ca/english/IPS/Data/91-213-XPB.htm)

Wootton, John (1996). What�s in a definition? Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine 1:55-56. (The online edition of the Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine can be reached throughthe publications section of the Canadian Medical Association website:http://www.cma.ca).



Descriptive Analysis

Number of Registered NursesIn the year 2000, there were 41,502 RNs located in rural and small town Canada. Thisfigure is marginally lower than in the previous year and only 1.9% lower than the 42,303RNs located in rural and small town Canada in 1994. In Canada as a whole and in theCensus Metropolitan and Census Agglomeration Areas, or urban areas of Canada, thechanges are similar. While there was a slight increase in the total number of RNs employedin nursing from 1999 to 2000, 1994-2000 comparisons indicate marginal declines in boththe overall total numbers of RNs and the numbers of RNs in urban areas. The stability ofthese numbers is illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3 also indicates that the relative proportions of rural and urban RNs have notchanged significantly throughout this same time period. In 1994, RNs in rural and smalltown Canada made up 18.0% of the total number of RNs employed in nursing; this figuredecreased only slightly to 17.9% in 2000.

The marginal differencesdescribed above for Canadaas a whole are not echoed inan identical manner whenprovincial/territorial numbersare examined (Table 1).

In Newfoundland andLabrador, for example, thenumber of RNs in rural andsmall town areas increased by10.1% from 1994 to 2000,while the number of RNs inurban areas decreased by0.5%.

Over this same time period,decreases in the absolutenumbers of RNs occurred inQuébec in both rural (3.46%)and urban (5.32%) areas.

In Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, decreases in the number of RNs were experiencedin rural areas but increases occurred in urban areas. The number of RNs in urban BritishColumbia in 2000 is virtually identical to the number in 1999, but there has been anincrease of 1.02% in rural and small town areas.

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

1994 1998 1999 2000

Num

ber of

RN

s

Urban Rural UnknownSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 3. Numbers of RNs Employed in Nursing inCanada for Selected Years: 1994, 1998,1999, and 2000



The percentage differences that areshown in Table 1 for New Brunswick andthe territories must be treated withcaution.

From 1995 to 1999, data from NewBrunswick erroneously included non-practising registrants; the 2000 datapresented here includes only active-practising RNs. With respect to theterritories, large percentage changes maybe due solely to the comparatively smallworkforces there. As well, the number ofRNs working in Nunavut is systematicallyundercounted. Please refer to the NunavutData section of the methodological notesprovided in Appendix A.

The relative proportions of rural and urbannurses vary widely among the provincesand territories. These differences areillustrated in Figure 4. Among theprovinces, the proportions of rural RNsrange from a low of 11.4% in BritishColumbia to a high of 36.0% in PrinceEdward Island. As there are no CMAs/CAsin Nunavut, all RNs are classified as beinglocated in rural and small town areas.

Table 1. Percent Change in the Numbers ofRNs by Rural/Urban Location,Province/Territory of Registration,and Canada, 1994 to 2000

Rural Urban All RNs

Nfld. +10.10 -0.50 +4.17P.E.I. +15.90 +7.12 +8.00N.S. +0.27 -7.13 -5.00N.B. -14.38 -11.06 -3.07Qué. -3.46 -5.32 -4.03Ont. -2.32 +0.22 +0.46Man. -1.46 -0.39 -0.32Sask. -0.04 +0.87 +0.61Alta. -1.01 +1.84 +1.43B.C. +1.02 0.00 +0.56Y.T. +2.22 +22.22 +16.75

N.W.T. +73.26 -17.25 +3.09Nun. -31.34 n/a -31.34

Canada -1.89 -1.64 -0.85Source: RNDB/CIHI

Notes:CIHI data will differ from provincial/territorial data due to theCIHI collection period, the removal of interprovincialduplicates, and provincial/territorial data cleaning at year-end.British Columbia, Alberta and Manitoba data prior to 1999,and New Brunswick data from 1995-1999 erroneouslyinclude non-practising registrations, and are subject to futurerevision.Please review the CIHI RNDB 2000 methodological notescontained in Appendix A for more comprehensiveinformation regarding data collection and processing, dataaccuracy, and data comparability.



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Per

cent

age

of

RN

s

Urban Rural UnknownSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 4. Proportions of Rural and Urban RNs by Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000

The provincial/territorial proportions of rural and urban RNs presented in Figure 4 might beexpected to be comparable to the relative proportions of the general populations in therespective rural/urban areas in each province/territory. In fact, a quick visual inspectioncomparing Figure 4 with Figure 5 might lead one to think that the patterns are indeedsimilar.

Certainly that wouldbe the case if onefocused on Ontariowhere, in 2000,14.5% of all RNs inthe province and14.5% of the totalpopulation werelocated in rural andsmall town areas.The similarity endsthere.

In every otherprovince andterritory other thanNunavut, theproportion of thepopulation who arelocated in rural andsmall town areasexceeds that of theRNs there.

Taking just oneprovince as anexample, inManitoba in 2000,33.9% of the totalpopulation waslocated in rural andsmall town areaswhere theequivalentproportion of RNswas 24.8%.

These relationships between the numbers of RNs and the numbers of the generalpopulation are explored in greater detail in the next section of this report.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

Pop

ula

tion

Urban RuralSource: Statistics Canada

Figure 5. Proportions of Rural and Urban Populations byProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000



Number of RNs per 10,000 PopulationThere has been relatively little change in the total number of RNs employed in nursing inCanada for the past decade or so. As indicated in the previous section, there was adecrease of 1.9% in the total number of RNs in rural and small town Canada from 1994 to2000. Similarly, there was a decrease of 0.8% in the total number of RNs. During thissame period of time (1994 to 2000) the total number of Canadians increased: in Canada asa whole the increase was 5.9% while in rural and urban Canada the increases were 2.8%and 6.7%, respectively. This combination of decreasing numbers of RNs serving anincreasing overall population has resulted in the decreases in the number of RNs per10,000 population that are shown in Figure 6. From 1988 to 1992 the ratio rose from77.8 to 82.0 RNs per 10,000 population. Then throughout the remainder of the 1990s,the ratio declined to 74.9 RNs per 10,000 population in 1999, with a slight rise to 75.6 in2000.

Changes in these ratios of less than 2 RNs per 10,000 population from one year to thenext may appear to be relatively small. They are not small, however, in terms of theabsolute numbers of the overall population and the RN workforce. For example, from 1998to 1999, the number of RNs per 10,000 population fell from 75.3 to 74.9, a difference of0.4 RNs per 10,000 population. That represents a decrease of 799 RNs from 1998 to1999 at a time when the total population of Canada increased by 245,484 people.

These nurse topopulation ratios atthe national levelmask the considerablevariation in thenumbers of RNs perpopulation that areseen at the provincialand territorial levels.

The latter, in turn,mask even moresignificant regionalvariations when theratios are computedfor smallergeographical units.

For this report, the smallest geographical unit that has been employed for this purpose isthe census division. Smaller geographical units would show even greater variations.

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

86

88

90

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

RN

s pe

r 10,0

00 P

opul

atio

n

Source: Statistics Canada and RNDB/CIHI

Please note the scale used in this figure

Figure 6. Registered Nurse to Population Ratios (for all RNs),Canada, 1988-2000



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

RN

s per

10,0

00 P

opula

tion

1994 2000Source: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 7. Registered Nurse to Population Ratios (for RNs Employed inNursing) by Province/Territory of Registration, Canada,1994 and 2000

It is recognized, however, that the computation of provincial/territorial and subprovincialnurse to population ratios may lead to problems of interpretation. The entire range ofnursing services and medical requirements of the population would not be expected to beavailable or identical in every jurisdiction or geographical unit examined.

In order to make these provincial/territorial and subprovincial ratios as comparable aspossible, sets of ratios have been computed as outlined in the methodological notes. Inthese sets of ratios the following comparisons are made: total numbers of RNs arecompared to the total population in a geographical unit; numbers of urban RNs arecompared to the urban population in a geographical unit; and numbers of rural RNs arecompared to the rural population in a geographical unit.

Figures 7 to 9 illustrate the application of these ratios for provinces/territories and forCanada as a whole. These three figures also provide comparisons of the ratios for theyears 1994 and 2000.

As shown, provincial/territorial numbers of RNs per 10,000 population can differ verysignificantly from the nurse to population ratios computed for the nation as a whole. Aswell, the 1994 to 2000 changes in the ratios vary in magnitude.

However, one of the most striking elements of all three of these figures is the downwardtrend in the numbers for the majority of provinces/ territories:

� When comparing 1994 and 2000 total numbers of RNs with the total population byprovince/territory (Figure 7): there was little change in the nurse to population ratio forthe Northwest Territories; the ratio increased over this time period for Newfoundlandand Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and the Yukon; all other provinces/territoriesexperienced a decrease in the number of RNs per population;



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Can

ada

RN

s per

10,0

00 P

opula

tion


Figure 8. Registered Nurse to Population Ratios for Urban RNs byProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and2000

� When comparing 1994 and 2000 numbers of urban RNs with the urban population ofthe provinces/territories (Figure 8): again, the ratio increased for Newfoundland andLabrador, Prince Edward Island, and the Yukon; all other jurisdictions experienced adecrease;

� When comparing 1994 and 2000 numbers of rural RNs with the rural population of theprovinces/territories (Figure 9): once again, the ratio increased for Newfoundland andLabrador and Prince Edward Island, as well as in the Northwest Territories; Nova Scotiaalso experienced a slight increase; all other provinces and territories saw the number ofRNs per population decrease.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

RN

s per

10,0

00 P

opula

tion


Figure 9. Registered Nurse to Population Ratios for Rural RNs byProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and2000



The wide variations in nurse to population ratios computed using Census Divisions as thegeographical unit of analysis are graphically portrayed in Figures 10 and 11. For Figure 10,nurse to population ratios for each Census Division were computed using the total numberof RNs and the total population in the year 2000. Figure 11 ratios are also derived fromyear 2000 data but the ratios were computed using the number of rural RNs and the ruralpopulation for each of the CDs mapped. In the latter map, areas outside of rural and smalltown Canada were excluded from the computations and were left blank on the map.

Two additional maps show the 1994 to 2000 differences in the overall nurse to populationratios (Figure 12) and the rural nurse to rural population ratios (Figure 13) by CensusDivision. Enlargements for all of these maps are included in Appendix E, each showingmore detail for either eastern or western Canada. Colour versions of these maps are alsoavailable at the following website: http://ruralnursing.unbc.ca.


RNs per 10,000 Population< 40

40 - 6060 - 8080 - 100

100 +

Total Number of RNsper 10,000 Population

by Census Division, Canada2000

Sources: RNDB/CIHI and Statistics Canada

Figure 10. Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Census Division, Canada, 2000


RNs per 10,000 Population< 3030 - 5050 - 7070 - 9090 +

Number of Rural RNsper 10,000 Rural Populationby Census Division, Canada

2000

Census Metropolitan/Census Agglomeration AreasSources: RNDB/CIHI and Statistics Canada

Figure 11. Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Population by Census Division, Canada, 2000


% Change5+ % IncreaseLittle Change5+ % Decrease


Changes in Nurse toPopulation Ratios for All RNsby Census Division, Canada

1994 to 2000

Figure 12. Changes in nurse to population ratios for all RNs by Census Division, Canada, 1994 to 2000



Changes in Nurse toPopulation Ratios for rural RNs

by Census Division, Canada1994 to 2000


Census Metropolitan/Census Agglomeration Areas

Figure 13. Changes in nurse to population ratios for rural RNs by Census Division, Canada, 1994 to 2000



The provincial/territorial and Census Division nurse to population ratios that have beenillustrated show both complex spatial and temporal patterns. Even so, Figures 7 to 9 andFigures 10 to 13 complement each other in illustrating a general east to west trend in thenumbers of RNs per population in Canada.

� Total number of RNs per total population by CD in the year 2000 (Figure 10): a largerproportion of the CDs in eastern Canada are displayed using the mapping classes of 80-100 and 100+ RNs per 10,000 population; as one moves into Québec and Ontario anincreasingly higher proportion of the CDs are displayed using the 60-80 and 80-100mapping classes; and as one continues westward the majority of CDs are mapped withratios that fall within the 40-60 and 60-80 range;

� A similar, but perhaps less distinct east to west pattern exists for the ratios relating thenumber of rural RNs to the rural populations of the Census Divisions (Figure 11): themajority of the CDs in eastern Canada are displayed using mapping classes 50-70 and70-90 rural RNs per 10,000 rural population whereas the majority of the CDs in Albertaand British Columbia are mapped as having rural nurse to rural population ratios of 30-50 and 50-70; in the central portion of the country from Québec to Saskatchewan thetrends are less distinct as CDs in these provinces span the entire range of mappingclasses but are found most frequently with ratios in the range of 50-70 rural RNs per10,000 population;

� When 1994 and 2000 ratios are compared, the temporal patterns for both total (Figure12) and rural (Figure 13) RNs generally match those of the separate spatial patternsdescribed above: in both total and rural nurse to population ratios, higher proportions ofCDs in eastern Canada have ratios that have increased over this time period; in much ofcentral Canada the ratios have either changed little or decreased; and in both Albertaand British Columbia, by far the majority of CDs have experienced RN to populationratios that have decreased.



Nurse to population ratio changes in any given geographical area, of course, are the resultof changes in the number of nurses and/or the size of the population in that area.Explaining all of the ratio changes that are seen in the illustrations provided in this sectionis beyond the scope of this publication. However, Tables 2 and 3 are provided to illustratethe complexity of the changing nurse to population ratios that Canada is experiencing.

Table 2. Numbers of Census Divisions by Changes in Total Population Compared with Changesin Total Numbers of RNs, Canada, 1994 to 2000

Decrease Little Change Increase

Decrease (-5.0% or more) 10 14 3 27Little Change 76 82 23 181Increase (+5.0% or more) 13 31 36 80

Column Totals 99 127 62 288Sources: Statistics Canada and RNDB/CIHI

Change Categories for Total Numbers of RNsChange Categories for Total Population Row Totals

Table 3. Numbers of Census Divisions by Changes in Rural Population Compared with Changesin the Numbers of Rural RNs, Canada, 1994 to 2000

Decrease Little Change Increase Row Totals

Decrease (-5.0% or more) 14 10 9 33Little Change 64 52 39 155Increase (+5.0% or more) 23 20 30 73

Column Totals 101 82 78 261Sources: Statistics Canada and RNDB/CIHI

Change Categories for Numbers of Rural RNsChange Categories for Rural Population



Demographic Characteristics

AgeA dramatic shift in the age of the RN workforce is occurring in Canada. In the relativelyshort period from 1994 to 2000, the average age of RNs in rural and small town Canadaincreased by 2.3 years from 40.6 years to 42.9 years. Although lesser in magnitude, thissame pattern can be observed for nurses in more urbanized areas of Canada, where therehas been an increase in average age of 1.8 years, from 41.6 years in 1994 to 43.4 yearsin 2000. The overall increase in the average age of all RNs in Canada during this period oftime is 1.9 years.

Table 4 illustrates these overall changes and also shows that the average age of RNs hasincreased in all locations (rural/urban) and in all provinces/territories. For RNs in rural andsmall town Canada, the province/territory with the smallest increase in average age is NewBrunswick, but even that change is substantial (+1.9 years). The largest change inaverage age has occurred with the rural RNs in the Yukon. However, the increase of 4.1years in the Yukon should be treated cautiously because of the relatively small number ofnurses used to compute that difference.

Although the differences in average age over the period from 1994 to 2000 are generallyhigher in rural areas than in the more urbanized portions of the country, rural RNs are onaverage younger than their urban counterparts. Today (RNDB 2000), that difference isrelatively small; the average age of rural nurses is 42.9 years compared with 43.4 yearsfor urban nurses. Table 4 provides this comparison but, perhaps more significantly, showsthat the gap in the average ages of rural versus urban nurses is narrowing. In Canada, thedifference was 1.0 year in 1994 compared with 0.5 years in 2000.

Table 4. Average Age (in years) of RNs by Rural/Urban Location and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 1994 and 2000

Urban Rural All RNs Rural-Urban Urban Rural All RNs Rural-Urban Urban Rural All RNs

Nfld. 38.38 35.99 37.66 -2.39 40.24 38.80 39.78 -1.44 1.86 2.81 2.12P.E.I. 41.50 40.09 40.99 -1.41 44.16 42.48 43.55 -1.68 2.66 2.39 2.56N.S. 39.96 40.96 40.24 1.00 42.67 43.41 42.89 0.74 2.71 2.45 2.65N.B. 40.04 39.26 39.78 -0.78 42.42 41.16 42.00 -1.26 2.38 1.90 2.22Qué. 41.16 39.07 40.81 -2.09 42.42 41.37 42.24 -1.05 1.26 2.30 1.43Ont. 42.36 41.56 42.24 -0.80 44.31 43.72 44.22 -0.59 1.95 2.16 1.98Man. 40.65 40.55 40.62 -0.10 43.19 43.42 43.25 0.23 2.54 2.87 2.63Sask. 41.45 41.78 41.55 0.33 43.32 44.21 43.60 0.89 1.87 2.43 2.05Alta. 41.51 41.45 41.50 -0.06 43.30 43.92 43.42 0.62 1.79 2.47 1.92B.C. 42.34 43.20 42.44 0.86 44.27 45.57 44.42 1.30 1.93 2.37 1.98Y.T. 41.38 39.79 41.03 -1.59 43.37 43.98 43.49 0.61 1.99 4.19 2.46

N.W.T./Nun. 39.49 39.40 39.44 -0.09 40.98 43.11 42.01 2.13 1.49 3.71 2.57

Canada 41.64 40.62 41.46 -1.02 43.47 42.97 43.38 -0.50 1.83 2.35 1.92Source: RNDB/CIHI

Differences (in years)2000 - 1994

1994 2000

Notes:RNs not stating Year of Birth are excluded from average age calculations. In 2000, 37 RNs did not state theiryear of birth.Please review the methodological notes for more comprehensive information regarding data collection andprocessing, data accuracy, and data comparability.



As well, in 1994, rural nurses in nine provinces/territories were on average younger thanurban nurses; this was reduced to five provinces in 2000, with the average age of ruralnurses higher than that of urban nurses in seven provinces/territories.

Some of these differences in average ages can be accounted for, numerically, byexamining the age group distributions of RNs in Figures 14 and 15. In the first of thesefigures (Figure 14), the age group distributions are shown for nurses in rural and smalltown Canada in 1994 and 2000.

As illustrated, theproportions of ruralnurses in the agecategories 40-44 yearsand less have decreasedwhile the proportions ofrural nurses haveincreased in the higherage groupings.

Figure 15, on the otherhand, compares year2000 nurses in terms ofthe two settings that arethe focus of this report,rural and urban.

In the younger age categories (from 45-49 years and lower), the proportions are higher forrural nurses compared with their urban counterparts. Conversely, in the last four agegroupings (from 50-54 to 65+ years), the proportions of urban nurses are higher.

The result of this agedistribution accounts forthe fact that, onaverage, rural nurses areyounger than RNsworking in the moreurbanized regions ofCanada.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

<25 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65+

Age Group

Per

centa

ge

of

Rura

l RN

s


Figure 14. Age Distribution of Rural RNs, Canada, 1994 and2000

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

<25 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65+

Age Group

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s

Rural Urban All RNsSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 15. Age Distributions of Rural RNs, Urban RNs and AllRNs, Canada, 2000



When dealing with nurse to population ratios, it was argued that national or provincial andterritorial ratios often mask the wide variations in that relationship when smallergeographical units (e.g. Census Divisions) are examined. The same case can be made formost other RNDB variables.

In terms of average ages, community-level (Census Subdivision) computations have beenundertaken with the initial results summarized in Table 5. For communities with 5 or moreRNs, the average age of RNs is between 40 and 49 years for 74.8% of rural communitiesand 81.9% of urban communities.

Consistent with the earlierdiscussion in this section, ahigher proportion of ruralcommunities (23.1%) arefound in the younger averageage groupings (RNs whoseaverage age is below 40 years)compared with urbancommunities (16.7%).

On the other hand, ruralcommunities, not just urbancommunities, can also befound where the average ageof their RNs is 50 or moreyears.

A quick look at the frequencydistribution of communitieswhere there is only 1 RN(Table 6) can be veryinstructive.

Because of the small numbers,the percentage values for theurban communities are notvery useful. More importantly,this table indicates that eachof a small number (6) of urbancommunities and a fairly largenumber (22) of ruralcommunities are served byonly one RN who is 60 yearsof age or more.

Table 5. Frequency Distribution of Canadian Rural andUrban Communities by Average Age Groupingsfor Communities with 5 or more RNs, Canada,2000

Average AgeCategories Count Percent Count Percent

<30 2 0.1 0 0.030-39 406 23.1 130 16.740-49 1,318 74.8 637 81.950-59 35 2.0 11 1.4

Total 1761 100.0 778 100.0Source: RNDB 2000/CIHI

Rural Communities Urban Communities

Note:Please review the methodological notes for a full definition of theterms �rural� and �urban� as used in this analysis.

Table 6. Frequency Distribution of Canadian Rural andUrban Communities by Age Groupings forCommunities with Only 1 RN, Canada, 2000

AgeCategories Count Percent Count Percent

<30 54 0.1 2 6.930-39 103 23.1 10 34.540-49 127 74.8 5 17.250-59 93 2.0 6 20.760+ 22 5.5 6 20.7

Total 399 100.0 29 100.0Source: RNDB 2000/CIHI

Rural Communities Urban Communities

Note:Please review the methodological notes for a full definition of theterms �rural� and �urban� as used in this analysis.



As well, a sole RN who is in her/his 50s provides nursing services in each of 93 ruralcommunities in Canada. At the other end of the age spectrum, 54 rural communities inCanada are each served by one RN under the age of 30. As yet, the locations andadditional demographic and workplace characteristics of these nurses in sole-RNcommunities have not been examined.

GenderLess than 5% of the RNs in Canada are male. However, the number of male nurses hassteadily increased from 9,054 (3.9%) in 1994 to 11,046 (4.8%) in 2000. For the mostpart, proportional as well as absolute increases in the number of male RNs has beenexperienced in every jurisdiction across Canada (see Figures 16 and 17) and in both ruraland urban areas of the country.

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T./N

un.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

Urb

an R

Ns


Figure 16. Proportions of Male RNs in Urban Areas of Canada,1994 and 2000

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T./N

un.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

Rura

l R

Ns


Figure 17. Proportions of Male RNs in Rural Areas of Canada,1994 and 2000



Figures 16 and 17 also indicate that, on the whole, the largest proportional increases innumbers of male RNs have occurred in urban areas. In Newfoundland and Labrador, forexample, the proportion of male RNs in rural and small town areas rose from 2.8% in 1994to 3.4% in 2000. Over the same period of time, the proportion of male RNs in urban areasof Newfoundland and Labrador rose from 2.3% to 3.9%.

Similar patterns are observed for the remaining provinces and territories with the exceptionof the Northwest Territories/Nunavut and Québec. There was a decrease in the proportionof male RNs in the rural areas of these jurisdictions, from 8.2% to 7.5% and from 9.8% to9.5% in the Northwest Territories/Nunavut and Québec, respectively.

Another way to look at the gender distribution of Canada�s RNs is to examine theproportions of male and female RNs working in rural and small town Canada. In 2000, only16.7% of the male RNs in Canada were located in rural and small town areas; thecomparable figure for female RNs was 18.2%.

This higher proportion offemale RNs in rural andsmall town locationsholds true in mostprovinces and territories;the NorthwestTerritories/Nunavut,Yukon and Québec arethe exceptions.

In the territories thedifferences are very small.For the NorthwestTerritories/Nunavut thereis an almost 50-50 splitwith 50.0% of male and48.1% of female RNswho are located in areasthat would be designatedas rural and small town.

Comparable figures for the Yukon in the year 2000 were 20.0% and 19.7% for male andfemale RNs, respectively. In Québec, the proportions are lower but the difference in themale-female percentages is slightly greater. In 2000, 18.5% of male RNs in Québec werelocated in rural and small town areas of the province while only 16.8% of female RNscould be found in these locales.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T./N

un.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s

Males FemalesSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 18. Proportions of RNs Located in Rural and Small TownCanada by Gender and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000



Education Characteristics

Initial/Entry to Practice EducationMost RNs begin their career after the completion of a diploma program in nursing.However, the demand for increased skills and qualifications, experienced in virtually everyprofession, is being felt by registered nurses across Canada. The impact on initial/entry topractice education can be seen in Figure 19, constructed using current (2000) RNs whoare in active practice. That illustration identifies the proportions of RNs who, grouped bydecade of graduation, entered the profession with a bachelor�s degree in nursing. Fewerthan 5% of the RNs who graduated before 1970 and fewer than 10% of the RNs whograduated during the 1970s entered the nursing profession with a bachelor�s degree.

The 1990s have seen asubstantial increase in thenumbers of RNs enteringpractice with a bachelor�sdegree. Between 1994and 2000, for example,the proportion of RNsentering the nursingworkforce with abachelor�s degree innursing increased from8.4% to 11.8%.

Some differences betweenrural and urban RNs interms of initial/entry topractice education can beseen in Figure 20.

While the proportion of urban RNs withbachelor�s degrees entering practice rosefrom 8.8% in 1994 to 12.3% by 2000,the change for rural RNs was from 6.4%to 9.2% over this same time period. Still,these increases will continue as thenumber of diploma programs across thecountry decreases. Diploma programswere phased out in 1994 in PrinceEdward Island and in 1995 in NewBrunswick and it is expected that morediploma programs elsewhere will followsuit in the coming years.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Pre-1950 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990+

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s


Figure 19. Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor's Degree asInitial/Entry to Practice Education by Rural/UrbanLocation and Decade of Graduation, Canada, 2000

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

Rural 1994 Rural 2000 Urban 1994 Urban 2000

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 20. Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor'sDegree as Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation by Rural/Urban Location,Canada, 1994 and 2000



0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Perc

enta

ge o

f R

Ns


Figure 21. Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor's Degree as Initial/Entry to PracticeEducation by Rural/Urban Location and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000

Figure 21 gives a summary of initial/entry to practice education for the year 2000 byplotting the proportions of RNs entering the workforce in each province/territory who had abachelor�s degree in nursing.

The lowest values are found in Québec, where the proportions of rural and urban RNs witha nursing degree on entry to practice were 3.8% and 7.3%, respectively.

The highest values are found in the Yukon, where 21.9% of all RNs entered practice witha bachelor�s degree. The equivalent rural and urban proportions in the Yukon were 23.9%and 21.4%, respectively. Less than 1% (74 nurses) of all RNs in all of Canada enteredpractice with a master�s degree.



Table 7. Percentage of Rural RNs with a Bachelor's Degree asInitial/Entry to Practice Education by Age Group andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000

<25 25-35 35-45 45-54 55+ Total

Nfld. 17.2 40.5 31.0 10.8 0.4 100.0P.E.I. 7.0 56.1 21.1 15.8 - 100.0N.S. 6.8 42.4 25.8 22.0 3.1 100.0N.B. 6.1 43.7 29.8 18.9 1.5 100.0Qué. 4.3 36.3 36.3 22.0 1.1 100.0Ont. 0.9 37.8 36.9 21.4 3.0 100.0Man. 3.3 37.2 33.1 23.4 2.9 100.0Sask. 4.5 33.2 27.9 27.9 6.5 100.0Alta. 4.0 45.8 25.9 20.1 4.2 100.0B.C. 3.7 24.1 34.1 27.9 10.2 100.0Y.T. - 18.2 72.7 9.1 - 100.0

N.W.T. 7.7 61.5 15.4 7.7 7.7 100.0Nun. - 23.5 52.9 17.6 5.9 100.0

Canada 4.6 38.8 31.7 21.4 3.5 100.0Source: RNDB/CIHI

Age Group (years)

Notes:Please review the methodological notes for a full definition of the term �rural�as used in this analysis.CIHI data will differ from provincial/territorial data due to the CIHI collectionperiod, the removal of interprovincial duplicates, and provincial/territorial datacleaning at year-end. Please review the methodological notes for morecomplete information.

As one would expect from the materials presented above, the highest proportions of RNswho entered the profession with a bachelor�s degree will be found within the younger agecategories of nurses. This is illustrated in Figure 22, which indicates that 25.8% of all RNsin the <25 years age category had a bachelor�s degree on entry to practice.

In this age category, therural and urbanproportions were 22.6%and 26.3%, respectively.Very similar proportions,only slightly lower, arefound in the 25-34 yearsage category. A moredetailed view of the ageand entry to practiceeducation patterns can beseen for rural RNs inTable 7.

In year 2000, 43.4%(1,664 RNs) of the ruralRNs who enteredpractice with abachelor�s degree wereunder the age of 35while only 19.2%(7,239 RNs) enteringpractice with a diplomawere under 35.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

<25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+

Age Group

Perc

enta

ge o

f RN

s


Figure 22. Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor�s Degree asInitial/Entry to Practice Education by Rural/UrbanLocation and Age Group, Canada, 2000



Age Upon GraduationOf the 230,475 RNs who provided information for the 2000 RNDB about their date ofgraduation with either a diploma or degree, 68 had graduated prior to 1950. In rural andsmall town Canada, 47.6% of RNs graduated prior to 1980 compared with 47.9% ofurban RNs. Almost one quarter of all RNs registered in 2000 graduated in the 1990s(24.3% in rural and 23.9% in urban Canada).

Examining information that combines year of graduation with year of birth suggests thatRNs today are beginning their nursing careers later in life than in the past. The overallaverage age upon graduation with initial/entry to practice education has shifted from 21.7years in the 1950s to 26.7 years in the 1990s (Table 8). Differences between rural andurban RNs are very small. Given the preponderance of RNs who graduated with a diploma,this shift cannot be explained by the recent increase in RNs who enter practice with abachelor�s degree. In fact, it is diploma graduates whose average age has increased themost, from 21.7 years in the 1950s to 27.1 years in the 1990s.

Highest Education in NursingThe numbers of RNs in Canada who are upgrading their academic nursing qualifications areincreasing but there is a substantial differential between rural and urban RNs. Of the ruralRNs who registered in 2000 and indicated that their initial/entry to practice education wasa nursing diploma, 10.3% subsequently obtained a bachelor�s degree (3,726), master�sdegree (144), or doctorate (6) in nursing. By comparison, 15.2% of urban diploma RNs hadupgraded their academic qualifications to a bachelor�s degree (23,064), master�s degree(1,899), or doctorate (81) in nursing. Smaller proportions of RNs with bachelor�s degreesas initial/entry to practice education upgraded to postgraduate degrees. In rural and smalltown Canada, 112 (2.9%) of these RNs obtained a master�s degree or doctorate in nursingwhile 1,457 (6.3%) urban RNs were able to attain advanced nursing degrees.

Table 8. Number and Average Age (in years) of RN graduates by Program Type and Decade ofGraduation, Canada, 2000

(A) (B) Rural Urban All RNs Rural Urban All RNs Rural Urban All RNs

Pre-1950 681950-1959 3,273 3,253 21.6 21.8 21.7 22.0 22.0 21.9 21.6 21.8 21.71960-1969 36,159 35,820 21.5 21.7 21.7 22.3 22.2 22.2 21.6 21.7 21.71970-1979 71,286 70,561 21.7 22.0 22.0 22.6 22.7 22.7 21.8 22.1 22.01980-1989 63,580 62,699 24.1 24.6 24.5 23.5 23.7 23.7 24.0 24.5 24.41990 + 56,109 55,011 26.8 27.2 27.1 25.3 25.2 25.2 26.6 26.8 26.7

Overall 230,475 227,344 23.5 23.8 23.7 24.1 24.1 24.1 23.5 23.8 23.8Plus Not Stated 232,412

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Average Age (years) Number of Graduates

Decade of Graduation

Diploma Bachelor's All Programs

Notes:Column (A) includes all RNs in the RNDB 2000 except the 1,937 RNs who did not state year of graduation and/oryear of birth.Column (B) identifies the numbers of RNs used to compute the average ages in the remaining portion of the table. Inaddition to the exclusions identified for (A), these numbers exclude the Pre-1950 graduates, RNs who did not stateinitial/entry to practice level of education, and, when appropriate, RNs who were not allocated to a rural/urbanl i



0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Rural 1994 Rural 2000 Urban 1994 Urban 2000

Perc

enta

ge

of

RN

s

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 23. Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor'sDegree as Highest Level of NursingEducation by Rural/Urban Location,Canada, 1994 and 2000

The overall impact of the changes outlined above is summarized in Figure 23, which showsthe differentials in the proportions of RNs who have attained a bachelor�s degree as theirhighest nursing degree.

For RNs in rural and smalltown Canada, 12.5% hadattained a bachelor�s degreein 1994, increasing to 18.0%in 2000. The equivalentfigures for urban RNs are17.6% in 1994 and 23.8% in2000.

In general, this rural/urbandifference is commonthroughout Canada. Asillustrated in Figure 24, in 9provinces the proportion ofrural and small town RNs witha bachelor�s degree in nursingis lower than that of RNsurban areas.

In some instances the difference is very small (in Prince Edward Island, 18.8% and 19.7%in rural and urban areas, respectively) but can be as great as 7.3% (Québec, Manitoba) and9.0% (Alberta). In one province, New Brunswick, the reverse is seen, but the difference isvery small (rural 31.6%, urban 30.9%). In the territories, it is the RNs in the rural areas

that have attainedbachelor�s degrees innursing in higherproportions than theirurban colleagues (i.e.RNs in Whitehorseand Yellowknife).Most striking is the52.2% of RNs in theYukon outside ofWhitehorse whosehighest education innursing is a bachelor�sdegree; theproportions in theNorthwest Territories(35.6%) and inNunavut (35.9%) aresimilarly high.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Perc

enta

ge o

f RN

s


Figure 24. Proportions of RNs with a Bachelor's Degree asHighest Level of Nursing Education by Rural/UrbanLocation and Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000



Non-Nursing DegreesIn Canada, the number of employed RNs with a degree in a program other than nursing isincreasing. In 2000, 6.4% (14,906) of RNs had obtained either a bachelor�s, master�s, ordoctoral degree in a non-nursing discipline, an increase from 5.4% (12,549) in 1994. (Thedifference is partially the result of data changes in the province of Ontario in 2000. Pleaserefer to the Data Accuracy section of the methodological notes in Appendix A for moredetails). This increase (1.0%) has been experienced by both rural and urban RNs. However,far fewer rural RNs have attained degrees outside of the nursing discipline than urban RNs.The comparable statistics are: for RNs in rural and small town Canada, 3.0% in 1994 and3.9% in 2000; and in urban Canada, 5.9% in 1994 and 7.0% in 2000.

Figure 25 illustrates these differences between rural and urban nurses. The value plotted isthe combined percentage of RNs with a bachelor�s, master�s, or doctoral degree outsidenursing for each province/territory for 2000. A total of 10.9% of Nunavut�s workforce ofRNs has obtained a non-nursing degree. This is the highest rate in Canada with respect torural RNs, but it is closely matched by the 10.2% for urban RNs in Alberta. For rural RNs,this proportion is less than 4.0% in 5 provinces. New Brunswick, with a figure of 3.8%, isthe only province where fewer than 4.0% of the urban RNs have attained a non-nursingdegree.

At the present time the RNDB does not identify the graduation dates for non-nursingdegrees or, for that matter, post-initial/entry to practice nursing degrees that an RN hasattained. These dates would be very useful to have for analyses of continuing educationprograms. This might be particularly valuable for work with rural RNs, who appear fromthese statistics to have had greater difficulty in acquiring additional academic qualificationsthan their urban colleagues.

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Perc

enta

ge

of

RN

s

Rural UrbanSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 25. Proportions of RNs with Degrees in Programs Other Than Nursingby Rural/Urban Location and Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000



Table 9. Percent Distribution of RNs by Place of Work and Rural/UrbanLocation, Canada, 1994 and 2000

1994 2000 1994 2000

Hospital 57.2 53.8 62.6 62.5Mental Health Centre 2.0 1.1 3.5 1.7Nursing Stations (Outpost or Clinic) 1.0 1.0 0.1 0.2Rehabilitation/Convalescent Centre 1.7 0.6 1.8 1.2Nursing Home/Long-Term Care 14.8 16.3 10.1 10.1Home Care Agency 4.8 4.9 3.2 3.5Community Health/Health Centre 9.2 12.7 5.4 7.8Business/Industry/Occupational Health Office 0.8 1.3 1.2 1.6Private Nursing Agency/Private Duty 0.5 0.4 0.9 0.8Self-Employed 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.8Physician's Office/Family Practice Unit 2.4 2.3 2.6 2.5Educational Institution 1.5 1.4 3.0 2.3Association/Government 1.1 1.4 1.2 1.7Other 2.7 2.2 3.8 3.1

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Rural (%) Urban (%)Place of Work

Notes:Please review the methodological notes for a full definition of the terms �rural� and�urban� as used in this analysis.CIHI data will differ from provincial/territorial data due to the CIHI collection period, theremoval of interprovincial duplicates, and provincial/territorial data cleaning at year-end.Please review the methodological notes for more complete information.

Employment Characteristics

Place of WorkExcluding RNs who did not identify their place of work for the RNDB and those who couldnot be allocated a rural/urban location, 60.9% (141,332) of Canada�s RNs in 2000 workedin hospitals (including general, maternal, paediatric, and psychiatric hospitals). Thisrepresents a marginal decrease from 1994 when 61.7% (143,191) of RNs indicated thattheir place of work was a hospital. With fewer hospitals in rural and small town areas ofCanada, the proportion of RNs working in these institutions decreased from 57.2% in1994 to 53.8% in 2000. For urban RNs there was virtually no change from 1994 (62.6%)to 2000 (62.5%).

Detailed comparisons of the proportions of RNs by place of work and by rural/urbanlocation are provided in Table 9 for all categories of place of work. This table also providescomparable data for 1994 and 2000 for urban RNs and RNs in rural and small townCanada. Some of the more significant differences between rural and urban RNs in terms ofplace of work are highlighted by the figures for nursing home/long-term care andcommunity health/health centre, where the proportions for both of these places of workare higher in rural and small town areas than in urban locations.

As well, in ruralareas there hasbeen anincrease in theproportion ofrural RNs innursing home/long-term carefacilities, from14.8% in 1994to 16.3% in2000.

In urban areasthe proportionof RNs in thosefacilities has notchanged.

Increases can be observed over this same time period in both rural (+3.5%) and urban(+2.4%) areas with respect to the proportions of RNs working in community health/healthcentre locations.



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of R

ura

l RN

s

Hospital Nursing Home Community Health OtherSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 26. Percentage of Rural RNs by Place of Work andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

Urb

an R

Ns


Figure 27. Percentage of Urban RNs by Place of Work andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000

Notes:Hospital includes data from Hospital (general, maternal, paediatric, psychiatric),Mental Health Centre, Nursing Station (outpost or clinic), andRehabilitation/Convalescent Centre.Nursing Home includes data from Nursing Home/Long Term Care.Community Health includes data from Community Health/Health Centre and HomeCare Agency.Other includes data from Physician�s Office/Family Practice Unit, EducationalInstitution, Business/Industry/Occupational Health Office, Private NursingAgency/Private Duty, Self-employed, Association/Government, Other, and NotStated.Please review the methodological notes for more comprehensive informationregarding the accuracy and comparability of RNDB data.

Regional variations(provincial andterritorialdifferences) andchanges over time(1994 to 2000) forplace of work arevery complex.

General views ofthe variations areillustrated byprovince/territoryfor rural RNs(Figure 26), urbanRNs (Figure 27),and for all RNsemployed innursing (Figure 28)for the year 2000.



Temporal changes for selected places of work are shown in Table 10. In that table, datafrom the Northwest Territories/Nunavut for Nursing Station and Community Health Centrehave been combined. In those territories, RNs often refer to nursing outposts ascommunity health centres.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s


Figure 28. Percentage of RNs by Place of Work and Province/Territoryof Registration, Canada, 2000

Notes:Hospital includes data from Hospital (general, maternal, paediatric, psychiatric),Mental Health Centre, Nursing Station (outpost or clinic), andRehabilitation/Convalescent Centre.Nursing Home includes data from Nursing Home/Long Term Care.Community Health includes data from Community Health/Health Centre and HomeCare Agency.Other includes data from Physician�s Office/Family Practice Unit, EducationalInstitution, Business/Industry/Occupational Health Office, Private NursingAgency/Private Duty, Self-employed, Association/Government, Other, and NotStated.Please review the methodological notes for more comprehensive informationregarding the accuracy and comparability of RNDB data.



An examination of these figures (Figures 26 to 28) and Table 10 indicates that for all RNsthe proportions of nurses working in hospitals has increased in approximately one half ofthe provinces/territories. However, the decreases in the remaining provinces/territorieshave produced an overall net decrease, as described in the first paragraph of this section ofthe report. In comparison, with the exception of New Brunswick, decreases in hospitals asplace of work for RNs in rural and small town Canada have been experienced in alljurisdictions. The largest decreases between 1994 and 2000 have occurred in the Yukon(9.3%), Nova Scotia (9.5%), and Saskatchewan (9.8%). Proportional decreases inhospitals as place of work in rural and small town Canada have generally beencompensated for by proportional increases in the four other categories of place of workprovided in Table 10.

Table 10. Percent Distribution of RNs by Selected Place of Work and Province/Territoryof Registration, Canada, 1994 and 2000

Place of Work Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Qué. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. Y.T. N.W.T./Nun. Canada

HospitalAll RNs

1994 68.5 57.8 69.9 68.7 62.5 58.4 62.9 59.2 64.0 62.2 48.3 49.9 61.72000 70.8 58.7 68.4 71.7 58.6 59.7 61.2 55.6 63.2 62.6 42.4 44.9 60.9

Rural RNs1994 64.4 64.9 67.9 63.3 52.7 55.8 59.1 49.9 61.8 59.5 28.9 33.8 57.22000 62.5 61.9 58.4 69.1 48.6 54.5 56.8 40.1 55.3 56.7 19.6 29.9 53.8

Nursing Station (Outpost or Clinic)All RNs

1994 0.9 - 0.0 - - 0.2 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.2 10.8 (See Note) 0.32000 1.1 - 0.2 - 0.1 0.2 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.3 13.6 (See Note) 0.4

Rural RNs1994 3.0 - 0.1 - - 0.5 2.7 1.8 0.5 1.1 42.2 (See Note) 1.02000 3.2 - 0.2 - 0.2 0.7 3.1 1.7 1.5 1.1 56.5 (See Note) 1.0

Nursing Home/Long Term CareAll RNs

1994 12.3 18.3 9.6 9.6 12.6 10.8 - 12.9 10.2 12.1 5.4 1.5 10.92000 11.1 15.9 11.4 9.6 14.9 8.2 11.7 13.4 9.7 13.5 8.5 2.3 11.3

Rural RNs1994 15.8 17.7 14.9 16.1 19.1 13.6 - 19.9 13.8 13.1 - 2.3 14.82000 15.0 14.4 17.1 14.2 20.7 13.0 16.3 21.7 15.2 14.4 2.2 3.3 16.3

Home Care AgencyAll RNs

1994 1.1 2.2 1.3 1.4 - 6.4 4.1 5.0 4.5 3.1 3.4 2.4 3.52000 0.7 4.5 4.1 0.9 0.5 6.4 2.8 7.1 5.3 2.0 3.8 1.9 3.7

Rural RNs1994 1.2 4.4 1.1 1.3 - 9.7 4.4 5.9 7.9 4.7 - 2.8 4.82000 0.5 6.9 5.5 1.0 0.6 7.8 4.0 10.7 8.4 2.3 4.3 1.7 4.9

Community Health/Health CentreAll RNs

1994 6.4 6.5 4.6 2.8 8.8 4.6 5.2 8.5 4.8 6.1 17.7 33.4 6.12000 8.9 4.5 5.0 3.4 11.8 7.7 6.4 9.9 7.0 9.0 12.7 35.8 8.7

Rural RNs1994 11.2 6.4 5.8 4.3 15.7 5.2 7.9 16.4 6.3 8.2 24.4 54.0 9.22000 15.0 4.6 7.2 5.0 19.7 8.9 8.7 18.1 10.1 14.2 13.0 52.7 12.7

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Notes:Data for the Northwest Territories/Nunavut for Nursing Station and Community Health Centre have beencombined and listed under Community Health Centre. In those territories RNs often do not make a distinctionbetween these two categories of place of work or they refer to nursing output stations as community healthcentres.Please review the methodological notes for more comprehensive information regarding data collection andprocessing, data accuracy, and data comparability.



Primary Area of ResponsibilityCounts and percentages of RNs by primary area of responsibility are provided in Table 11for both 1994 and 2000. This table also allows a comparison of the frequencydistributions of rural, urban, and all RNs by area of responsibility. Some of the regionalvariations of this variable are illustrated in Table 12, where categories of responsibilityhave been aggregated under the headings Direct Care, Administration, Other, and NotStated.

The percentages shown in these tables must be treated with caution for two reasons.First, there has been a change in the categories of this variable from 1994 to the morerecent editions of the RNDB. �Other Direct Care� now separates RNs into area ofresponsibility categories �Oncology�, �Rehabilitation�, and �Other Direct Care�. Second,�Not Stated� has been included because of the relatively large numbers of RNs who did notsubmit this information, particularly RNs in Québec and Ontario.

The most commonly identified areas of responsibility for both rural and urban RNs aremedical/surgical and geriatric/long-term care. In terms of the medical/surgical category, thenumbers of RNs have decreased for all RNs from 45,194 nurses in 1994 to 39,872 in2000. In rural and small town areas of Canada, the decrease has been from 7,468 to

Table 11. Number and Percent Distribution of RNs by Area of Responsibility andRural/Urban Location, Canada, 1994 and 2000

Counts % Counts % Counts % Counts % Counts % Counts %

Direct CareMedical/Surgical 7,468 17.7 6,372 15.4 37,487 19.6 32,956 17.5 45,194 19.3 39,872 17.2Psychiatric/Mental Health 1,354 3.2 1,364 3.3 10,613 5.6 10,080 5.4 12,021 5.1 11,594 5.0Paediatric 778 1.8 407 1.0 6,953 3.6 5,167 2.8 7,768 3.3 5,642 2.4Maternal/Newborn 2,061 4.9 1,631 3.9 12,105 6.3 10,512 5.6 14,224 6.1 12,283 5.3Geriatric/Long Term Care 6,202 14.7 6,237 15.0 19,433 10.2 18,870 10.0 25,725 11.0 25,436 10.9Critical Care (Burn) 1,774 4.2 2,032 4.9 15,126 7.9 15,226 8.1 16,972 7.2 17,552 7.6Community Health 2,666 6.3 3,309 8.0 7,648 4.0 9,899 5.3 10,382 4.4 13,416 5.8Ambulatory Care 475 1.1 926 2.2 3,128 1.6 4,823 2.6 3,616 1.5 5,855 2.5Home Care 2,048 4.8 2,402 5.8 6,091 3.2 6,959 3.7 8,188 3.5 9,439 4.1Occupational Health 450 1.1 394 0.9 2,725 1.4 2,407 1.3 3,185 1.4 2,831 1.2Operating Room 1,153 2.7 1,200 2.9 8,215 4.3 8,225 4.4 9,406 4.0 9,538 4.1Emergency Room 2,279 5.4 2,322 5.6 8,408 4.4 8,423 4.5 10,737 4.6 10,893 4.7Nursing in Several Clinical Areas 5,986 14.2 5,024 12.1 10,183 5.3 7,852 4.2 16,269 6.9 13,098 5.6Oncology 279 0.7 3,564 1.9 3,894 1.7Rehabilitation 381 0.9 2,784 1.5 3,209 1.4Other Direct Care 3,234 7.6 1,882 4.5 19,669 10.3 12,069 6.4 23,020 9.8 14,131 6.1

AdministrationNursing Service 1,666 3.9 2,450 5.9 5,697 3.0 9,471 5.0 7,398 3.2 12,060 5.2Nursing Education 80 0.2 72 0.2 530 0.3 422 0.2 614 0.3 501 0.2Other Administration 474 1.1 546 1.3 2,276 1.2 2,846 1.5 2,760 1.2 3,438 1.5

EducationTeaching � Students 435 1.0 297 0.7 3,969 2.1 2,125 1.1 4,428 1.9 2,453 1.1Teaching � Employees 297 0.7 135 0.3 1,641 0.9 1,023 0.5 1,949 0.8 1,171 0.5Teaching � Patients/Clients 429 1.0 198 0.5 2,534 1.3 1,078 0.6 2,978 1.3 1,286 0.6Other Education 162 0.4 259 0.6 971 0.5 1,802 1.0 1,137 0.5 2,077 0.9

ResearchReseach Only 20 0.0 55 0.1 465 0.2 987 0.5 490 0.2 1,057 0.5Other Research 60 0.1 65 0.2 1,078 0.6 1,109 0.6 1,143 0.5 1,191 0.5

Not Stated 752 1.8 1,263 3.0 4,005 2.1 7,140 3.8 4,789 2.0 8,495 3.7

Total 42,303 100.0 41,502 100.0 190,950 100.0 187,819 100.0 234,393 100.0 232,412 100.0Source: RNDB/CIHI

not collected

not collected

not collected

not collected

not collected

not collected

All RNs 1994 All RNs 2000Rural RNs 1994 Rural RNs 2000 Urban RNs 1994 Urban RNs 2000

Notes:Please review the methodological notes for a full description of the terms �rural� and �urban� used in thisanalysis.Please review the methodological notes in Appendix A for more comprehensive information regarding thecollection and processing, accuracy, and comparability of RNDB data.



Table 12. Percent Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location,Area of Responsibility and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000

Direct Care

Admin OtherNot

StatedDirect Care

Admin OtherNot

Stated

Nfld. 93.5 5.2 1.1 0.3 89.4 5.0 5.2 0.4P.E.I. 92.7 5.8 1.5 0.0 88.7 7.9 3.3 0.1N.S. 90.6 5.5 3.9 0.0 90.8 4.5 4.7 0.0N.B. 91.8 5.6 2.0 0.6 91.1 4.3 3.8 0.8Qué. 76.8 13.2 2.1 7.9 75.9 12.4 3.9 7.8Ont. 88.0 6.2 2.4 3.3 86.6 5.2 4.1 4.1Man. 91.8 5.4 2.7 0.1 89.7 5.7 4.4 0.2Sask. 90.8 6.9 1.8 0.5 88.5 5.9 5.0 0.6Alta. 91.5 4.9 2.8 0.8 89.3 4.1 5.3 1.3B.C. 92.4 3.5 3.3 0.8 90.5 3.9 4.8 0.8Y.T. 97.8 2.2 0.0 0.0 85.6 10.2 3.7 0.5

N.W.T. 91.3 6.7 1.3 0.7 88.4 6.6 5.0 0.0Nun. 90.2 8.7 1.1 0.0 - - - -

Canada 87.1 7.4 2.4 3.0 85.1 6.8 4.3 3.8Source: RNDB/CIHI

Rural Urban

Notes:The categories of Direct Care, Admin, Other, and Not Stated are the groupedheadings presented in Table 11. The category Other includes data from Educationand Research.Please review the methodological notes for a full description of the terms �rural�and �urban� used in this analysis.

6,372 RNs. Overall, a similar pattern exists for the geriatric/long-term care category.However, there has been a very slight increase here in the numbers of rural RNs (6,202 in1994 and 6,237 in 2000). For rural RNs, another area of responsibility that is cited verycommonly is �Nursing in Several Clinical Areas�. However, there has been a decrease in thenumbers of RNs in this category, from 5,986 in 1994 to 5,024 in 2000. For rural RNs,these decreases are compensated for by increases spread out among a number of directpatient care areas of responsibility (e.g. community health, home care, etc.), as well as inadministration, education, and research.

The proportion (approximately 85%) of RNs providing direct care has changed little overrecent years. However, there are a number of differences that can be seen whencomparing rural and urban RNs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction (Table 12).

Higher proportions ofrural RNs can beidentified in the areasof responsibility ofdirect care andadministration. Fordirect care this patternis apparent for allprovinces/territorieswith the exception ofthe marginally largerproportion of urbanRNs in Nova Scotia.

For administration thepattern is less precise,with slightly higheradministrationproportions in urbanareas (compared torural areas) of PrinceEdward Island,Manitoba, and BritishColumbia, and asubstantially higher proportion in the Yukon. Even when taking the �Not Stated� recordsinto account, Québec stands out as having the largest proportions of RNs working inadministration. In rural and small town areas of Québec in 2000, 13.2% of RNs identifiedadministration as their primary area of responsibility. The equivalent proportion for urbanRNs in Québec was 12.4%. These reported proportions of RNs whose primaryresponsibility is administration should be treated cautiously. In many areas, but particularlyin rural and small town Canada, RNs may have multiple responsibilities (e.g. administrationand direct care) but, when filling in their registration forms each year, report that theirprimary area of responsibility is administration.



0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

Not Stated

Other

Consultant

Researcher

Instructor/Professor/Educator

Clinical Nurse Specialist

Manager/Assistant Manager

Director/Assistant Director

Chief Nursing Officer/ChiefExecutive Officer

Percentage of RNs

Rural Urban

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 29. Percentage of RNs by Rural/Urban Location andPosition (excluding Staff/Community HealthNurses), Canada, 1994

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8%

Not Stated

Other

Consultant

Researcher

Instructor/Professor/Educator

Clinical Nurse Specialist

Manager/Assistant Manager

Director/Assistant Director

Chief Nursing Officer/ChiefExecutive Officer

Percentage of RNs

Rural Urban

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 30. Percentage of RNs by Rural/Urban Location andPosition (excluding Staff/Community HealthNurses), Canada, 2000

PositionMost RNs in Canada identifytheir position as staff/community health nurse, andthere has been little changeoverall from 1994 (76.9%)to 2000 (76.7%).

However, there have beenchanges over this period interms of the proportions ofRNs in this position for bothrural and urban RNs (seeFigures 29 and 30).

In 1994, 79.1% of RNs inrural and small town Canadaidentified their position asstaff/community nursecompared with 78.3% oftheir urban colleagues. By2000, these proportionsdecrease to 77.3% and76.5%, respectively.

The proportions of RNs inmanagerial positions(including the positions ofchief nursing officer/chiefexecutive officer,director/assistant director,and manager/assistantmanager) have alsodecreased, from a nationalrate of 10.1% in 1994 to7.7% in 2000. However, forthis category of positionsthe proportions have been(in 1994) and continue to be(in 2000) higher in rural andsmall town areas of Canada.

In comparison with urbanRNs, nurses in rural andsmall town Canada are lesslikely to hold positions



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Perc

enta

ge

of

Rura

l RN

s

Managerial Staff/Community Other Not StatedSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 31. Proportions of Rural RNs by Grouped Position and Province/Territoryof Registration, Canada, 2000

categorized as clinical nurse specialist, educator, researcher, or consultant. On the otherhand, it is these latter positions that have generally increased in relative terms from 1994to 2000 for both rural and urban RNs.

For example, the overall proportion of RN consultants in rural Canada stood at 0.5% in1994 but rose to 2.1% in 2000. Again, a note of caution must be expressed with respectto the proportions stated here and used in Figures 29 to 32. These percentages werecomputed with the �Not Stated� responses included. In 1994, 1.7% of the rural RNs and2.1% of urban RNs did not indicate their position. In 2000, the Not Stated proportionswere 2.0% and 2.5% for rural and urban RNs, respectively.

Provincial/territorial illustrations of RN positions are provided for rural RNs in Figure 31 andfor urban RNs in Figure 32.

For rural RNs, the proportions of RNs in managerial positions ranges from lows of 8.1%(Québec), 8.2% (Newfoundland and Labrador), and 8.3% (Alberta) to highs of 17.4%(Nova Scotia) and approximately 15% for Prince Edward Island and the territories.



For most provinces/territories the proportions of urban RNs in managerial positions arelower, ranging from 6.2% in the Northwest Territories to 11.7% and 12.8% in NovaScotia and Yukon, respectively. The exception is Prince Edward Island, where 20.7% ofurban RNs identified themselves as being in a managerial position. Similar observationsmay be made for the remaining position categories by examining these figures.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%N

fld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

Urb

an R

Ns

Managerial Staff/Community Other Not StatedSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 32. Proportions of Urban RNs by Grouped Position and Province/Territoryof Registration, Canada, 2000



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

Rura

l R

Ns

Regular CasualSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 33. Percentage of Rural RNs by Employment Status andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

<25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+Age Group

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s


Figure 34. Percentage of RNs with RegularEmployment by Rural/Urban Location andAge Group, Canada, 2000

Employment StatusThe number of RNs in Canada who were employed on a casual basis in 2000 was 34,532(14.9%). This was the lowest proportion for this employment status category for RNssince 1994 (CIHI, 2000), when 15.1% of RNs were employed on a casual basis. This ismost likely due to a decrease in the numbers of urban nurses employed on a casual basiswhere the change has been from 17.1% in 1994 to 15.8% in 2000.

The wide range ofregular and casualemployment statuscategories for ruralRNs throughout theprovinces/territoriescan be seen inFigure 33.

For the most part, theproportions of RNs inrural and small townCanada in regularemployment fall withina range of from 80%to 85%. However, only71.8% of rural RNs inBritish Columbia are soemployed, comparedwith the 91.3% of rural RNs in Manitoba who are employed on a regular basis.

Regular employment status is highlylinked to age for both rural and urbannurses. Fewer than 50% of the RNs25 years of age or younger areemployed on a regular basis. For thisage category of nurses in 2000, only46.4% of rural and 48.5% of urbannurses were employed on a regularbasis. As illustrated in Figure 34, theregular employment percentagesincrease with age, peaking in the 45-54 year age grouping (rural RNs,90.1%; urban RNs, 91.0%). Theproportions dip slightly in the agegroup of 55 years and older to84.2% for rural RNs and 86.0% forRNs working in urban areas ofCanada.



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

Rura

l R

Ns

Source: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 35. Percentage of Rural RNs with Full-TimeEmployment by Province/Territory of Registration,Canada, 2000

Full-Time/Part-Time StatusIn 1994, 58.2% (128,796) of the RNs who reported their full-time/part-time statusindicated that they were employed on a full-time basis. However, in that year of the RNDBa substantial number (13,027 or 5.6%) of RNs did not report their full-time/part-timestatus. Without the latter, missing group of nurses the proportion of RNs reporting full-timeemployment status would be 54.9%. This can be compared to 55.0% in 2000 (only 49RNs in that year did not indicate whether they were employed full time or part time).

Those figures would suggest that there has been little change from 1994 to 2000.However, when excluding the �Not Stated� records, the differences over time and thedifferences between nurses in rural and urban areas of the country were quite substantial.In 1994, only 53.2% of rural RNs were employed full time compared with 59.2% of theRNs in urban areas of Canada. By 2000, both figures had decreased, to 49.6% for ruralRNs and 56.1% for urban RNs.

Variations in full-time/part-time status are evengreater when onecompares the proportionsby province and territory.In terms of full-timeemployment status for ruralRNs, these variations areillustrated in Figure 35using RNDB 2000 data.

The range is from a low of33.8% in Prince EdwardIsland to a high of 89.1%in Nunavut. In the majorityof the provinces, between40% and 60% of rural RNs

are employed on a full-time basis. That is also the range for urban RNs but, with fewexceptions, the proportions of urban RNs with full-time employment status exceed theproportions of rural RNs.

Earlier a comparison was made between regular/casual employment status and agegroupings. A similar comparison with full-time/part-time status yields much the samepattern (Figure 36).



0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

<25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+

Age Group

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s


Figure 36. Percentage of RNs with Full-TimeEmployment by Rural/Urban Location andAge Group, Canada, 2000

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Rural Urban

Perc

enta

ge

of

RN

s

Males FemalesSource: RNDB/CIHI

Figure 37. Percentage of RNs with Full-TimeEmployment by Rural/Urban Locationand Gender, Canada, 2000

Fewer RNs in the younger age group(under 25 years) are employed fulltime (rural, 26.0%; urban, 31.2%).The proportions increase withincreasing age until the 45-54 yearsage grouping and then decrease.

In 2000 for this age group (45-54years), 57.2% of RNs in rural andsmall town Canada were employed fulltime compared with 63.0% of RNs inurban areas of the country. In the agegrouping 55 years or more thesefigures decreased to 52.7% for ruraland 59.4% for urban RNs.

Significant variations also occur in full-time/part-time status by gender (Figure37). In 2000, 70% of male RNsindicated that they were employed fulltime (rural, 69.8%; urban, 70.6%).

Female RNs were much less likely tobe employed full time: 48.7% offemale RNs in rural and small townareas in 2000 were employed full timeas were 55.4% in urban areas of thecountry.

Multiple EmploymentThe question concerning whether aregistered nurse has more than oneemployer is relatively new to theRNDB. This information was not collected nationally in 1994 and is still not collected bytwo jurisdictions (Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick). Still, as 95.1% of the RNsemployed in nursing in 2000 responded to this question, the information provided belowmay be considered characteristic of registered nurses in Canada today.



0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Nfld.

N.S

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

Y.T

.

N.W

.T.

Nun

.

Can

ada

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s


Figure 38. Percentage of RNs with Multiple Employers byRural/Urban Location and Province/Territory ofRegistration, Canada, 2000

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

<25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+

Age Group

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s


Figure 39. Percentage of RNs with MultipleEmployers by Rural/Urban Location andAge Group, Canada, 2000

Excluding �Not Stated�records, 15.8% of RNsin urban areas and17.7% of RNs in ruralareas of the countryindicated that they hadmore than one employerin 2000. Provincial andterritorial variations inthis rate are illustrated inFigure 38.

British Columbia (rural29.2%, urban 26.0%)and Saskatchewan (rural28.1%, urban 17.1%)had the highest rate ofRNs with multipleemployers. The lowestrates for rural RNs withmultiple employers can be found in Nunavut (2.2%) and the Yukon (6.5%). For urban RNs,the lowest rates for nurses with multiple employers in 2000 occurred in Nova Scotia(6.3%) and Newfoundland and Labrador (6.6%). As indicated in Figure 38, the provincewith the greatest differential was Saskatchewan where the proportion (28.1%) of ruralRNs with more than one employer was greater than their urban colleagues (17.1%).

Gender and age differences can also be seen in multiple employment. Generally, malestend to report having more than one employer more frequently than females. Data from theRNDB 2000 indicate that 18.4% of male RNs in rural and small town areas of Canada and19.6% of male RNs in urban areas had more than one employer. For female RNs, the rateswere 17.6% and 15.6% in rural and urban areas, respectively.

Age relationships for this variable areshown in Figure 39. More than aquarter of the RNs in rural and smalltown Canada report that they havemore than one employer, 26.6% inthe less than 25 years age groupingand 26.0% in the 25-34 year agegroup.

The equivalent figures for urban RNsare 18.3% and 22.6%, respectively.The rural/urban differences in theproportions of RNs with multipleemployers are smaller for RNs whoare 35 years of age and older.



Provincial Migration PatternsThe current RNDB is not designed to assess migration patterns, as RNs in Canada do nothave unique registration numbers at the national level. The provincial and territorialregistration numbers that are employed are only unique within the respective jurisdictions.However, some indication of the movement of RNs within Canada can be examined bycomparing place of graduation with current province or territory of registration. Thiscomparison is not to be considered an accurate measure of migration and applies only tothose RNs who graduated from a nursing program in Canada.

In 2000, there were 213,825 (92.0%) Canadian-trained RNs, 14,177 (6.1%) foreign-trained, and 4,410 (1.9%) RNs did not state their place of graduation. By comparison, ofthe 234,393 RNs who were employed in nursing in 1994, 91.4% were Canadian-trained,6.6% foreign-trained, and 2.0% who did not state their place of graduation.

Of the 41,502 RNs in rural and small town Canada in the year 2000, 96.5% (40,036)graduated from a nursing program in Canada. In 1994, 96.0% (40,606) of the rural RNswere Canadian-trained. In those years, the proportions of rural RNs who did not providetheir place of graduation were 1.1% and 1.6% in 1994 and 2000, respectively.

For Canadian-trained RNs working in rural and small town Canada, Tables 13 and 14 wereconstructed by comparing the jurisdiction where an RN was trained with the jurisdictionwhere they were registered. In these tables, the Yukon is not listed by row (province ofgraduation) as there is no RN education program in that territory; and, NorthwestTerritories/Nunavut is listed by row (province/territory of graduation) only in Table 14 asgraduations there in the nursing programs post-date 1994.

Table 13. Percent Distribution of Rural RNs by Province/Territory of Graduation andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994

Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Que. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. Y.T. N.W.T./Nun. Canada

Nfld. 87.1 0.3 3.6 1.6 0.2 3.1 0.6 - 1.5 1.1 0.1 0.9 100.0P.E.I. 1.4 75.8 7.8 4.4 - 3.3 0.6 1.7 2.2 1.9 - 0.8 100.0N.S. 1.0 1.3 84.9 3.9 0.2 3.9 0.6 0.3 2.0 1.2 0.2 0.6 100.0N.B. 0.4 0.6 4.0 86.9 3.1 2.2 0.5 0.1 0.9 0.9 - 0.3 100.0Qué. 0.1 0.0 0.5 1.1 94.6 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.0 0.1 100.0Ont. 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.5 1.1 90.4 0.9 0.5 2.3 2.8 0.1 0.4 100.0Man. 0.1 - 0.8 0.2 0.1 4.7 77.6 6.1 5.0 4.6 0.1 0.6 100.0Sask. 0.0 0.0 0.4 - 0.1 1.3 4.2 74.6 12.8 5.6 0.1 0.8 100.0Alta. 2.0 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.0 1.8 1.1 5.4 78.7 10.9 0.1 1.0 100.0B.C. 0.1 - 0.5 0.4 - 2.6 0.6 1.5 4.8 88.2 0.6 0.8 100.0

Canada 3.6 0.8 6.2 6.1 24.7 28.8 6.0 6.4 9.8 6.9 0.1 0.4 100.0Source: RNDB/CIHI

Province/Territory of Registration

Pro

vinc

e of

Gra

duat

ion

Notes:0.0 = a value that is less than 0.05%Rows may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.CIHI data will differ from provincial/territorial data due to the CIHI collection period, the removal ofinterprovincial duplicates, and provincial/territorial data cleaning at year-end.Please review the methodological notes in Appendix A for more comprehensive information regarding thecollection, processing, accuracy and comparability of RNDB data.



In 1994 (Table 13), for example, 87.1% of the rural RNs who trained in Newfoundland andLabrador were also registered in that province; 0.3% of the Newfoundland-trained ruralRNs were registered in Prince Edward Island; etc. The proportion of Newfoundland-trainedrural RNs who were registered in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2000 (Table 14) is verysimilar (86.8%). For the most part, there is relatively little difference in the 1994 and 2000patterns. That is, roughly the same proportions exist for each jurisdiction in both 1994 and2000, respectively: 84.9% and 87.2% for Nova Scotia; 86.9% and 83.9% for NewBrunswick; and so on.

The differences between 1994 and 2000 are generally in the range of ±3%. The exceptionto this observation is Prince Edward Island, where the figures are 75.8% and 85.9% for1994 and 2000, respectively. Retention of the rural RNs trained in Prince Edward Islandhas substantially increased over that time period. The percentages that are provided forNorthwest Territories/Nunavut for 2000 (Table 14) should be treated cautiously because ofthe very low absolute numbers that these proportions are based on.

Saskatchewan is the province/territory that experienced the greatest amount of outmigration of RNs, both rural and urban. In terms of the year 2000 RNDB, only 67.1% ofthe 10,331 graduates from Saskatchewan are currently registered in Saskatchewan. Asillustrated in Figure 40, Saskatchewan figures are particularly low overall and for RNs inurban areas. At the other end of the scale, 93.8% of all RNs included in the 2000 RNDBwho were trained in Québec have remained in that province. Similarly high numbers can befound for RNs trained in and retained by British Columbia and Ontario.

Table 14. Percent Distribution of Rural RNs by Province/Territory of Graduation andProvince/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000

Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Que. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. Y.T. N.W.T./Nun. Canada

Nfld. 86.8 0.4 3.8 0.5 0.1 2.8 0.6 0.2 1.9 1.3 0.2 1.4 100.0P.E.I. - 85.9 5.5 2.3 - 2.3 0.3 0.5 1.8 1.3 - - 100.0N.S. - 2.0 87.2 2.3 0.1 3.9 0.5 0.3 1.7 1.4 - 0.6 100.0N.B. - 1.5 5.7 83.9 3.3 2.9 0.5 0.1 0.5 1.2 - 0.4 100.0Qué. - 0.0 0.4 0.5 95.7 2.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.1 100.0Ont. - 0.1 0.9 0.3 1.0 90.7 0.8 0.5 2.2 2.8 0.2 0.6 100.0Man. - 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.1 4.0 80.1 5.0 4.7 4.4 0.2 0.5 100.0Sask. - 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 1.1 3.3 77.3 11.5 5.4 0.1 0.6 100.0Alta. - 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.0 1.6 1.0 5.0 79.6 10.9 0.1 0.9 100.0B.C. - 0.0 0.8 1.0 - 2.1 0.8 1.3 7.0 86.0 0.3 0.6 100.0

N.W.T./Nun. - - - - - 25.0 12.5 - - - - 62.5

Canada 4.2 1.1 6.3 4.9 24.4 28.8 6.0 6.4 9.9 7.2 0.1 0.5 100.0Source: RNDB/CIH

Province/Territory of Registration

Prov

ince

/Ter

rito

ry o

fG

radu

atio

n

100.0

Notes:0.0 = a value that is less than 0.05%Rows may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.CIHI data will differ from provincial/territorial data due to the CIHI collection period, the removal ofinterprovincial duplicates, and provincial/territorial data cleaning at year-end.Please review the methodological notes in Appendix A for more comprehensive information regarding thecollection, processing, accuracy and comparability of RNDB data.



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nfld.

P.E

.I.

N.S

.

N.B

.

Qué

.

Ont

.

Man

.

Sas

k.

Alta.

B.C

.

N.W

.T./N

un.

Per

centa

ge

of

RN

s


Figure 40. Percentage of RNs For Which Province/Territory ofGraduation Matches Province/Territory ofRegistration, by Rural/Urban Location, Canada, 2000

For the majority ofjurisdictions it is mostoften the nurses in ruraland small town Canadathat have remained in theprovinces where theywere trained.

In general, if one ignoresthe extremely smalldifferences between therural and urbanpercentages in Ontarioand Alberta, this is thecase in all provincesexcept British Columbia.In British Columbia,86.0% of the rural RNswere trained in andstayed in British Columbiacompared to 92.8% ofthe urban RNs.



International Nursing GraduatesIn the previous section of this report it was indicated that in 2000 there was a total of14,177 international nursing graduates registered in Canada. Just over half of theinternational nursing graduates were educated in the United Kingdom (28.6% or 4,050RNs) and the Philippines (23.8% or 3,370 RNs). Another 9.0% were educated in theUnited States (1,279 RNs) and 6.9% in Hong Kong (982). The percentage of internationalnursing graduates from all other countries is less than 5.0% in each case.

In general, few international nursing graduates work in rural and small town Canada. Thisis illustrated in Figure 41 where the sizes of �pies� are drawn relative to the absolutenumbers of RNs in Canada who were educated in one of the seven major world regionsshown on that map. The dark �slice� represents the RNs who are located in rural and smalltown Canada; the remainder are located in urban areas of Canada.

Of the RNs located in rural and small town areas and who received their nursing educationoutside of Canada, 50.3% are from European countries. But this figure represents only6.8% of RNs trained in Europe who are now employed in nursing in Canada. Because ofthe small numbers, rural/urban comparisons cannot be provided for most of the individualcountries outside of Canada where RNs received their nursing education.

Figure 41. Major World Region Origins of the International Nursing Graduate RNs of Canada,2000



Table 15. Number and Percentage ofForeign-Trained RNs Locatedin Rural Areas, Canada, 2000

Country Counts %

Australia 37 14.1India 17 2.8Ireland 15 11.1Netherlands 30 19.6New Zealand 25 14.5Philippines 57 1.7Poland 6 1.5South Africa 11 8.2United Kingdom 310 7.7United States 228 17.8

Source: RNDB/CIHI

The exceptions are listed below (Table 15) for countries with 100 or more internationalnursing graduates and 5 or more of those RNs who are now located in rural and smalltown Canada.

For example, 14.1% (37) of the RNs registered inCanada who were trained in Australia work inrural areas of Canada. Of the countries or groupsof countries listed, the greatest number offoreign-trained RNs who work in rural Canadacome from the United Kingdom; the highestproportions are from the Netherlands (19.6%) andthe United States (17.8%).



SummaryThis report is intended to serve two purposes. As a data summary of the CIHI RegisteredNurses Database, it provides for the first time a nation-wide overview of the numbers,demographics, and workplace profiles of registered nurses in rural and small town Canada.Undertaking this task also provided an opportunity to compare and contrast thecharacteristics of rural nurses with those of their urban colleagues. The focus of theseanalyses has been on RNs employed in nursing in Canada in the year 2000, with a limitedanalysis of the changes that have occurred in RN workforce characteristics since 1994.

The second objective is the provision of a numerical foundation describing rural RNs thatwill aid and inform the documentary, survey, and narrative analytical components of athree-year (2001-2004) research project, Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada.For that study, it is of critical importance to examine the RNDB numbers usingsubprovincial geographical units of analysis. This report therefore uses census geographicalareas known as Census Subdivisions and Census Divisions. Without these smallergeographical units, the tremendous regional variations in rural RN characteristics acrossCanada would be masked by national and even provincial/territorial counts, ratios, andpercentages.

In the Introduction, we began by asking whether the characteristics of RNs in rural andsmall town Canada were similar to those characteristics featured in the executive summaryof the Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 2000. Those characteristicsare repeated here with the equivalent features given, where possible, for rural RNs.

� There was a moderate rise of 1.7% in the total number of registered nurses (RNs)employed in nursing in Canada from 1999 to 2000;

� There was a slight decrease of 0.5% in the total number of rural RNs from 1999 to2000.

� General population growth rates have exceeded the increase in the number of RNs,resulting in fewer nurses employed in nursing per 10,000 population;

� This observation is generally applicable for both rural and urban areas of Canada.

� The average age of RNs in Canada increased by almost two years, from 41.4 years to43.3 years, during the period from 1994 to 2000;

� The average age of RNs in rural Canada increased by 2.3 years, from 40.6 years in1994 to 42.9 years in 2000.

� Casual employment rates decreased from 18.2% in 1999 to 14.9% in 2000;

� The casual employment rate for rural RNs in 2000 was 15.8%.

� 54.8% of RNs were employed full time in 2000, compared to 51.1% in 1999;

� 49.6% of rural RNs were employed full time in 2000.



� While there has been a slight increase in 2000 compared to 1999 in the proportion ofRNs working in community-based settings, hospitals remain the predominant place ofwork;

� Hospitals are also the predominant place of work for rural RNs. In 2000, 56.6% ofRNs in rural and small town areas of Canada worked in hospitals compared to65.6% of their urban colleagues. Community-based settings are relatively moreimportant in rural Canada, in terms of where RNs work.

� An increasing percentage of Canada�s RN workforce has obtained a bachelor�s degreeas their highest education in nursing;

� This observation is also applicable to rural RNs. However, in 2000, only 18.0% ofrural RNs had obtained a bachelor�s degree as their highest education in nursingcompared with 23.8% of RNs working in urban areas of Canada.

� For the less than 8% of RNs who graduated outside of Canada, the most commoncountries where they were educated were the United Kingdom, the Philippines, and theUnited States;

� Of the RNs who graduated outside of Canada and who work in rural and smalltown Canada, the majority were educated in the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates. Fewer than 2% of rural RNs were educated outside of Canada compared to7% in urban Canada.

Some of the principal differences between rural RNs and urban RNs for the year 2000 areshown in Table 16. Some of the principal differences in the rural RN workforce between1994 and 2000, including some of those outlined above, are indicated in Table 17.



Table 16. Profile of RNs Employed in Nursing in Rural and Urban Canada, 2000

Year 2000 Rural Urban Canada

Numbers of RNs employed in nursing 41,502 187,819 232,412

Proportions of all RNs (%) 17.9 80.8 100.0

Numbers of Canadians 6,665,926 24,084,161 30,750,087

Proportions of the total Canadian population (%) 21.7 78.3 100.0

Number of RNs per 10,000 population 62.3 78.0 75.6

Average age (years) 42.9 43.4 43.3

Gender (%) Male 4.4 4.8 4.8

Female 95.6 95.2 95.2

Initial education in nursing (%) Diploma 90.8 87.7 88.2

Bachelor's 9.2 12.3 11.8

Highest education in nursing (%) Diploma 81.4 74.3 75.6

Bachelor's 18.0 23.8 22.8Master's/ Doctorate

0.6 1.9 1.6

Employment status (%) Regular 84.2 85.4 85.1

Casual 15.8 14.6 14.9

Multiple employment (%) Yes 16.4 15.1 15.3

No 76.4 80.9 79.8

Not Stated 7.2 4.0 4.9

Full-time/Part-time status (%) Full-time 49.6 56.1 55.0

Part-time 50.3 43.8 45.0




Table 17. Profile of RNs Employed in Nursing in Rural and Small Town Canada, 1994 and2000

1994 2000

Numbers of RNs employed in nursing in rural and small town areas 42,303 41,502

Proportions of all RNs (%) 18.0 17.9

Numbers of Canadians in rural and small town areas 6,484,833 6,665,926

Proportions of the total Canadian population (%) 22.3 21.7

Number of RNs per 10,000 population 65.2 62.3

Average age (years) 40.6 42.9

Gender (%) Male 4.0 4.4

Female 96.0 95.6

Initial education in nursing (%) Diploma 93.6 90.8

Bachelor's 6.4 9.2

Highest education in nursing (%) Diploma 87.0 81.4

Bachelor's 12.5 18.0Master's/ Doctorate

0.5 0.6

Employment status (%) Regular 82.9 84.2

Casual 17.1 15.8

Multiple employment (%) Yes n/a 16.4

No n/a 76.4

Not Stated n/a 7.2

Full-time/Part-time status (%) Full-time 53.2 49.6

Part-time 46.8 50.3


Provincial/Territorial Profiles


YEAR 2000URBAN

NFLD.RURAL

NFLD.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL

CANADANumber of RNs employedin nursing

3,593 1,700 41,502 232,412

Number of RNs per10,000 population

145.9 58.1 62.3 75.6

Average age (years) 40.2 38.8 42.9 43.3

Gender (%) MALE 3.9 3.4 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 96.1 96.6 95.6 95.2

Place of work (%) HOSPITAL 75.3 65.6 56.4 63.8COMMUNITY

HEALTH6.8 15.0 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 9.2 14.9 16.2 11.2

OTHER 8.9 4.1 9.9 12.5

Primary area of DIRECT CARE 89.4 82.1 87.1 85.5responsibility (%) ADMINISTRATION 5.0 5.2 7.4 6.9

EDUCATION 4.5 1.0 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 0.7 0.0 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.4 0.3 3.0 3.7

Full-time/Part-time FULL-TIME 72.4 73.2 49.6 55.0status (%) PART-TIME 27.6 26.8 50.3 45.0

Position (%) MANAGER 9.0 8.3 9.9 7.7

STAFF NURSE 80.1 85.7 78.1 76.7

OTHER 10.2 5.4 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 0.6 0.7 2.0 2.4

Highest education in DIPLOMA 77.3 83.4 81.4 75.6nursing (%) BACHELOR�S 20.7 16.4 18.0 22.8

MASTER�S/DOCTORATE

2.0 0.3 0.6 1.7

Place of graduation (%) CANADA 100.0 100.0 96.5 92.0

FOREIGN 0.0 0.0 1.9 6.1NOT STATED 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.9

Source: Registered Nurses Database, Canadian Institute for Health Information


YEAR 2000URBAN

P.E.I.RURAL

P.E.I.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


797 452 41,502 232,412


104.2 72.4 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 2.0 1.1 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 98.0 98.9 95.6 95.2


HEALTH7.6 11.5 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 16.9 14.4 16.2 11.2

OTHER 12.2 10.2 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 2.1 1.5 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 0.3 0.0 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.1 0.0 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 73.8 80.1 78.1 76.7

OTHER 5.3 3.9 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 0.4 0.7 2.0 2.4



1.9 0.9 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

N.S.RURAL

N.S.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


6,067 2,584 41,502 232,412


104.2 72.0 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 3.1 1.6 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 96.9 98.4 95.6 95.2


HEALTH7.5 12.7 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 8.9 17.1 16.2 11.2

OTHER 7.9 9.3 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 2.5 1.7 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 1.3 0.4 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 82.2 77.6 78.1 76.7

OTHER 5.5 4.2 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 0.5 0.7 2.0 2.4



2.2 1.4 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

N.B.RURAL

N.B.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


4,424 2,167 41,502 232,412


112.8 59.5 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 3.7 3.6 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 96.3 96.4 95.6 95.2


HEALTH3.1 5.9 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 6.4 14.2 16.2 11.2

OTHER 13.1 7.5 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 3.4 2.0 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 0.4 0.0 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.8 0.6 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 77.6 80.9 78.1 76.7

OTHER 13.1 8.0 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 0.9 0.6 2.0 2.4



1.9 0.7 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

QUÉ.RURAL

QUÉ.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


48,098 9,817 41,502 232,412


83.7 60.3 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 8.6 9.5 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 91.4 90.5 95.6 95.2


HEALTH10.6 20.3 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 13.7 20.7 16.2 11.2

OTHER 11.5 7.2 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 2.4 1.7 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 1.5 0.4 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 7.8 7.9 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 73.0 71.1 78.1 76.7

OTHER 14.3 15.2 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 6.0 5.5 2.0 2.4



1.6 0.5 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

ONT.RURAL

ONT.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


68,972 11,855 41,502 232,412


69.1 70.0 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 3.4 2.8 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 96.6 97.2 95.6 95.2


HEALTH13.7 16.7 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 7.4 13.0 16.2 11.2

OTHER 16.9 14.4 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 3.0 2.0 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 1.1 0.4 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 4.1 3.3 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 77.5 75.6 78.1 76.7

OTHER 14.9 13.3 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 1.2 1.0 2.0 2.4



2.0 0.6 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

MAN.RURAL

MAN.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


7,496 2,489 41,502 232,412


98.8 64.0 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 4.7 3.5 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 95.3 96.5 95.6 95.2


HEALTH8.1 12.7 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 10.2 16.3 16.2 11.2

OTHER 15.2 9.8 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 3.3 2.5 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 1.1 0.2 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.2 0.1 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 78.0 79.5 78.1 76.7

OTHER 10.2 6.1 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 2.0 1.3 2.0 2.4



2.0 0.6 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

SASK.RURAL

SASK.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


5,826 2,685 41,502 232,412


98.9 61.8 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 3.3 1.3 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 96.7 98.7 95.6 95.2


HEALTH11.6 28.7 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 9.5 21.6 16.2 11.2

OTHER 13.0 7.2 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 4.2 1.6 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 0.8 0.2 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.6 0.5 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 81.3 83.2 78.1 76.7

OTHER 9.1 5.0 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 1.3 1.0 2.0 2.4



1.1 0.4 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

ALTA.RURAL

ALTA.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


17,719 4,301 41,502 232,412


79.6 55.8 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 2.6 2.4 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 97.4 97.6 95.6 95.2


HEALTH10.7 18.5 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 8.4 15.2 16.2 11.2

OTHER 13 8.0 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 4.0 2.4 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 1.3 0.3 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 1.3 0.8 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 82.2 85.6 78.1 76.7

OTHER 9.2 5.2 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 1.2 0.8 2.0 2.4



2.7 0.7 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

B.C.RURAL

B.C.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


24,381 3,165 41,502 232,412


70.6 51.7 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 4.1 3.6 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 95.9 96.4 95.6 95.2


HEALTH10.3 16.5 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 13.3 14.4 16.2 11.2

OTHER 10.7 9.9 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 4.1 2.3 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 0.7 0.1 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.8 0.8 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 82.7 82.7 78.1 76.7

OTHER 8.4 6.0 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 1.7 1.7 2.0 2.4



2.5 1.0 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

Y.T.RURAL

Y.T.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


187 46 41,502 232,412


87.1 50.1 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 6.4 6.5 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 93.6 93.5 95.6 95.2


HEALTH16.5 17.3 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 9.6 2.2 16.2 11.2

OTHER 21.3 4.4 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 3.7 0.0 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.5 0.0 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 77.5 82.6 78.1 76.7

OTHER 8.5 2.2 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 1.1 0.0 2.0 2.4



1.1 0.0 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

N.W.T.RURAL

N.W.T.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


259 149 41,502 232,412


136.4 65.8 62.3 75.6


Gender (%) MALE 6.9 6.7 4.4 4.8

FEMALE 93.1 93.3 95.6 95.2


HEALTH15.8 41.2 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME 1.5 5.9 16.2 11.2

OTHER 19.6 5.9 9.9 12.5


EDUCATION 5.1 1.1 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED 0.0 1.0 3.0 3.7



STAFF NURSE 78.8 79.1 78.1 76.7

OTHER 13.9 5.0 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED 1.2 1.0 2.0 2.4



1.9 2.0 0.6 1.7





YEAR 2000URBAN

NUN.RURAL

NUN.RURAL

CANADA

TOTAL


n/a 92 41,502 232,412


n/a 32.7 62.3 75.6

Average age (years) n/a 42.5 42.9 43.3

Gender (%) MALE n/a 8.7 4.4 4.8

FEMALE n/a 91.3 95.6 95.2

Place of work (%) HOSPITAL n/a 33.3 56.4 63.8COMMUNITY

HEALTHn/a 49.5 17.5 12.4

NURSING HOME n/a 2.2 16.2 11.2

OTHER n/a 15.1 9.9 12.5

Primary area of DIRECT CARE n/a 90.3 87.1 85.5responsibility (%) ADMINISTRATION n/a 8.6 7.4 6.9

EDUCATION n/a 1.1 2.1 3.0

RESEARCH n/a 0.0 0.3 1.0

NOT STATED n/a 0.0 3.0 3.7

Full-time/Part-time FULL-TIME n/a 89.1 49.6 55.0status (%) PART-TIME n/a 10.9 50.3 45.0

Position (%) MANAGER n/a 15.1 9.9 7.7

STAFF NURSE n/a 77.4 78.1 76.7

OTHER n/a 6.5 10.1 13.2

NOT STATED n/a 1.1 2.0 2.4

Highest education in DIPLOMA n/a 63.0 81.4 75.6nursing (%) BACHELOR�S n/a 35.9 18.0 22.8


n/a 1.1 0.6 1.7

Place of graduation (%) CANADA n/a 78.3 96.5 92.0

FOREIGN n/a 14.1 1.9 6.1NOT STATED n/a 7.6 1.6 1.9


Data Tables

Table 1.0 Numbers and Proportions of RNs by Rural/Urban Location and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1994 and 1998


Nfld. 1,544 29.8 3,611 69.7 23 0.4 5,178 Nfld. 1,726 32.3 3,573 66.9 41 0.8 5,340P.E.I. 390 33.6 744 64.0 28 2.4 1,162 P.E.I. 446 34.9 805 63.0 26 2.0 1,277N.S. 2,577 28.1 6,533 71.3 47 0.5 9,157 N.S. 2,510 29.4 5,999 70.4 16 0.2 8,525N.B. 2,531 33.3 4,974 65.4 105 1.4 7,610 N.B. 2,571 34.5 4,786 64.2 99 1.3 7,456Qué. 10,169 16.6 50,802 83.0 247 0.4 61,218 Qué. 9,195 16.2 46,951 82.6 679 1.2 56,825Ont. 12,137 14.9 68,819 84.6 345 0.4 81,301 Ont. 11,498 14.6 67,123 85.2 204 0.3 78,825Man. 2,526 25.1 7,525 74.6 32 0.3 10,083 Man. 2,562 25.2 7,599 74.6 24 0.2 10,185Sask. 2,686 31.6 5,776 68.0 29 0.3 8,491 Sask. 2,719 32.2 5,713 67.6 23 0.3 8,455Alta. 4,345 19.9 17,399 79.6 116 0.5 21,860 Alta. 4,406 20.0 17,530 79.7 52 0.2 21,988B.C. 3,133 11.4 24,380 88.4 62 0.2 27,575 B.C. 3,351 12.0 24,596 87.8 57 0.2 28,004Y.T. 45 22.2 153 75.4 5 2.5 203 Y.T. 54 22.4 186 77.2 1 0.4 241

N.W.T. 86 20.4 313 74.3 22 5.2 421 N.W.T. 164 40.0 228 55.6 18 4.4 410Nun. 134 100.0 n/a n/a 0 0.0 134 Nun. 120 100.0 n/a n/a 0 0.0 120

Canada 42,303 18.0 190,950 81.5 1,140 0.5 234,393 Canada 41,322 18.2 185,092 81.3 1,237 0.5 227,651Source: RNDB/CIHI

n/a - Not applicable

Values between 1 and 4 are not suppressed in the "Unknown" category of Table 1.0 because the figures represent "calculated" values that cannot be used to identify individual RNs.

Please review the methodological notes for a full description of the terms "Rural", "Urban" and "Unknown" as used in this analysis.

CIHI data will differ from year-end provincial/territorial data due to the CIHI reporting period, the removal of interprovincial duplicates, and provincial/territorial data cleaning at year end.

Please review the RNDB methodological notes contained in Appendix A for detailed information regarding the collection, processing, accuracy and comparability of RNDB data.

Table 1.0a Numbers and Proportions of RNs by Rural/Urban Location and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 1999 and 2000


Nfld. 1,684 32.0 3,528 67.0 52 1.0 5,264 Nfld. 1,700 31.5 3,593 66.6 101 1.9 5,394P.E.I. 437 35.5 793 64.4 2 0.2 1,232 P.E.I. 452 36.0 797 63.5 6 0.5 1,255N.S. 2,529 29.4 6,069 70.4 17 0.2 8,615 N.S. 2,584 29.7 6,067 69.7 48 0.6 8,699N.B. 2,670 34.6 4,920 63.8 120 1.6 7,710 N.B. 2,167 29.4 4,424 60.0 785 10.6 7,376Qué. 9,796 16.9 47,558 82.0 626 1.1 57,980 Qué. 9,817 16.7 48,098 81.9 835 1.4 58,750Ont. 11,327 14.5 66,401 84.9 469 0.6 78,197 Ont. 11,855 14.5 68,972 84.4 852 1.0 81,679Man. 2,573 25.2 7,614 74.6 24 0.2 10,211 Man. 2,489 24.8 7,496 74.6 66 0.7 10,051Sask. 2,716 31.8 5,813 68.0 24 0.3 8,553 Sask. 2,685 31.4 5,826 68.2 32 0.4 8,543Alta. 4,354 19.8 17,616 79.9 74 0.3 22,044 Alta. 4,301 19.4 17,719 79.9 152 0.7 22,172B.C. 3,312 11.9 24,554 88.0 45 0.2 27,911 B.C. 3,165 11.4 24,381 87.9 184 0.7 27,730Y.T. 48 19.8 193 79.4 2 0.8 243 Y.T. 46 19.4 187 78.9 4 1.7 237

N.W.T. 143 37.2 226 58.9 15 3.9 384 N.W.T. 149 34.3 259 59.7 26 6.0 434Nun. 106 100.0 n/a n/a 0 0.0 106 Nun. 92 100.0 n/a n/a 0 0.0 92

Canada 41,695 18.3 185,291 81.1 1,464 0.6 228,450 Canada 41,502 17.9 187,819 80.8 3,091 1.3 232,412Source: RNDB/CIHI

n/a - Not applicable

Values between 1 and 4 are not suppressed in the "Unknown" category of Table 1.0a because the figures represent "calculated" values that cannot be used to identify individual RNs.

Please review the methodological notes for a full description of the terms "Rural", "Urban" and "Unknown" as used in this analysis.


Northwest Territories/Nunavut RNDB data for the year 2000 were derived using a modified methodology.


UnknownTotal1999

Rural Urban UnknownTotal 2000

Rural Urban

UnknownTotal

Rural Urban UnknownTotal1994 1998 Rural Urban

Page 89

Table 2.0 Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Rural/Urban Location‡ and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada: 1994, 1998, 1999 and 2000

1994 1998 1999 2000 1994 1998 1999 2000 1994 1998 1999 2000

Nfld. 47.9 57.7 57.1 58.1 143.1 145.2 143.6 145.9 90.1 97.9 97.3 100.1P.E.I. 63.9 72.2 70.5 72.4 102.3 107.1 104.8 104.2 86.9 93.3 89.5 90.3N.S. 71.5 69.9 70.4 72.0 115.4 104.0 104.7 104.2 98.9 91.1 91.7 92.4N.B. 69.2 70.5 73.4 59.5 129.1 123.0 126.0 112.8 101.3 99.0 102.2 97.5Qué. 63.3 56.4 60.1 60.3 90.7 82.5 83.2 83.7 84.9 77.6 78.9 79.7Ont. 74.3 68.7 67.3 70.0 74.8 69.1 67.5 69.1 75.1 69.2 67.9 70.0Man. 68.5 66.8 66.7 64.0 99.6 100.7 100.6 98.8 89.7 89.5 89.4 87.6Sask. 61.3 62.0 62.2 61.8 101.1 97.4 98.7 98.9 84.1 82.5 83.4 83.5Alta. 62.2 58.7 57.1 55.8 86.7 81.3 80.2 79.6 80.8 75.6 74.5 74.0B.C. 54.6 55.1 54.5 51.7 78.4 72.6 71.8 70.6 74.9 70.1 69.3 68.2Y.T. 52.8 58.3 52.1 50.1 71.1 83.5 88.3 87.1 67.6 76.4 78.2 77.3

N.W.T. 37.9 73.3 64.3 65.8 178.2 124.6 122.5 136.4 104.6 100.8 94.4 104.3Nun. 53.8 44.6 38.6 32.7 n/a n/a n/a n/a 53.8 44.6 38.6 32.7

Canada 65.2 62.3 62.7 62.3 84.7 78.4 77.7 78.0 80.7 75.3 74.9 75.6Source: RNDB/CIHI

‡ EXCLUDES 3,091 RECORDS WHERE RURAL/URBAN LOCATION WAS "UNKNOWN".

Figures presented in Table 2.0 use updated population estimates from Statistics Canada; consequently, these figures will not match those previously released by CIHI.

Please review the methodological notes for a full description of the terms "Rural" and "Urban" as used in this analysis.




Rural Urban Overall

Page 90

Table 3.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Age Group and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000

Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Qué. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. Y.T. N.W.T./Nun. Canada

ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412< 25 ** ** 82 106 2,201 ** 100 116 266 411 * ** 4,24825-34 1,593 252 1,618 1,664 11,883 14,780 1,894 1,574 4,570 4,529 41 141 44,53935-44 1,917 393 3,229 2,616 18,537 24,533 3,365 2,743 6,759 8,380 86 154 72,71245-54 1,344 435 2,780 2,302 20,643 28,362 3,457 2,901 7,338 9,868 87 153 79,67055+ 377 165 990 688 5,486 13,214 1,211 1,209 3,232 4,542 ** ** 31,206Not Stated * * 0 0 0 * 24 0 7 0 0 0 37

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502< 25 ** * 23 32 408 ** 16 25 ** 27 0 5 77825-34 569 106 440 571 2,137 2,191 452 451 799 352 * ** 8,12635-44 560 144 923 738 3,270 3,519 833 848 1,324 975 20 67 13,22145-54 410 153 885 650 3,373 4,358 883 934 1,491 1,264 19 80 14,50055+ 97 ** 313 176 629 1,649 297 427 646 547 * ** 4,864Not Stated * 0 0 0 0 * 8 0 * 0 0 0 13

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819< 25 ** ** 56 67 1,756 ** 83 91 222 381 * * 3,38525-34 984 146 1,158 912 9,541 12,270 1,429 1,113 3,721 4,151 34 78 35,53735-44 1,336 246 2,299 1,580 15,001 20,742 2,507 1,887 5,394 7,353 65 83 58,49345-54 910 279 1,886 1,424 17,007 23,836 2,555 1,954 5,807 8,522 68 63 64,31155+ 273 120 668 441 4,793 11,492 906 781 2,570 3,974 ** ** 26,069Not Stated * * 0 0 0 * 16 0 5 0 0 0 24

Source: RNDB/CIHI

‡ EXCLUDES 3,091 RECORDS WHERE RURAL/URBAN LOCATION WAS "UNKNOWN"; THEREFORE "RURAL" AND "URBAN" TOTALS WILL NOT MATCH GRAND TOTAL.* Figure too small to be expressed

** Figure suppressed to ensure confidentiality





Page 91

Table 3.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Age Group and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0< 25 ** ** 0.9 1.4 3.7 ** 1.0 1.4 1.2 1.5 * ** 1.825-34 29.5 20.1 18.6 22.6 20.2 18.1 18.8 18.4 20.6 16.3 17.3 26.8 19.235-44 35.5 31.3 37.1 35.5 31.6 30.0 33.5 32.1 30.5 30.2 36.3 29.3 31.345-54 24.9 34.7 32.0 31.2 35.1 34.7 34.4 34.0 33.1 35.6 36.7 29.1 34.355+ 7.0 13.1 11.4 9.3 9.3 16.2 12.0 14.2 14.6 16.4 ** ** 13.4Not Stated * * 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0< 25 ** * 0.9 1.5 4.2 ** 0.6 0.9 ** 0.9 0.0 2.1 1.925-34 33.5 23.5 17.0 26.3 21.8 18.5 18.2 16.8 18.6 11.1 * ** 19.635-44 32.9 31.9 35.7 34.1 33.3 29.7 33.5 31.6 30.8 30.8 43.5 27.8 31.945-54 24.1 33.8 34.2 30.0 34.4 36.8 35.5 34.8 34.7 39.9 41.3 33.2 34.955+ 5.7 ** 12.1 8.1 6.4 13.9 11.9 15.9 15.0 17.3 * ** 11.7Not Stated * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.3 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0< 25 ** ** 0.9 1.5 3.7 ** 1.1 1.6 1.3 1.6 * * 1.825-34 27.4 18.3 19.1 20.6 19.8 17.8 19.1 19.1 21.0 17.0 18.2 30.1 18.935-44 37.2 30.9 37.9 35.7 31.2 30.1 33.4 32.4 30.4 30.2 34.8 32.0 31.145-54 25.3 35.0 31.1 32.2 35.4 34.6 34.1 33.5 32.8 35.0 36.4 24.3 34.255+ 7.6 15.1 11.0 10.0 10.0 16.7 12.1 13.4 14.5 16.3 ** ** 13.9Not Stated * * 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 92

Table 4.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Gender and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Male 202 21 232 264 5,139 2,748 443 233 583 1,129 15 37 11,046Female 5,192 1,234 8,467 7,112 53,611 78,931 9,608 8,310 21,589 26,601 222 489 221,366

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Male 57 ** 42 79 936 327 87 36 105 113 * 18 1,808Female 1,643 ** 2,542 2,088 8,881 11,528 2,402 2,649 4,196 3,052 ** 223 39,694

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Male 139 16 189 165 4,117 2,367 354 194 468 1,010 12 18 9,049Female 3,454 781 5,878 4,259 43,981 66,605 7,142 5,632 17,251 23,371 175 241 178,770

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Table 4.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Gender and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Male 3.7 1.7 2.7 3.6 8.7 3.4 4.4 2.7 2.6 4.1 6.3 7.0 4.8Female 96.3 98.3 97.3 96.4 91.3 96.6 95.6 97.3 97.4 95.9 93.7 93.0 95.2

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Male 3.4 ** 1.6 3.6 9.5 2.8 3.5 1.3 2.4 3.6 * 7.5 4.4Female 96.6 ** 98.4 96.4 90.5 97.2 96.5 98.7 97.6 96.4 ** 92.5 95.6

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Male 3.9 2.0 3.1 3.7 8.6 3.4 4.7 3.3 2.6 4.1 6.4 6.9 4.8Female 96.1 98.0 96.9 96.3 91.4 96.6 95.3 96.7 97.4 95.9 93.6 93.1 95.2

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 93

Table 5.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Initial/Entry to Practice Education and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Diploma 4,621 1,092 7,456 5,891 54,760 72,651 8,595 7,316 18,109 23,894 185 434 205,004Bachelor's Degree ** 163 ** 1,485 3,934 9,028 1,456 1,227 ** 3,827 52 92 27,334Master's Degree * 0 * 0 56 0 0 0 * 9 0 0 74

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Diploma 1,468 395 2,288 1,691 9,445 10,956 2,249 2,348 3,749 2,842 35 198 37,664Bachelor's Degree 232 57 ** 476 372 899 240 337 552 323 11 43 ** Master's Degree 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Diploma 3,077 691 5,131 3,550 44,541 60,968 6,288 4,941 14,247 20,885 147 213 164,679Bachelor's Degree ** 106 ** 874 3,504 8,004 1,208 885 ** 3,487 40 46 ** Master's Degree * 0 * 0 53 0 0 0 * 9 0 0 **

Source: RNDB/CIHI

‡ EXCLUDES 3,091 RECORDS WHERE RURAL/URBAN LOCATION WAS "UNKNOWN"; THEREFORE "RURAL" AND "URBAN" TOTALS WILL NOT MATCH GRAND TOTAL.

* Figure too small to be expressed






Table 5.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Initial/Entry to Practice Education and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Diploma 85.7 87.0 85.7 79.9 93.2 88.9 85.5 85.6 81.7 86.2 78.1 82.5 88.2Bachelor's Degree ** 13.0 ** 20.1 6.7 11.1 14.5 14.4 ** 13.8 21.9 17.5 11.8Master's Degree * 0.0 * 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Diploma 86.4 87.4 88.5 78.0 96.2 92.4 90.4 87.4 87.2 89.8 76.1 82.2 90.8Bachelor's Degree 13.6 12.6 ** 22.0 3.8 7.6 9.6 12.6 12.8 10.2 23.9 17.8 ** Master's Degree 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 *

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Diploma 85.6 86.7 84.6 80.2 92.6 88.4 83.9 84.8 80.4 85.7 78.6 82.2 87.7Bachelor's Degree ** 13.3 ** 19.8 7.3 11.6 16.1 15.2 ** 14.3 21.4 17.8 ** Master's Degree * 0.0 * 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.0 **

Source: RNDB/CIHI




Page 94

Table 6.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Decade of Graduation and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412<1959 23 22 112 69 381 1,574 112 179 406 451 * ** 3,3411960-1969 521 220 1,331 979 6,957 14,567 1,272 1,536 3,692 4,991 ** ** 36,1591970-1979 1,442 397 2,774 2,049 20,091 24,494 2,857 2,535 6,369 8,068 82 128 71,2861980-1989 1,662 361 2,714 2,433 16,254 21,169 3,037 2,278 6,070 7,393 76 133 63,5801990+ 1,746 255 1,768 1,846 15,058 17,947 2,773 2,015 5,635 6,827 52 187 56,109Not Stated 0 0 0 0 9 1,928 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,937

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502<1959 * 8 42 17 ** ** 21 60 75 49 * 8 4901960-1969 ** 67 408 256 859 2,001 302 526 757 563 ** 33 5,9121970-1979 450 140 893 579 3,412 3,878 800 891 1,262 974 16 64 13,3591980-1989 478 133 768 739 2,897 2,961 714 660 1,205 893 14 59 11,5211990+ 633 104 473 576 2,613 2,703 652 548 1,002 686 10 77 10,077Not Stated 0 0 0 0 * ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 143

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819<1959 18 14 70 48 342 1,399 90 119 328 401 * * 2,8311960-1969 380 152 912 633 6,020 12,488 961 1,005 2,917 4,390 ** ** 29,9111970-1979 969 255 1,875 1,268 16,420 20,484 2,042 1,637 5,090 7,044 66 56 57,2061980-1989 1,163 225 1,938 1,424 13,118 17,996 2,299 1,609 4,820 6,458 60 70 51,1801990+ 1,063 151 1,272 1,051 12,190 14,885 2,104 1,456 4,564 6,088 40 99 44,963Not Stated 0 0 0 0 8 1,720 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,728

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 95

Table 6.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Decade of Graduation and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0<1959 0.4 1.8 1.3 0.9 0.6 1.9 1.1 2.1 1.8 1.6 * ** 1.41960-1969 9.7 17.5 15.3 13.3 11.8 17.8 12.7 18.0 16.7 18.0 ** ** 15.61970-1979 26.7 31.6 31.9 27.8 34.2 30.0 28.4 29.7 28.7 29.1 34.6 24.3 30.71980-1989 30.8 28.8 31.2 33.0 27.7 25.9 30.2 26.7 27.4 26.7 32.1 25.3 27.41990+ 32.4 20.3 20.3 25.0 25.6 22.0 27.6 23.6 25.4 24.6 21.9 35.6 24.1Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0<1959 * 1.8 1.6 0.8 ** ** 0.8 2.2 1.7 1.5 * 3.3 1.21960-1969 ** 14.8 15.8 11.8 8.8 16.9 12.1 19.6 17.6 17.8 ** 13.7 14.21970-1979 26.5 31.0 34.6 26.7 34.8 32.7 32.1 33.2 29.3 30.8 34.8 26.6 32.21980-1989 28.1 29.4 29.7 34.1 29.5 25.0 28.7 24.6 28.0 28.2 30.4 24.5 27.81990+ 37.2 23.0 18.3 26.6 26.6 22.8 26.2 20.4 23.3 21.7 21.7 32.0 24.3Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * ** 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0<1959 0.5 1.8 1.2 1.1 0.7 2.0 1.2 2.0 1.9 1.6 * * 1.51960-1969 10.6 19.1 15.0 14.3 12.5 18.1 12.8 17.3 16.5 18.0 ** ** 15.91970-1979 27.0 32.0 30.9 28.7 34.1 29.7 27.2 28.1 28.7 28.9 35.3 21.6 30.51980-1989 32.4 28.2 31.9 32.2 27.3 26.1 30.7 27.6 27.2 26.5 32.1 27.0 27.21990+ 29.6 18.9 21.0 23.8 25.3 21.6 28.1 25.0 25.8 25.0 21.4 38.2 23.9Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 96

Table 7.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Highest Education in Nursing and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Diploma 4,265 994 6,488 5,016 43,825 65,456 7,701 6,677 14,832 19,958 144 347 175,703Bachelor's Degree 1,052 242 2,035 2,251 14,126 14,967 2,181 1,794 6,829 7,145 ** ** 52,882Master's Degree ** ** 171 102 769 1,208 158 65 476 589 * ** 3,641Doctorate * * 5 7 30 48 11 7 35 38 0 0 186

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Diploma 1,417 363 2,057 1,467 7,999 10,302 2,072 2,209 3,261 2,468 22 151 33,788Bachelor's Degree 278 ** 492 685 1,770 1,486 402 467 1,012 664 24 ** 7,451Master's Degree 5 * ** ** ** ** 15 ** 28 33 0 * 254Doctorate 0 0 * * * * 0 * 0 0 0 0 9

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Diploma 2,778 625 4,402 2,969 35,198 54,517 5,580 4,441 11,479 17,349 120 177 139,635Bachelor's Degree 743 157 1,526 1,369 12,163 13,291 1,765 1,322 5,758 6,441 ** ** 44,677Master's Degree ** ** ** 81 711 1,118 140 58 447 554 * ** 3,334Doctorate * * * 5 26 46 11 5 35 37 0 0 173

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 97

Table 7.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Highest Education in Nursing and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Diploma 79.1 79.2 74.6 68.0 74.6 80.1 76.6 78.2 66.9 72.0 60.8 66.0 75.6Bachelor's Degree 19.5 19.3 23.4 30.5 24.0 18.3 21.7 21.0 30.8 25.8 ** ** 22.8Master's Degree ** ** 2.0 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.6 0.8 2.1 2.1 * ** 1.6Doctorate * * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Diploma 83.4 80.3 79.6 67.7 81.5 86.9 83.2 82.3 75.8 78.0 47.8 62.7 81.4Bachelor's Degree 16.4 ** 19.0 31.6 18.0 12.5 16.2 17.4 23.5 21.0 52.2 ** 18.0Master's Degree 0.3 * ** ** ** ** 0.6 ** 0.7 1.0 0.0 * 0.6Doctorate 0.0 0.0 * * * * 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Diploma 77.3 78.4 72.6 67.1 73.2 79.0 74.4 76.2 64.8 71.2 64.2 68.3 74.3

Bachelor's Degree 20.7 19.7 25.2 30.9 25.3 19.3 23.5 22.7 32.5 26.4 ** ** 23.8Master's Degree ** ** ** 1.8 1.5 1.6 1.9 1.0 2.5 2.3 * ** 1.8Doctorate * * * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 98

Table 8.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Other Education in Nursing (Non-Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412No 3,752 896 7,543 6,319 0 68,828 7,847 7,355 22,172 19,907 183 405 145,207Yes 1,642 240 1,156 1,057 0 12,851 2,204 ** 0 5,216 ** 121 25,718Not Stated 0 119 0 0 58,750 0 0 * 0 2,607 ** 0 61,487

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502No 1,195 331 2,256 1,856 0 10,041 1,993 2,258 4,301 2,311 30 182 26,754Yes 505 83 328 311 0 1,814 496 ** 0 582 ** 59 4,619Not Stated 0 38 0 0 9,817 0 0 * 0 272 * 0 10,129

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819No 2,485 560 5,246 3,789 0 58,079 5,806 5,070 17,719 17,460 149 202 116,565Yes 1,108 156 821 635 0 10,893 1,690 ** 0 4,601 ** 57 20,746Not Stated 0 81 0 0 48,098 0 0 * 0 2,320 ** 0 50,508

Source: RNDB/CIHI








Table 8.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Other Education in Nursing (Non-Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0No 69.6 71.4 86.7 85.7 0.0 84.3 78.1 86.1 100.0 71.8 77.2 77.0 62.5Yes 30.4 19.1 13.3 14.3 0.0 15.7 21.9 ** 0.0 18.8 ** 23.0 11.1Not Stated 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 9.4 ** 0.0 26.5

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0No 70.3 73.2 87.3 85.6 0.0 84.7 80.1 84.1 100.0 73.0 65.2 75.5 64.5Yes 29.7 18.4 12.7 14.4 0.0 15.3 19.9 ** 0.0 18.4 ** 24.5 11.1Not Stated 0.0 8.4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 8.6 * 0.0 24.4

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0No 69.2 70.3 86.5 85.6 0.0 84.2 77.5 87.0 100.0 71.6 79.7 78.0 62.1Yes 30.8 19.6 13.5 14.4 0.0 15.8 22.5 ** 0.0 18.9 ** 22.0 11.0Not Stated 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 9.5 ** 0.0 26.9

Source: RNDB/CIHI




Page 99

Table 9.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Other Education in Nursing (Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Bachelor's Degree 320 90 880 821 13,873 6,491 842 759 3,095 5,708 ** ** 33,052Master's Degree ** ** 168 102 759 1,208 158 65 474 588 * ** 3,622Doctorate * * 5 7 30 48 11 7 35 38 0 0 186None 5,000 1,134 7,646 865 6,683 73,932 9,040 7,687 18,568 21,248 196 365 152,364Not Stated 0 12 0 5,581 37,405 0 0 25 0 148 0 17 43,188

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Bachelor's Degree 51 30 216 219 1,751 615 174 186 494 549 13 72 4,370Master's Degree 5 * ** ** ** ** 15 ** 28 33 0 * 253Doctorate 0 0 * * * * 0 * 0 0 0 0 9None 1,644 413 2,334 267 1,221 11,173 2,300 2,481 3,779 2,571 33 156 28,372Not Stated 0 ** 0 1,666 6,797 0 0 9 0 12 0 ** 8,498

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Bachelor's Degree 263 60 658 536 11,929 5,799 662 573 2,579 5,127 ** ** 28,267Master's Degree ** ** ** 81 701 1,118 140 58 445 553 * ** 3,316Doctorate * * * 5 26 46 11 5 35 37 0 0 173None 3,261 715 5,272 504 5,345 62,009 6,683 5,174 14,660 18,532 160 192 122,507Not Stated 0 7 0 3,298 30,097 0 0 16 0 132 0 6 33,556

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 100

Table 9.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Other Education in Nursing (Degree) and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Bachelor's Degree 5.9 7.2 10.1 11.1 23.6 7.9 8.4 8.9 14.0 20.6 ** ** 14.2Master's Degree ** ** 1.9 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.6 0.8 2.1 2.1 * ** 1.6Doctorate * * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1None 92.7 90.4 87.9 11.7 11.4 90.5 89.9 90.0 83.7 76.6 82.7 69.4 65.6Not Stated 0.0 1.0 0.0 75.7 63.7 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.2 18.6

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Bachelor's Degree 3.0 6.6 8.4 10.1 17.8 5.2 7.0 6.9 11.5 17.3 28.3 29.9 10.5Master's Degree 0.3 * ** ** ** ** 0.6 ** 0.7 1.0 0.0 * 0.6Doctorate 0.0 0.0 * * * * 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0None 96.7 91.4 90.3 12.3 12.4 94.2 92.4 92.4 87.9 81.2 71.7 64.7 68.4Not Stated 0.0 ** 0.0 76.9 69.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 ** 20.5

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Bachelor's Degree 7.3 7.5 10.8 12.1 24.8 8.4 8.8 9.8 14.6 21.0 ** ** 15.1Master's Degree ** ** ** 1.8 1.5 1.6 1.9 1.0 2.5 2.3 * ** 1.8Doctorate * * * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1None 90.8 89.7 86.9 11.4 11.1 89.9 89.2 88.8 82.7 76.0 85.6 74.1 65.2Not Stated 0.0 0.9 0.0 74.5 62.6 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.3 17.9

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 101

Table 10.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Non-Nursing Education and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Bachelor's Degree 113 54 566 88 1,326 4,754 483 367 1,482 1,876 ** ** 11,155Master's degree 73 11 157 131 1,250 343 154 138 517 612 * ** 3,397Doctorate 9 0 10 7 68 109 13 13 75 50 0 0 354None 5,199 1,162 7,966 155 9,697 76,473 9,401 8,008 20,098 25,041 217 178 163,595Not Stated 0 28 0 6,995 46,409 0 0 17 0 151 0 311 53,911

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Bachelor's Degree 25 17 109 19 133 453 63 70 194 179 * ** 1,281Master's degree 8 * ** ** ** 26 17 ** ** ** 0 6 307Doctorate 0 0 * * * 13 0 0 * * 0 0 24None 1,667 425 2,451 39 1,345 11,363 2,409 2,599 4,055 2,932 ** ** 29,402Not Stated 0 ** 0 2,084 8,236 0 0 * 0 12 0 145 10,488

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Bachelor's Degree ** 37 451 ** 1,178 4,234 416 296 1,279 1,686 ** ** 9,754Master's degree 64 8 135 100 1,135 308 137 126 460 568 * * 3,046Doctorate ** 0 8 * 62 95 13 13 71 47 0 0 321None 3,435 731 5,473 101 8,220 64,335 6,930 5,378 15,909 21,945 169 93 132,719Not Stated 0 21 0 4,155 37,503 0 0 13 0 135 0 152 41,979

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 102

Table 10.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Non-Nursing Education and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Bachelor's Degree 2.1 4.3 6.5 1.2 2.3 5.8 4.8 4.3 6.7 6.8 ** ** 4.8Master's degree 1.4 0.9 1.8 1.8 2.1 0.4 1.5 1.6 2.3 2.2 * ** 1.5Doctorate 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2None 96.4 92.6 91.6 2.1 16.5 93.6 93.5 93.7 90.6 90.3 91.6 33.8 70.4Not Stated 0.0 2.2 0.0 94.8 79.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.0 59.1 23.2

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Bachelor's Degree 1.5 3.8 4.2 0.9 1.4 3.8 2.5 2.6 4.5 5.7 * ** 3.1Master's degree 0.5 * ** ** ** 0.2 0.7 ** ** ** 0.0 2.5 0.7Doctorate 0.0 0.0 * * * 0.1 0.0 0.0 * * 0.0 0.0 0.1None 98.1 94.0 94.9 1.8 13.7 95.8 96.8 96.8 94.3 92.6 ** ** 70.8Not Stated 0.0 ** 0.0 96.2 83.9 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 0.4 0.0 60.2 25.3

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Bachelor's Degree ** 4.6 7.4 ** 2.4 6.1 5.5 5.1 7.2 6.9 ** ** 5.2Master's degree 1.8 1.0 2.2 2.3 2.4 0.4 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.3 * * 1.6Doctorate ** 0.0 0.1 * 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2None 95.6 91.7 90.2 2.3 17.1 93.3 92.4 92.3 89.8 90.0 90.4 35.9 70.7Not Stated 0.0 2.6 0.0 93.9 78.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.0 58.7 22.4

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 103

Table 11.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Place of Work and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412

Hospital 3,887 797 6,194 5,543 37,279 50,032 6,568 5,001 14,652 18,007 136 270 148,366Hospital (general, maternal, paediatric, psychiatric) 3,807 736 5,950 5,250 34,368 48,686 6,140 4,730 13,983 17,346 100 236 141,332Mental Health Centre ** 55 72 212 2,223 365 41 63 228 369 * 0 3,636Nursing Stations (Outpost or Clinic) ** 0 14 0 45 176 133 84 145 85 32 ** 805Rehabilitation/Convalescent Centre 16 6 158 81 643 805 254 124 296 207 * * 2,593

Nursing Home/Long Term Care 595 ** 989 705 8,717 6,668 1,170 1,138 2,150 3,730 ** 12 26,094

Community Health 519 114 789 316 7,204 11,543 930 1,445 2,710 3,056 39 165 28,830Home Care Agency 40 57 354 69 264 5,232 285 607 1,164 553 9 10 8,644Community Health/Health Centre 479 57 435 247 6,940 6,311 645 838 1,546 2,503 30 155 20,186

Other Place of Work 378 143 727 763 5,406 13,289 1,365 920 2,614 2,930 41 79 28,655Business/Industry/Occupational Health Office ** 5 122 42 1,332 1,311 83 100 376 210 * 0 3,621Private Nursing Agency/Private Duty ** 0 46 38 646 575 220 48 49 101 0 * 1,739Self-Employed 16 7 77 47 325 897 61 54 52 311 * ** 1,858Physician's Office/Family Practice Unit 30 37 120 172 745 2,978 194 150 700 477 13 6 5,622Educational Institution 118 19 159 138 1,260 1,710 204 193 542 662 5 13 5,023Association/Government 25 45 179 134 830 1,252 363 194 323 502 12 30 3,889Other 137 30 24 192 268 4,566 240 181 572 667 6 20 6,903

Not Stated 15 * 0 49 144 147 18 39 46 7 * 0 467Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 104



Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502

Hospital 1,115 289 1,572 1,569 5,081 6,637 1,523 1,142 2,507 1,874 35 93 23,437Hospital (general, maternal, paediatric, psychiatric) 1,059 280 1,508 1,490 4,761 6,453 1,413 1,073 2,373 1,794 9 72 22,285Mental Health Centre 0 9 16 59 212 50 14 12 55 42 0 0 469Nursing Stations (Outpost or Clinic) ** 0 5 0 17 88 77 46 63 ** 26 ** 431Rehabilitation/Convalescent Centre * 0 43 20 91 46 19 11 16 * 0 * 252

Nursing Home/Long Term Care 254 65 443 307 2,031 1,538 ** 581 652 457 * ** 6,743

Community Health 263 52 327 129 1,988 1,980 317 769 794 524 ** ** 7,262Home Care Agency 8 31 142 22 58 921 100 286 360 74 * * 2,008Community Health/Health Centre 255 21 185 107 1,930 1,059 217 483 434 450 6 107 5,254

Other Place of Work 63 46 242 150 697 1,682 240 182 ** 310 * 29 3,985Business/Industry/Occupational Health Office ** * 45 10 220 154 12 13 46 16 0 0 523Private Nursing Agency/Private Duty * 0 12 * 65 33 14 11 * 8 0 * 153Self-Employed * * 22 ** 60 136 12 12 ** 37 0 * 302Physician's Office/Family Practice Unit 8 13 39 42 82 508 37 37 101 65 * * 935Educational Institution 7 * 58 24 142 173 36 23 49 61 0 * 578Association/Government * 13 57 32 94 158 81 29 56 38 * 11 573Other 35 14 9 29 34 520 48 57 78 85 0 12 921

Not Stated 5 0 0 12 20 18 * 11 ** 0 0 0 75

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 105



Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819

Hospital 2,701 504 4,589 3,421 31,668 42,876 4,997 3,835 12,027 16,007 98 166 122,889Hospital (general, maternal, paediatric, psychiatric) 2,680 452 4,410 3,241 29,103 41,737 4,681 3,633 11,495 15,431 88 154 117,105Mental Health Centre ** 46 56 131 1,994 312 27 51 171 326 * 0 3,122Nursing Stations (Outpost or Clinic) * 0 9 0 26 77 54 38 81 48 ** 12 353Rehabilitation/Convalescent Centre ** 6 114 49 545 750 235 113 280 202 * 0 2,309

Nursing Home/Long Term Care 331 ** 542 283 6,575 5,078 761 555 1,489 3,254 ** * 19,025

Community Health 244 61 455 141 5,096 9,451 610 675 1,904 2,514 31 41 21,223Home Care Agency 32 25 209 42 202 4,259 183 320 798 475 7 6 6,558Community Health/Health Centre 212 36 246 99 4,894 5,192 427 355 1,106 2,039 24 35 14,665

Other Place of Work 309 96 481 545 4,638 11,439 1,114 734 2,260 2,599 39 48 24,302Business/Industry/Occupational Health Office 32 * 77 25 1,095 1,140 71 87 326 194 * 0 3,052Private Nursing Agency/Private Duty ** 0 34 29 572 534 206 37 46 93 0 * 1,564Self-Employed ** ** 54 32 260 756 49 42 43 273 * 5 1,538Physician's Office/Family Practice Unit 22 23 80 116 653 2,447 155 113 597 412 ** * 4,634Educational Institution 110 15 100 107 1,107 1,513 165 169 489 593 5 12 4,385Association/Government 21 32 121 94 728 1,073 279 163 265 461 11 18 3,266Other 99 16 15 142 223 3,976 189 123 494 573 6 7 5,863

Not Stated 8 * 0 34 121 128 14 27 39 7 * 0 380

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 106

Table 12.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Area of Responsibility and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412

Direct Care 4,897 1,132 7,896 6,759 44,688 70,896 9,072 7,625 19,900 25,139 209 470 198,683Medical/Surgical 1,196 264 1,959 1,349 10,520 11,032 1,833 1,543 4,327 5,777 31 41 39,872Psychiatric/Mental Health 277 85 512 370 3,201 4,287 295 157 916 1,477 5 12 11,594Paediatric 239 34 378 173 0 2,615 284 245 874 774 8 18 5,642Maternal/Newborn 282 87 571 360 2,218 4,521 632 417 1,448 1,708 14 25 12,283Geriatric/Long Term Care 659 196 1,072 926 5,684 8,179 1,328 1,220 2,133 4,000 18 21 25,436Critical Care 508 52 725 1,032 3,230 6,944 686 693 1,662 2,003 * ** 17,552Community Health 436 86 418 577 2,194 5,016 821 593 1,265 1,817 51 142 13,416Ambulatory Care 101 17 203 210 2,612 1,547 310 100 340 397 * ** 5,855Home Care 51 44 416 0 1,639 4,250 380 574 1,186 875 9 15 9,439Occupational Health 41 7 101 67 362 1,501 99 105 360 179 * ** 2,831Operating Room 247 45 512 352 1,561 3,094 515 354 1,119 1,712 11 16 9,538Emergency Room 291 64 488 463 2,258 4,103 476 348 1,056 1,296 18 32 10,893Nursing in Several Clinical Areas 206 96 183 148 6,713 1,806 662 780 1,391 1,000 24 89 13,098Oncology 46 0 149 0 393 2,347 120 98 384 ** * 0 3,894Rehabilitation 15 27 134 182 598 1,344 182 94 285 ** * 0 3,209Other Direct Care 302 28 75 550 1,505 8,310 449 304 1,154 1,423 8 23 14,131

Administration 270 89 417 340 7,359 4,352 564 531 942 1,077 20 38 15,999Nursing Service 188 79 325 180 7,359 2,009 361 366 570 591 14 18 12,060Nursing Education 17 * 35 11 0 219 42 42 78 53 * * 501Other Administration 65 ** 57 149 0 2,124 161 123 294 433 ** ** 3,438

Education 181 31 298 206 1,321 2,402 311 287 826 1,100 ** ** 6,987Teaching - Students 95 15 137 131 0 872 149 120 375 546 * ** 2,453Teaching - Employees 37 10 73 41 0 411 83 69 204 241 * * 1,171Teaching Patients/Clients 35 ** 78 34 0 587 35 59 192 253 * 5 1,286Other Education 14 * 10 0 1,321 532 44 39 55 60 * 0 2,077

Research ** * 88 20 784 775 86 51 234 182 0 0 2,248Nursing Reseach Only ** * 35 20 594 213 51 11 90 36 0 0 1,057Other Research 21 0 53 0 190 562 35 40 144 146 0 0 1,191

Not Stated 20 * 0 51 4,598 3,254 18 49 270 232 * * 8,495Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 107



Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502

Direct Care 1,589 419 2,340 1,990 7,542 10,434 2,285 2,437 3,937 2,925 ** ** 36,162Medical/Surgical 365 94 525 394 1,322 1,745 374 311 705 526 * ** 6,372Psychiatric/Mental Health 31 19 107 84 422 415 56 18 103 109 0 0 1,364Paediatric 14 6 59 44 0 171 18 21 43 31 0 0 407Maternal/Newborn 97 24 138 106 261 546 95 51 147 156 * ** 1,631Geriatric/Long Term Care 275 61 475 325 1,267 1,601 401 655 667 499 * ** 6,237Critical Care 102 ** 140 233 402 764 77 68 78 150 0 * 2,032Community Health 239 32 173 251 436 874 239 270 366 307 22 100 3,309Ambulatory Care 25 * 35 67 532 127 57 10 38 26 0 ** 926Home Care 21 23 155 0 379 852 142 267 400 154 * ** 2,402Occupational Health 7 * 35 17 77 175 10 12 46 10 0 * 394Operating Room 56 ** 118 63 179 360 93 41 133 144 0 * 1,200Emergency Room 114 33 203 179 343 860 107 84 208 179 * ** 2,322Nursing in Several Clinical Areas 159 73 99 64 1,636 596 480 577 837 438 14 51 5,024Oncology * 0 18 0 15 198 14 * 14 15 0 0 279Rehabilitation * 15 38 49 78 123 28 ** 26 17 0 0 381Other Direct Care 81 ** 22 114 193 1,027 94 43 126 164 * 8 1,882

Administration 88 ** 142 121 1,293 737 134 186 212 110 * ** 3,068Nursing Service 69 ** 118 ** 1,293 397 101 145 153 ** * ** 2,450Nursing Education 5 0 12 * 0 23 10 8 8 * 0 0 72Other Administration 14 * 12 ** 0 317 23 33 51 38 0 10 546

Education 18 ** 91 43 168 247 61 43 107 101 0 * 889Teaching - Students * * 52 22 0 73 27 19 40 55 0 * 297Teaching - Employees * * ** 11 0 38 19 7 34 8 0 * 135Teaching Patients/Clients 9 * 24 10 0 75 8 11 27 32 0 * 198Other Education * 0 * 0 168 61 7 6 6 6 0 0 259

Research 0 0 11 * 40 41 ** 5 12 * 0 0 120Nursing Reseach Only 0 0 5 * 30 7 ** * * 0 0 0 55Other Research 0 0 6 0 10 34 0 * ** * 0 0 65

Not Stated 5 0 0 12 774 396 * 14 33 25 0 * 1,263Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 108



Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819

Direct Care 3,212 707 5,511 4,030 36,488 59,712 6,726 5,158 15,829 22,054 160 229 159,816Medical/Surgical 805 168 1,422 796 9,047 9,176 1,449 1,221 3,593 5,220 28 31 32,956Psychiatric/Mental Health 244 66 401 251 2,738 3,822 237 138 807 1,359 5 12 10,080Paediatric 221 28 316 108 0 2,419 264 223 823 740 7 18 5,167Maternal/Newborn 181 63 429 218 1,931 3,935 531 364 1,287 1,546 12 15 10,512Geriatric/Long Term Care 370 135 592 463 4,347 6,515 921 563 1,459 3,479 16 10 18,870Critical Care 398 37 583 696 2,782 6,073 601 623 1,573 1,846 * ** 15,226Community Health 184 53 241 262 1,720 4,086 577 322 894 1,498 29 33 9,899Ambulatory Care 74 13 166 127 2,027 1,398 249 88 297 371 * ** 4,823Home Care 30 20 259 0 1,240 3,359 236 306 779 715 7 8 6,959Occupational Health 33 * 66 44 280 1,313 88 93 310 169 * 5 2,407Operating Room 190 36 392 259 1,362 2,711 417 312 978 1,545 11 12 8,225Emergency Room 172 30 284 233 1,891 3,205 367 262 837 1,106 17 19 8,423Nursing in Several Clinical Areas 44 23 82 71 4,940 1,180 179 201 547 543 10 32 7,852Oncology ** 0 130 0 371 2,120 104 93 363 339 * 0 3,564Rehabilitation ** ** 95 113 515 1,205 153 89 259 327 * 0 2,784Other Direct Care 210 19 53 389 1,297 7,195 353 260 1,023 1,251 6 13 12,069

Administration 179 63 273 191 5,974 3,574 429 344 723 953 19 17 12,739Nursing Service 117 57 206 93 5,974 1,593 259 221 416 513 13 9 9,471Nursing Education 12 * 23 8 0 195 32 33 67 48 * * 422Other Administration 50 ** 44 90 0 1,786 138 90 240 392 ** ** 2,846

Education 162 24 206 150 1,141 2,132 248 244 711 990 7 13 6,028Teaching - Students 90 11 84 102 0 787 121 101 332 485 * ** 2,125Teaching - Employees 35 ** 60 26 0 370 63 62 166 232 * 0 1,023Teaching Patients/Clients 26 * 54 22 0 508 27 48 164 219 * * 1,078Other Education 11 * 8 0 1,141 467 37 33 49 54 * 0 1,802

Research ** * 77 17 726 724 79 46 222 177 0 0 2,096Nursing Reseach Only ** * 30 17 553 204 45 8 87 36 0 0 987Other Research 21 0 47 0 173 520 34 38 135 141 0 0 1,109

Not Stated ** * 0 36 3,769 2,830 14 34 234 207 * 0 7,140Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 109

Table 13.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Position and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Managerial Positions 470 234 1,168 685 4,088 5,592 1,057 773 1,674 2,081 31 58 17,911

Chief Nursing Officer/Chief Executive Officer 68 25 114 149 628 722 80 167 160 113 ** * 2,235Director/Assistant Director 20 22 111 21 139 879 169 77 203 400 ** ** 2,056Manager/Assistant Manager 382 187 943 515 3,321 3,991 808 529 1,311 1,568 21 44 13,620

Staff Nurse/Community Health Nurse 4,405 953 6,994 5,774 42,042 62,200 7,650 6,949 18,091 22,591 172 408 178,229

Other Positions 481 62 485 862 9,159 12,959 1,162 718 2,164 2,581 32 53 30,718Clinical Nurse Specialist 18 * 34 39 690 932 229 49 282 329 ** * 2,622Instructor/Professor/Educator 135 24 201 142 1,080 1,703 297 246 587 772 6 14 5,207Researcher ** * 100 18 365 528 86 34 121 125 0 0 1,395Consultant ** 13 98 72 1,191 3,773 142 58 224 335 * ** 5,946Other 287 20 52 591 5,833 6,023 408 331 950 1,020 7 26 15,548

Not Stated 38 6 52 55 3,461 928 182 103 243 477 * ** 5,554

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Managerial Positions 140 69 449 229 797 1,092 326 288 358 305 7 36 4,096

Chief Nursing Officer/Chief Executive Officer 32 ** 57 54 114 189 26 89 52 30 0 * 654Director/Assistant Director 8 ** 39 8 21 168 62 25 47 49 0 ** 439Manager/Assistant Manager 100 55 353 167 662 735 238 174 259 226 7 27 3,003

Staff Nurse/Community Health Nurse 1,454 ** 2,001 1,743 6,929 8,950 1,944 2,227 3,657 2,589 30 ** 32,073

Other Positions 94 18 115 183 1,552 1,699 187 144 252 218 9 14 4,485Clinical Nurse Specialist * 0 6 10 67 120 35 ** 26 ** ** 0 313Instructor/Professor/Educator 8 ** 60 24 138 167 62 29 61 63 * * 620Researcher 0 0 12 0 20 27 8 * 13 * 0 0 86Consultant ** * 24 8 173 553 16 6 26 38 0 * 852Other 78 10 13 141 1,154 832 66 98 126 84 0 12 2,614

Not Stated 12 * 19 12 539 114 32 26 34 53 0 * 848Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 110

Table 13.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Position and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Managerial Positions 324 165 712 382 3,237 4,446 726 484 1,302 1,752 24 16 13,570

Chief Nursing Officer/Chief Executive Officer 36 16 57 79 505 526 54 78 108 83 ** * 1,548Director/Assistant Director 12 17 70 9 118 697 107 52 155 348 ** * 1,592Manager/Assistant Manager 276 132 585 294 2,614 3,223 565 354 1,039 1,321 14 13 10,430

Staff Nurse/Community Health Nurse 2,864 ** 4,954 3,396 34,476 52,608 5,660 4,695 14,310 19,863 ** ** 143,751

Other Positions 382 44 368 607 7,504 11,111 962 571 1,900 2,343 23 38 25,853Clinical Nurse Specialist 15 * 28 25 617 796 189 40 254 297 7 * 2,273Instructor/Professor/Educator 126 18 140 108 931 1,515 233 216 521 703 ** ** 4,529Researcher ** * 87 14 339 492 78 32 108 121 0 0 1,289Consultant ** 11 74 56 1,000 3,186 126 51 197 296 * 10 5,031Other 205 10 39 404 4,617 5,122 336 232 820 926 7 13 12,731

Not Stated 23 * 33 39 2,881 807 148 76 207 423 * * 4,645Source: RNDB/CIHI







Page 111

Table 13.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Position and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000

Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Qué. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. Y.T. N.W.T./Nun. CanadaALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Managerial Positions 8.7 18.6 13.4 9.3 7.0 6.8 10.5 9.0 7.6 7.5 13.1 11.0 7.7Chief Nursing Officer/Chief Executive Officer 1.3 2.0 1.3 2.0 1.1 0.9 0.8 2.0 0.7 0.4 ** * 1.0Director/Assistant Director 0.4 1.8 1.3 0.3 0.2 1.1 1.7 0.9 0.9 1.4 ** ** 0.9Manager/Assistant Manager 7.1 14.9 10.8 7.0 5.7 4.9 8.0 6.2 5.9 5.7 8.9 8.4 5.9

Staff Nurse/Community Health Nurse 81.7 75.9 80.4 78.3 71.6 76.2 76.1 81.3 81.6 81.5 72.6 77.6 76.7

Other Positions 8.9 4.9 5.6 11.7 15.6 15.9 11.6 8.4 9.8 9.3 13.5 10.1 13.2Clinical Nurse Specialist 0.3 * 0.4 0.5 1.2 1.1 2.3 0.6 1.3 1.2 ** * 1.1Instructor/Professor/Educator 2.5 1.9 2.3 1.9 1.8 2.1 3.0 2.9 2.6 2.8 2.5 2.7 2.2Researcher ** * 1.1 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.6Consultant ** 1.0 1.1 1.0 2.0 4.6 1.4 0.7 1.0 1.2 * ** 2.6Other 5.3 1.6 0.6 8.0 9.9 7.4 4.1 3.9 4.3 3.7 3.0 4.9 6.7

Not Stated 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.7 5.9 1.1 1.8 1.2 1.1 1.7 * ** 2.4

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Managerial Positions 8.2 15.3 17.4 10.6 8.1 9.2 13.1 10.7 8.3 9.6 15.2 14.9 9.9

Chief Nursing Officer/Chief Executive Officer 1.9 ** 2.2 2.5 1.2 1.6 1.0 3.3 1.2 0.9 0.0 * 1.6Director/Assistant Director 0.5 ** 1.5 0.4 0.2 1.4 2.5 0.9 1.1 1.5 0.0 ** 1.1Manager/Assistant Manager 5.9 12.2 13.7 7.7 6.7 6.2 9.6 6.5 6.0 7.1 15.2 11.2 7.2

Staff Nurse/Community Health Nurse 85.5 ** 77.4 80.4 70.6 75.5 78.1 82.9 85.0 81.8 65.2 ** 77.3

Other Positions 5.5 4.0 4.5 8.4 15.8 14.3 7.5 5.4 5.9 6.9 19.6 5.8 10.8Clinical Nurse Specialist * 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.4 ** 0.6 ** ** 0.0 0.8Instructor/Professor/Educator 0.5 ** 2.3 1.1 1.4 1.4 2.5 1.1 1.4 2.0 * * 1.5Researcher 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 * 0.3 * 0.0 0.0 0.2Consultant ** * 0.9 0.4 1.8 4.7 0.6 0.2 0.6 1.2 0.0 * 2.1Other 4.6 2.2 0.5 6.5 11.8 7.0 2.7 3.6 2.9 2.7 0.0 5.0 6.3

Not Stated 0.7 * 0.7 0.6 5.5 1.0 1.3 1.0 0.8 1.7 0.0 * 2.0Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 112

Table 13.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Position and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Managerial Positions 9.0 20.7 11.7 8.6 6.7 6.4 9.7 8.3 7.3 7.2 12.8 6.2 7.2

Chief Nursing Officer/Chief Executive Officer 1.0 2.0 0.9 1.8 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.3 0.6 0.3 ** * 0.8Director/Assistant Director 0.3 2.1 1.2 0.2 0.2 1.0 1.4 0.9 0.9 1.4 ** * 0.8Manager/Assistant Manager 7.7 16.6 9.6 6.6 5.4 4.7 7.5 6.1 5.9 5.4 7.5 5.0 5.6

Staff Nurse/Community Health Nurse 79.7 ** 81.7 76.8 71.7 76.3 75.5 80.6 80.8 81.5 ** ** 76.5

Other Positions 10.6 5.5 6.1 13.7 15.6 16.1 12.8 9.8 10.7 9.6 12.3 14.7 13.8Clinical Nurse Specialist 0.4 * 0.5 0.6 1.3 1.2 2.5 0.7 1.4 1.2 3.7 * 1.2Instructor/Professor/Educator 3.5 2.3 2.3 2.4 1.9 2.2 3.1 3.7 2.9 2.9 ** ** 2.4Researcher ** * 1.4 0.3 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.7Consultant ** 1.4 1.2 1.3 2.1 4.6 1.7 0.9 1.1 1.2 * 3.9 2.7Other 5.7 1.3 0.6 9.1 9.6 7.4 4.5 4.0 4.6 3.8 3.7 5.0 6.8

Not Stated 0.6 * 0.5 0.9 6.0 1.2 2.0 1.3 1.2 1.7 * * 2.5Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 113

Table 14.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Regular/Casual Basis and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Regular Basis 4,789 1,067 7,066 6,277 49,565 72,848 9,410 7,513 17,861 20,865 201 418 197,880Casual Basis 605 188 1,633 1,099 9,185 8,831 641 1,030 4,311 6,865 36 108 34,532

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Regular Basis 1,464 376 2,055 1,866 7,931 10,556 2,273 2,381 3,532 2,274 41 204 34,953Casual Basis 236 76 529 301 1,886 1,299 216 304 769 891 5 37 6,549

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Regular Basis 3,242 686 4,974 3,752 40,942 61,543 7,077 5,105 14,205 18,458 159 194 160,337Casual Basis 351 111 1,093 672 7,156 7,429 419 721 3,514 5,923 28 65 27,482

Source: RNDB/CIHI

‡ EXCLUDES 3,091 RECORDS WHERE RURAL/URBAN LOCATION WAS "UNKNOWN"; THEREFORE "RURAL" AND "URBAN" TOTALS WILL NOT MATCH GRAND TOTAL.Please review the methodological notes for a full description of the terms "Rural" and "Urban" as used in this analysis.




Table 14.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Regular/Casual Basis and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Regular Basis 88.8 85.0 81.2 85.1 84.4 89.2 93.6 87.9 80.6 75.2 84.8 79.5 85.1Casual Basis 11.2 15.0 18.8 14.9 15.6 10.8 6.4 12.1 19.4 24.8 15.2 20.5 14.9

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Regular Basis 86.1 83.2 79.5 86.1 80.8 89.0 91.3 88.7 82.1 71.8 89.1 84.6 84.2Casual Basis 13.9 16.8 20.5 13.9 19.2 11.0 8.7 11.3 17.9 28.2 10.9 15.4 15.8

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Regular Basis 90.2 86.1 82.0 84.8 85.1 89.2 94.4 87.6 80.2 75.7 85.0 74.9 85.4Casual Basis 9.8 13.9 18.0 15.2 14.9 10.8 5.6 12.4 19.8 24.3 15.0 25.1 14.6

Source: RNDB/CIHI


Page 114

Table 15.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Full-Time/Part-Time Status and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412Full-Time 3,918 522 5,323 4,049 29,895 43,899 4,524 4,340 12,064 18,703 127 418 127,782Part-Time 1,476 733 3,376 3,327 28,855 37,780 5,527 ** ** 9,027 110 108 104,581Not Stated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * ** 0 0 0 49

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502Full-Time 1,244 153 1,517 1,185 4,422 5,573 997 1,127 2,142 2,005 30 204 20,599Part-Time 456 299 1,067 982 5,395 6,282 1,492 1,558 2,150 1,160 16 37 20,894Not Stated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819Full-Time 2,602 368 3,774 2,457 25,036 37,807 3,491 3,195 9,819 16,564 97 194 105,404Part-Time 991 429 2,293 1,967 23,062 31,165 4,005 ** ** 7,817 90 65 82,375Not Stated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * ** 0 0 0 40

Source: RNDB/CIHI






Ontario, Saskatchewan and Northwest Territories/Nunavut data have been revised from previous RNDB publications.


Table 15.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Full-Time/Part-Time Status and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Full-Time 72.6 41.6 61.2 54.9 50.9 53.7 45.0 50.8 54.4 67.4 53.6 79.5 55.0Part-Time 27.4 58.4 38.8 45.1 49.1 46.3 55.0 ** ** 32.6 46.4 20.5 45.0Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * ** 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Full-Time 73.2 33.8 58.7 54.7 45.0 47.0 40.1 41.9 49.8 63.3 65.2 84.6 49.6Part-Time 26.8 66.2 41.3 45.3 55.0 53.0 59.9 58.1 50.0 36.7 34.8 15.4 50.3Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Full-Time 72.4 46.2 62.2 55.5 52.1 54.8 46.6 54.8 55.4 67.9 51.9 74.9 56.1Part-Time 27.6 53.8 37.8 44.5 47.9 45.1 53.4 ** ** 32.1 48.1 25.1 43.8Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * ** 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 115

Table 16.0 Number of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Multiple Employment and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 5,394 1,255 8,699 7,376 58,750 81,679 10,051 8,543 22,172 27,730 237 526 232,412No 4,957 0 8,065 0 50,132 67,330 8,695 6,762 18,379 20,409 204 482 185,415Yes 416 0 634 0 8,045 12,197 1,356 1,748 3,793 7,321 ** ** 35,585Not Stated 21 1,255 0 7,376 573 2,152 0 33 0 0 * ** 11,412

Rural and Small Town Canada 1,700 452 2,584 2,167 9,817 11,855 2,489 2,685 4,301 3,165 46 241 41,502No 1,527 0 2,335 0 8,112 9,820 2,006 1,924 3,483 2,241 ** ** 31,719Yes 168 0 249 0 1,590 1,808 483 752 818 924 * ** 6,808Not Stated 5 452 0 2,167 115 227 0 9 0 0 0 0 2,975

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 3,593 797 6,067 4,424 48,098 68,972 7,496 5,826 17,719 24,381 187 259 187,819No 3,341 0 5,685 0 41,366 56,836 6,628 4,809 14,767 18,039 157 228 151,856Yes ** 0 382 0 6,325 10,231 868 994 2,952 6,342 ** 31 28,391Not Stated ** 797 0 4,424 407 1,905 0 23 0 0 * 0 7,572

Source: RNDB/CIHI







Table 16.0a Percentage Distribution of RNs by Rural/Urban Location‡, Multiple Employment and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0No 91.9 0.0 92.7 0.0 85.3 82.4 86.5 79.2 82.9 73.6 86.1 91.6 79.8Yes 7.7 0.0 7.3 0.0 13.7 14.9 13.5 20.5 17.1 26.4 ** ** 15.3Not Stated 0.4 100.0 0.0 100.0 1.0 2.6 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 * ** 4.9

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0No 89.8 0.0 90.4 0.0 82.6 82.8 80.6 71.7 81.0 70.8 ** ** 76.4Yes 9.9 0.0 9.6 0.0 16.2 15.3 19.4 28.0 19.0 29.2 * ** 16.4Not Stated 0.3 100.0 0.0 100.0 1.2 1.9 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.2

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0No 93.0 0.0 93.7 0.0 86.0 82.4 88.4 82.5 83.3 74.0 84.0 88.0 80.9Yes ** 0.0 6.3 0.0 13.2 14.8 11.6 17.1 16.7 26.0 ** 12.0 15.1Not Stated ** 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.8 2.8 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 4.0

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 116

Table 17.0 Number of International Nursing Graduates by Rural/Urban Location‡, World Region of Graduation and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 0 18 211 62 546 8,563 491 217 0 4,010 17 42 14,177Africa 0 0 ** * 491 188 13 11 0 95 * 0 806U.S.A. & Bermuda 0 10 54 ** 26 717 64 42 0 340 * 0 1,286Latin America & Caribbean 0 0 * * 8 524 9 * 0 22 0 0 567South America 0 0 0 * 10 95 5 * 0 12 0 0 125Asia 0 * 26 * 0 3,512 206 46 0 1,750 0 9 5,552Europe 0 ** 114 25 ** 3,403 185 85 0 1,536 9 27 5,400Oceania 0 0 10 * * 124 9 30 0 255 * 6 441Not Stated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Rural and Small Town Canada 0 6 62 19 * 293 74 46 0 263 * 27 796Africa 0 0 0 * * * * * 0 ** 0 0 19U.S.A. & Bermuda 0 ** 26 14 0 85 18 12 0 67 * 0 228Latin America & Caribbean 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 0 6South America 0 0 0 * 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 * Asia 0 0 ** 0 0 32 15 7 0 18 0 * 79Europe 0 * 30 * * 156 38 19 0 132 * 19 400Oceania 0 0 * 0 0 13 * * 0 36 0 ** 62Not Stated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 0 12 147 36 530 8,198 408 170 0 3,731 15 14 13,261Africa 0 0 ** 0 26 184 12 8 0 84 * 0 771U.S.A. & Bermuda 0 ** 28 11 20 619 45 30 0 272 * 0 1,039Latin America & Caribbean 0 0 * * ** 509 9 * 0 21 0 0 550South America 0 0 0 * 10 92 5 * 0 12 0 0 121Asia 0 * 20 * 0 3,459 184 39 0 1,728 0 6 5,439Europe 0 6 83 19 8 3,225 146 66 0 1,396 8 8 4,965Oceania 0 0 9 * * 110 7 25 0 218 * 0 376Not Stated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Source: RNDB/CIHI






Newfoundland data for Table 17.0 are currently under review, and are subject to revision.


Page 117

Table 17.0a Percentage Distribution of International Nursing Graduates by Rural/Urban Location‡, World Region of Graduation and Province/Territory of Registration, Canada, 2000


ALL RNs EMPLOYED IN NURSING 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Africa 0.0 0.0 ** * 89.9 2.2 2.6 5.1 0.0 2.4 * 0.0 5.7U.S.A. & Bermuda 0.0 55.6 25.6 ** 4.8 8.4 13.0 19.4 0.0 8.5 * 0.0 9.1Latin America & Caribbean 0.0 0.0 * * 1.5 6.1 1.8 * 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 4.0South America 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 1.8 1.1 1.0 * 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9Asia 0.0 * 12.3 * 0.0 41.0 42.0 21.2 0.0 43.6 0.0 21.4 39.1Europe 0.0 ** 54.0 40.3 ** 39.7 37.7 39.2 0.0 38.3 52.9 64.3 38.1Oceania 0.0 0.0 4.7 * * 1.4 1.8 13.8 0.0 6.4 * 14.3 3.1Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Rural and Small Town Canada 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 * 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 * 100.0 100.0Africa 0.0 0.0 0.0 * * * * * 0.0 ** 0.0 0.0 2.4U.S.A. & Bermuda 0.0 ** 41.9 73.7 0.0 29.0 24.3 26.1 0.0 25.5 * 0.0 28.6Latin America & Caribbean 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.8South America 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * Asia 0.0 0.0 ** 0.0 0.0 10.9 20.3 15.2 0.0 6.8 0.0 * 9.9Europe 0.0 * 48.4 * * 53.2 51.4 41.3 0.0 50.2 * 70.4 50.3Oceania 0.0 0.0 * 0.0 0.0 4.4 * * 0.0 13.7 0.0 ** 7.8Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Urban Canada (CMA/CA) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Africa 0.0 0.0 ** 0.0 89.8 2.2 2.9 4.7 0.0 2.2 * 0.0 5.8U.S.A. & Bermuda 0.0 ** 19.0 30.6 4.9 7.6 11.0 17.6 0.0 7.3 * 0.0 7.8Latin America & Caribbean 0.0 0.0 * * ** 6.2 2.2 * 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 4.1South America 0.0 0.0 0.0 * 1.9 1.1 1.2 * 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9Asia 0.0 * 13.6 * 0.0 42.2 45.1 22.9 0.0 46.3 0.0 42.9 41.0Europe 0.0 50.0 56.5 52.8 1.5 39.3 35.8 38.8 0.0 37.4 53.3 57.1 37.4Oceania 0.0 0.0 6.1 * * 1.3 1.7 14.7 0.0 5.8 * 0.0 2.8Not Stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: RNDB/CIHI



Page 118

Appendix A

RNDB 2000 Methodological Notes


Registered Nurses Database A�1

RNDB 2000 Methodological NotesThis appendix contains abridged materials selected from the methodology section of theCIHI publication Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 2000. Along withthe methodological section of the current report, it will provide readers with anappreciation of the strengths and limitations of the RNDB data in general as well as thesummaries that have been presented in the present report focusing on RNs employed innursing in Rural and Small Town Canada. Principally, the methodological information thathas been left out is the tabulated data from that original publication or materials that havebeen incorporated into the present report. Please refer to the original publication for the fullmethodological approach for the year 2000 RNDB.

BackgroundThe Registered Nurses Database (RNDB) contains supply and distribution information forregistered nurses in Canada from 1980 to the present and is maintained by the CanadianInstitute for Health Information (CIHI).

Historically, Statistics Canada was responsible for the collection and dissemination ofregistered nursing data, producing the publication series Revised Registered Nurses DataSeries from 1980 to 1988, and Registered Nurses Management Data from 1989 to 1998.CIHI assumed responsibility for data collection and management in the 1996 data year, andfor dissemination in the 1999 data year. The CIHI publication series is now titled Supplyand Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada.

Data elements included in the RNDB are: Province of Registration, Registration Number,Sex, Year of Birth, Entry/Initial Nursing Education, Year of Graduation, Province/Country ofGraduation, Other Education in Nursing (Non-Degree), Other Education in Nursing (Degree),Education in Other Than Nursing, Employment Status (including regular/casual employmentin nursing), Full-time/Part-time Status, Multiple Employment, Province/Country ofEmployment, Place of Work, Primary Area of Responsibility, Position, Province/Country ofResidence, and Postal Code of Residence.


A�2 Registered Nurses Database

General Methodology

Target PopulationThe target population for the RNDB is all registered nurses submitting active-practisingregistration in a Canadian province/territory. For Canadian-born RNs living and workingoutside of Canada, data are not captured if the RN chooses not to register in a Canadianprovince/territory as well. Data for registered nurses maintaining associate or non-activeregistration are not collected for the database. In addition, the RNDB does not contain dataon licensed practical nurses (LPNs) (also referred to as registered practical nurses andregistered nursing assistants and licensed nursing assistants) or on registered psychiatricnurses (RPNs).

The 12-month RN registration period varies among provinces/territories, with mostjurisdictions following either a January-December or April-March registration year. Due toCIHI�s aim to provide timely data, each province/territory submits data to CIHI after thefirst six months of its registration period. The result of this strategy is that the RNDBsystematically undercounts the number of registered nurses in Canada. Counts in theRNDB will differ from year-end provincial/territorial data sources; however, preliminaryanalysis suggests the counts differ by less than 5 percent.

A standardized minimum data set is collected for each active-practising registered nurse.

Data Sources and CollectionThe collection and submission of RN data is governed by a Core Data Agreement. Eachyear registered nursing provincial/territorial regulating authorities (PTRAs), CIHI, StatisticsCanada, and the Canadian Nurses Association (CNA) review the core set of elements eachprovince/territory includes on the registration forms. Under the current agreement, eachPTRA submits 18 data elements collected from each registered nurse.

Collecting data from individual RNs is the responsibility of the PTRA. The data are manuallyentered, and a provincial/territorial file is submitted to CIHI in a standardized format. Not alldata elements collected from the registration forms are sent to CIHI; each PTRA collectsadditional information for its own administrative and/or research purposes, apart from theelements outlined in the Core Data Agreement.

Appendix B of Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 2000 containscopies of the year 2000 provincial/territorial registration forms. Appendix B of the presentreport lists contact information for each jurisdiction.

File ProcessingOnce provincial/territorial data files are received by CIHI, all records undergo two stages ofprocessing before inclusion in the national file.

The first stage of processing ensures that data are in the proper format, and that allresponses pass specific validity and logic tests. Should submitted codes not match the



standardized CIHI codes, an exception report is produced that identifies the error. Inaddition, the data also undergoes tests to check for a logical relationship between specificfields. For example, an error is identified in the exception report if Year of Graduation isless than Year of Birth.

Errors are reviewed jointly by CIHI and the respective provincial/territorial Registrar, andcorrected where possible. If a correction cannot be made, the code is changed to theappropriate default value.

Once the file has passed all validity and logic tests, the second stage of processing begins.As registered nurses are able to register simultaneously in more than one jurisdiction, amethodology was developed to identify (or �flag�) RNs living outside of Canada or RNsregistered in more than one province/territory.

Flagging and Removal of RNs Living Abroad and Interprovincial DuplicatesTo accurately count the number of RNs registered (and/or working) in Canada, it isnecessary to identify RNs living outside of Canada or RNs simultaneously registered inmore than one province/territory. Counting all registrations received by CIHI double-countsthose RNs registered in more than one jurisdiction (�interprovincial duplicates�), anderroneously includes those RNs living abroad.

To minimize the number of duplicate registrations, the information collection period isrestricted to the first six months of each province/territory's registration year. This processdoes not result in significant under-coverage, as most registrations occur in the initialmonths, but it does reduce the number of duplicate registrations arising from the height ofinterprovincial migration occurring during the summer.

All data received from the provinces/territories are kept in the RNDB, however, only non-duplicate records are included in the publication, media release, and ad-hoc queries. Non-duplicates are defined as records meeting the following conditions:

1) Province/Country of Residence is either in Canada, or �not stated�.

2) for RNs employed in nursing, the Province of Employment equals Province ofRegistration; if Province of Employment is �not stated�, then Province of Residenceequals Province of Registration; or,

for RNs not employed in nursing (or for RNs with Employment Status of �not stated�),Province of Residence equals Province of Registration; if Province of Residence is �notstated�, then Province of Employment equals Province of Registration.

Such a method for eliminating RNs living abroad and interprovincial duplicates doesintroduce certain errors. For example,

1) An RN living in the United States but working in Canada will be erroneously removed as�living abroad�.



2) An RN registered and employed in a Canadian province accepts an offer to worktemporarily in a northern territory. When registering with the appropriate territorialnursing association, an RN typically identifies her/his �home� province as the currentProvince of Employment. Since the Province of Registration (northern territory) does notmatch the Province of Employment (home province), the RN is identified as aninterprovincial duplicate and is removed from the territorial figures. Although thisscenario occurs throughout Canada, the effect is more acute for territorial data.

3) An RN living and registering in one province/territory at the beginning of the yearmoves to and registers in another province/territory one to three months later. Thisobvious duplicate will not be detected.

4) An RN not working in nursing registers in a province other than her/his province ofresidence. This registration will be identified erroneously as a duplicate.

5) An RN working for the Department of National Defence or for Health Canada isemployed in a province other than his/her province of registration; this registration willbe flagged erroneously as a duplicate. These two federal departments only require theirnursing employees to be currently registered in Canada, although not necessarily intheir province of employment.

Theoretically, an RN who registers and works in more than one province/territorysimultaneously would be double-counted in the RNDB, as the Province of Employmentwould match the Province of Registration in each jurisdiction.

The methodology for the removal of interprovincial duplicates has remained relativelyconsistent over time. However, methodological enhancements undertaken in 1996 aimedto obtain more information on RNs not working in nursing and RNs employed and residingoutside of Canada. For this reason, it is only appropriate to compare pre- and post-1996data in terms of RNs employed in nursing.

Nunavut DataNunavut data presented in the Descriptive Analysis section of this publication undercountsthe actual number of RNs practising in that territory, for two significant reasons.

First, CIHI undercounts the number of RNs practising in all northern territories, as a resultof existing interprovincial duplicate methodology. RNs working in the north on a temporarybasis are typically identified (and removed) as interprovincial duplicates.

Second, RNs practising in Nunavut are registered with the Northwest Territories RegisteredNurses Association (NWTRNA). At present, the NWTRNA is unable to determine whichRNs practise in the Northwest Territories, and which practise in Nunavut.

By using the Postal Code of Residence field in the RNDB, CIHI is able to determine whichRNs live in Nunavut. The Nunavut workforce is therefore defined as: non-duplicate RNs



registered in the Northwest Territories, employed in nursing, and living in Nunavut. Thismethodology, however, has limitations.

The postal code of residence is not necessarily an indicator of province/territory ofemployment. As outlined above, CIHI uses a well-established editing process to removeinterprovincial duplicates; however, it is possible for a non-duplicate registration to containa postal code of residence in another province/territory/country. Therefore, some RNsregistered and employed in the Northwest Territories/Nunavut will have postal codes ofresidence from outside these territories. This is true for all jurisdictions for each year. Byselecting only Nunavut-specific postal codes for Nunavut data, all postal codes from theNorthwest Territories and elsewhere are included in the Northwest Territories data. It ispossible that some of these RNs actually practise nursing in Nunavut.

The current registration form in use by the NWTRNA explicitly asks RNs where theypractise more than 50 percent of the time � in the Northwest Territories or Nunavut. Untilthat data is available for the 2001 data year, there exists no actual measure of the numberof RNs working in Nunavut. For this reason, Nunavut data is not separated from NorthwestTerritories data in the Data Tables section of this publication, and caution must be appliedwhen analyzing Nunavut data in the Descriptive Analysis.

Data AccuracyThe Data Quality department at CIHI has developed a framework for assessing andreporting the quality of data contained in CIHI�s databases and registries. The frameworkfocuses upon the five dimensions of data quality: Timeliness, Accuracy, Usability,Comparability, and Relevance. Due to the structure and content of the RNDB, the dataquality dimensions of timeliness, usability, and relevance are not evaluated here; to moreeffectively meet the needs of this publication, this section focuses only on the dimensionsof Accuracy and Comparability.

Accuracy is an assessment of how well the data reflects reality. For the RNDB, this is anassessment of how closely the data presented in this publication reflect the targetpopulation of all RNs registering for active-practising membership in Canada. Comparabilitymeasures how well the current year data compare to data from previous years, plus howdata from the RNDB compare to registered nurse data found in other sources.

Provincial/territorial regulating authorities collect this data for administrative purposes. It isthrough agreement that this data is submitted to CIHI for research and analysis.Consequently, it is important to note that the level of accuracy and completenessnecessary to meet the financial and administrative requirements of a registry can beconsiderably less stringent than that for research. Nevertheless, improvements in datacollection systems and a jurisdictional-wide acknowledgement of the importance for goodquality data has led to data collection and capture improvements for the RNDB. Thissection outlines where caution must be applied when analyzing data presented in Supplyand Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 2000.



Under-coverageUnder-coverage results when data that should be collected for the database are notincluded. The RNDB annually undercounts the actual number of active-practising RNsbecause data is submitted to CIHI after only the first six months of each jurisdiction�s 12-month registration period. Preliminary analysis suggests that more than 95% of RNs renewwithin the first six months, as there are often financial penalties for failing to renew beforethe registration periods begin. Although the impact may be minor, the six-month cut-offresults in CIHI releasing figures that do not correspond with year-end provincial/territorialfigures, which can cause confusion and/or controversy.

CIHI annually under-counts the number of RNs practising in northern Canada due to themethodology used to identify and remove interprovincial duplicates. Each year, a numberof RNs from the southern provinces work temporarily in the Yukon, Northwest Territories,and/or Nunavut. These RNs register with the territorial nursing association for employment,which varies between a few weeks and a few months in length, but when completing theregistration form, will often identify their Province of Employment as their home province.When the Province of Registration does not match the Province of Employment, RNsemployed in nursing are identified as duplicates, and are removed from the figures includedin CIHI publications, media releases, and ad-hoc requests. Therefore, the territorial figurespresented in current and historical RNDB publications under-count the actual number ofRNs practising in the territories. At present, the impact of this under-coverage has notbeen analyzed.

Over-coverageDuring the year 2000 data submission period, representatives from the Nurses Associationof New Brunswick (NANB) discovered that file submissions from 1995 to 1999 hadinadvertently included non-practising registrations. As of March 2001, an impactassessment had not yet been completed. From a similar analysis previously conducted forother provinces, and in comparison to year 2000 data that includes only active-practisingdata, it is believed the impact is minor. Historical revisions have not yet been made, butplease note that 1995 to 1999 data from New Brunswick is subject to revision.

Non-responseItem non-response is the percentage of �not stated� responses for each data element. Thedegree of item non-response varies among elements, with the largest percentagesoccurring in �Other Nurse Education (Non-Degree)� at 25.54% nationally, �Education inOther Than Nursing� at 22.51%, and Other Nurse Education (Degree) at 18.22%.CIHI did not impute any missing values for the year 2000 data. Instead, many of theelements with a large percentage of �not stated� values were not included in theDescriptive Analysis and Data Tables sections; in other cases, the number of �not stated�values were clearly identified in the analysis.



Collection and CaptureWhen information is self-reported, as is the case with registered nurses completing theirown registration forms, reliability becomes an issue. However, each PTRA suppliessupporting documentation to their membership to assist in the completion of theregistration form. Consequently, the data received by each jurisdiction is consideredreliable.

Data entry also impacts the accuracy of the data, as information may not be classified orcoded properly. At present, an audit of data entry accuracy has not been completed;consequently, data entry accuracy is unknown. For the 2000 data year, however, theCollege of Nurses of Ontario (CNO) is known to have encountered errors during the dataentry process.

Data entry errors resulted in complete records of �not stated� values for year 2000 datafrom Ontario. For approximately 4000 RNs, the entire record has been recorded as �notstated�, despite actual responses completed on the paper registration form. This error couldnot be corrected until after publication of this document. The result is a larger percentageof �not stated� values for many data elements than in previous years for Ontario. However,the total number of records remains accurate. In the Descriptive Analysis, the number of�not stated� values is identified where necessary.

ComparabilityAs discussed, comparability refers to RNDB data over time (such as intra- and inter-provincial comparisons), and RNDB data to similar sources.

When reviewing the data presented in the Descriptive Analysis and Data Tables sections ofthis publication, please keep in mind the following comparability limitations:

New Brunswick:� Representatives from NANB discovered in September 2000 that data submitted to CIHI

from 1995 to 1999 had inaccurately included non-practising memberships. The degreeof this impact has not yet been analyzed, but it is the most significant reason for theapparent decline in the number of RNs employed in nursing in New Brunswick, from7,710 (1999) to 7,376 (2000).

� Year 2000 data includes only active-practising registrations, and is therefore consideredto be more accurate than previous data. Please note that New Brunswick historical datais subject to future revision.

� The New Brunswick registration form does not offer an option of �none� for the fieldsOther Education in Nursing (Degree) and Education in Other Than Nursing. Therefore,records previously reported as �none� are now more accurately reported as �not stated�.

Ontario:In the year 2000, the CNO completed a significant amount of �data cleaning� on its RNdatabase. Consequently, 2000 data is more accurate than the historical data presented inthis publication. This cleaning resulted in the following changes:



� For the field Other Education in Nursing (Non-Degree), responses left blank weredefaulted to �no� in 2000; from 1997 to 1999, these responses were reported as �notstated�. These data were not collected in Ontario prior to 1996.

� Again, for the field Other Education in Nursing (Non-Degree), the apparent decline inthe number of �yes� values: starting in 2000, only nursing courses with a length greaterthan 300 hours are included; prior to 2000, there existed no minimum number of hourscriterion.

� For the field Other Education in Nursing (Degree), responses left blank were defaultedto �none� in 2000; prior to 2000, these responses were reported as �not stated�.

� Apparent declines in the number of RNs obtaining a baccalaureate degree since enteringthe nursing profession is also a result of data cleaning. In years prior to 2000, this fieldhad erroneously reported RNs that had double-counted their initial baccalaureate degreein nursing. Year 2000 data is therefore considered more accurate for Ontario. This errorhas little impact upon the data presented in either the Descriptive Analysis or DataTables sections of either the 1999 RNDB or 2000 RNDB publications, as this field isnot reported. CIHI generates the field Highest Education in Nursing by comparingInitial/Entry Nursing Education and Other Education in Nursing (Degree); only thehighest education is presented in the Data Tables, and only the initial education andhighest education fields are presented in the Descriptive Analysis.

� For the field Education in Other Than Nursing, responses left blank were defaulted to�none� in 2000; prior to 2000, these responses were reported as �not stated�.

� The apparent decline in the number of RNs with a Master�s degree is the result of newediting rules developed by the CNO for their database. Many RNs reporting a Master�sdegree in a discipline/program other than nursing had no record of obtaining abachelor�s degree. These RNs were defaulted to �none�.

� For the field Position, new data mapping has resulted in different groupings for theposition of �Director/Assistant Director�. This change is noted in the DescriptiveAnalysis and Data Tables sections. In addition, partially due to changes in the Positionfield by several jurisdictions in 2000, and partially due to concerns for cell suppression,much of the Position data presented in the Descriptive Analysis and Data Tablessections is categorized by �Managerial Positions�, �Staff Nurse/Community HealthNurse�, �Other Positions�, and �Not Stated�. The contents of each grouping are clearlyidentified in both the Descriptive Analysis and Data Tables sections of this publication.

Alberta:� In the year 2000, the Alberta Association of Registered Nurses (AARN) began using a

new computer system. When preparing the CIHI file submission it was discovered thatfrom 1995 to 1999, data for the field �Baccalaureate� had been combined with datafrom the element Initial/Entry Nursing Education, effectively doubling the number ofRNs with a baccalaureate degree in nursing. Historical revisions have not yet beenmade, but the impact upon the data is minimal. The data tables presented in thepublication only report Highest Education in Nursing data, which is not affected by thiserror. In addition, neither the 1999 nor 2000 CIHI publications include Other Educationin Nursing (Degree) in the Descriptive Analysis section. Please note that these data aresubject to future revision.



British Columbia:� For the field Position, changes in the mapping of the positions �Chief Nursing

Officer/Chief Executive Officer� and �Director/Assistant Director� result in non-comparable data from British Columbia between 1999 and 2000. These changes arenoted in the Descriptive Analysis and Data Tables sections. To facilitate intra-provincialcomparisons, the categories of �Managerial Positions�, �Staff Nurse/Community HealthNurse�, �Other Positions�, and �Not Stated� have been created. The contents of eachgrouping are clearly identified in both the Descriptive Analysis and Data Tables sectionsof this publication.

� 1999 data from British Columbia may include RNs registering after the six-month CIHIcut-off date, resulting in minor over-coverage. Although an analysis has not yet beencompleted to determine the impact, please note that comparisons between 1999 and2000 figures may be affected, and that 1999 data from British Columbia is subject tofuture revision. The year 2000 data presented in this publication is consideredaccurate.

Northwest Territories/Nunavut:� For 2000, the number of RNs employed in nursing is estimated for the Northwest

Territories/Nunavut. The submission of incomplete Province of Employment dataresulted in the removal of too few duplicates, inaccurately inflating the number of RNsemployed in nursing for the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. Of the 796registrations originally submitted, CIHI identified and retained 426 registrations withnon-duplicate status in 1999 and 2000; data for the remaining 370 registrations werere-submitted by the NWTRNA and re-processed, resulting in the identification of 118additional duplicates and the removal of 3 non-active registrations. Final data for theNorthwest Territories/Nunavut includes 249 duplicates and 544 non-duplicates. Ofthose, 526 are employed in nursing. This estimation affects intra-territorial analysis, ascomparisons over time must be made with caution. This limitation is identified wherenecessary in the Descriptive Analysis and Data Tables.

� For the field Other Education in Nursing (Non-Degree), blank responses were defaultedto �no� in 2000; in previous years, blank responses were coded as �not stated�.

� For the field Full-Time/Part-Time Status, blank responses were defaulted to �part-time�in 2000; in previous years, blank responses were coded as �not stated�. This hasresulted in an apparent increase in the number of RNs working part-time in theNorthwest Territories/Nunavut, and caution should be applied when making intra-provincial comparisons over time. This change is footnoted where necessary in theDescriptive Analysis and Data Tables.



Historical DataSupply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 2000 presents RN data from 1994to 2000. Data from 1994 to 1998 were also presented in tabular format in the StatisticsCanada publication series Registered Nurses Management Data. Minor corrections andadditions to the 1994, 1995, and 1996 data were received after production of thesepublications; as a result of these minor revisions, the revised data presented in the CIHIpublication series (including Supply and Distribution of Registered Nurses in Canada, 1999)are considered to be more accurate, and previously published 1994 to 1996 figures shouldbe disregarded.

Recently, a data quality assessment reviewed all RNDB data from 1980 to the present. Atthe time of publication historical revisions had not yet been made, so caution should beapplied when comparing data over time. Historical data presented in this publication aregenerally restricted to RNs employed in nursing. In part, this is done to maintainconsistency with the current year data tables presented in the final section; it is also donebecause �employed in nursing� data is generally considered to be more accurate andcomplete than �not employed�, �employed in other than nursing�, or �not stated� data. Inaddition, please note that pre-2000 data presented in this publication are subject to furtherrevision.

In data years prior to 1998, British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba submitted non-practising registrations in their file submission to CIHI. Preliminary analysis suggests theimpact is minor over-coverage for RNs �employed in nursing�, and a greater degree of over-coverage for RNs �not employed�, �employed in other than nursing�, and �not stated�. Asthis publication reports only �employed in nursing� historical data, the effect on datapresented here is minimal. Nationally, less than 2% of the total number of RNs reported byCIHI to be active-practising were actually non-practising each of these years; in addition,less than 0.6% of RNs employed in nursing were actually non-practising each yearbetween 1994 and 1998. Regardless, caution should be applied when analyzing historicaltrends with respect to these jurisdictions and to national totals.



Comparability with Other SourcesRNDB data used in publications, media releases, ad-hoc requests, and special studies willnot match data from provincial/territorial regulating authorities for the following reasons:

� CIHI collects data from only the first six months of each PTRA�s registration period.Although the resulting under-coverage is minimal, the figures released by CIHI will notbe exactly the same as provincial/territorial figures, which are released after theregistration year has completed;

� CIHI removes RNs living abroad and interprovincial duplicates. The CIHI file is not anamalgamation of provincial/territorial data; removing RNs simultaneously registered inmultiple jurisdictions provides more accurate national totals. Provincial/territorial datawill include RNs with multiple registrations; and,

� Many jurisdictions �clean� the data at year-end. After the registration period has ended,PTRAs have an opportunity to investigate and correct potential data entry errors. Thismay result in fewer �not stated� values in the provincial/territorial figures than in theCIHI figures.

Comparisons between different data sources lend support and confirmation to trendsobserved in the data analysis. For registered nursing data, comparisons may be madebetween RNDB data and data from Statistics Canada�s Labour Force Survey (LFS), as eachsource is able to report the number of RNs in Canada.

The LFS is a monthly household survey that is representative of the Canadian non-institutional population 15 years of age and older. The LFS provides a useful comparisonfor RNDB data because of its different collection methodology; whereas the RNDB collectsdata from each RN registering to practise, the LFS is a survey, and its results areextrapolated from a representative national sample.

The RNDB reports 232,412 RNs employed in nursing in Canada in 2000; similarly, the LFSreports (based on an average of 12 months of data) 231,800 RNs in Canada. Each figurerepresents an increase of approximately 1.5% from 1999 totals.

Appendix B

Population Estimates


Registered Nurses Database B�1

Table B-1 Statistics Canada Population Estimates by Province/Territory, Canada,1994 and 1998

Note: Please refer to the methodological notes for a full description of the terms "Rural" and "Urban" as usedin this analysis.

Source: Statistics Canada, Demography Division, Population Estimates Section.

Counts % Counts %

Nfld. 322,483 56.1 252,345 43.9 574,828P.E.I. 60,992 45.6 72,699 54.4 133,691N.S. 360,441 38.9 565,881 61.1 926,322N.B. 365,551 48.7 385,391 51.3 750,942Qué. 1,607,559 22.3 5,599,743 77.7 7,207,302Ont. 1,632,916 15.1 9,194,585 84.9 10,827,501Man. 368,641 32.8 755,211 67.2 1,123,852Sask. 438,211 43.4 571,474 56.6 1,009,685Alta. 698,080 25.8 2,006,824 74.2 2,704,904B.C. 573,847 15.6 3,107,903 84.4 3,681,750Y.T. 8,517 28.3 21,530 71.7 30,047

N.W.T. 22,686 56.4 17,562 43.6 40,248Nun. 24,909 100.0 0 0.0 24,909

Canada 6,484,833 22.3 22,551,148 77.7 29,035,981

Total1994 Rural Urban

Counts % Counts %


N.W.T. 22,371 55.0 18,305 45.0 40,676Nun. 26,908 100.0 0 0.0 26,908

Canada 6,627,703 21.9 23,620,246 78.1 30,247,949Source: Statistics Canada

Total1998 Rural Urban


B�2 Registered Nurses Database

Table B-1a Statistics Canada Population Estimates by Province/Territory, Canada,1999 and 2000

Note: Please refer to the methodological notes for a full description of the terms "Rural" and "Urban" as usedin this analysis.

Source: Statistics Canada, Demography Division, Population Estimates Section.

Counts % Counts %


N.W.T. 22,636 54.4 18,990 45.6 41,626Nun. 28,149 100.0 0 0.0 28,149

Canada 6,665,926 21.7 24,084,161 78.3 30,750,087Source: Statistics Canada

1998 Rural UrbanTotal

Counts % Counts %


N.W.T. 22,229 54.7 18,443 45.3 40,672Nun. 27,443 100.0 0 0.0 27,443

Canada 6,645,953 21.8 23,847,480 78.2 30,493,433

1994 Rural UrbanTotal

Appendix C

Registered Nursing Contact Information


Registered Nurses Database C�1

Registered Nursing Contact Information

Provincial/Territorial Regulating Authorities

Newfoundland and Labrador:Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador55 Military Road, Box 6116St. John's, NF A1C 5X8Tel: 709-753-6040Fax: 709-753-4940Email: [email protected]: www.arnn.nf.ca

Prince Edward Island:Association of Nurses of Prince Edward Island137 Queen Street, Suite 303Charlottetown, PEI C1A 4B3Tel: 902-368-3764Fax: 902-628-1430Email: [email protected]: www.iwpei.com/nurses/

Nova Scotia:College of Registered Nurses of Nova ScotiaSuite 600, Barrington TowerScotia Square, 1894 Barrington St.Halifax NS B3J 2A8Tel: 902-491-9744Fax: 902-491-9510Email: [email protected]: www.rnans.ns.ca

New Brunswick:Nurses Association of New Brunswick / Association des infirmières et infirmiers duNouveau-Brunswick165 Regent StreetFredericton, NB E3B 3W5Tel: 506-458-8731Fax/télécopieur: 506-459-2838Email/Courriel: [email protected]: www.nanb.nb.ca


C�2 Registered Nurses Database

Québec:Ordre des infirmières et infirmiers du Québec4200, boul. Dorchester OuestMontréal, QC H3Z 1V4Tel: 514-935-2501 / 1-800-363-6048Fax/télécopieur: 514-935-1799Email /Courriel: [email protected]: www.oiiq.org

Ontario:College of Nurses of Ontario101 Davenport RoadToronto, ON M5R 3P1Tel: 1-800-387-5526 / 416-928-0900Fax: 416-928-5607Email: [email protected]: www.cno.org

Manitoba:College of Registered Nurses of Manitoba647 Broadway AvenueWinnipeg, MB R3C 0X2Tel: 204-774-3477Fax: 204-775-6052Email: [email protected]: www.marn.mb.ca

Saskatchewan:Saskatchewan Registered Nurses' Association2066 Retallack StreetRegina, SK S4T 7X5Tel: 306-359-4200Fax: 306-525-0849Email: [email protected]: www.srna.org

Alberta:Alberta Association of Registered Nurses11620 - 168 StreetEdmonton, AB T5M 4A6Tel: 780-451-0043Fax: 780-452-3276Email: [email protected]: www.nurses.ab.ca


Registered Nurses Database C�3

British Columbia:Registered Nurses Association of British Columbia2855 Arbutus StreetVancouver, BC V6J 3Y8Tel: 604-736-7331Fax: 604-738-2272Email: [email protected]: www.rnabc.bc.ca

Yukon:Yukon Registered Nurses Association204-4133 Fourth AvenueWhitehorse, YT Y1A 3T3Tel: 867-667-4062Fax: 867-668-5123Email: [email protected]: none

Northwest Territories/Nunavut:Northwest Territories Registered Nurses AssociationBox 2757Yellowknife, NWT X1A 2R1Tel: 867-873-2745Fax: 867-873-2336Email: [email protected]: www.nwtrna.com

Other Registered Nursing Associations

Canadian Nurses Association50 DrivewayOttawa, ON K2P 1E2Tel: 1-800-361-8404Fax: 613-237-3520Web site: www.cna-nurses.ca

Appendix D

Project Participants:Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada


Registered Nurses Database D�1

The Nursing Practice in Rural and Remote Canada research project was launched in May of2001. Its aim is to describe and examine the nature of registered nursing practice inprimary care, acute care, community health, continuing care (home care), and long-termcare settings within rural and remote Canada.

The study is funded by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation and third partyco-sponsors: the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Regional Partnership Co-sponsorship Program, the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research, the NursingResearch Fund, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, the Nova Scotia HealthResearch Foundation, the Government of Nunavut, the Saskatchewan Department ofEconomic & Co-operative Development, the Alberta Heritage Foundation for MedicalResearch, and the British Columbia Rural & Remote Health Research Institute based atUNBC. The project is also being undertaken with the enthusiastic moral and in-kind supportof the provincial and territorial nursing associations and with the assistance of theCanadian Institute for Health Information.

The study participants include:

Research Team

Lead Principal InvestigatorMartha MacLeod, University of Northern British Columbia

Co-Principal InvestigatorsJudith Kulig, University of LethbridgeNorma Stewart. University of SaskatchewanRoger Pitblado, Laurentian University

Co-InvestigatorsKathy Banks, University of Northern British ColumbiaCarl D�Arcy, University of SaskatchewanDorothy Forbes, University of SaskatchewanSandra Kioke, University of Northern British ColumbiaGinette Lazure, Université LavalRuth Martin-Misener, Dalhousie UniversityJennifer Medves, Queen�s UniversityDebra Morgan, University of SaskatchewanMichel Morton, Lakehead UniversityGail Remus, University of SaskatchewanBarbara Smith, University of SaskatchewanElizabeth Thomlinson, University of CalgaryCarolyn Vogt, University of ManitobaLela Zimmer, University of Northern British Columbia


D�2 Registered Nurses Database

Advisory Team

Principal Decision-MakerMarian Knock, British Columbia Ministry of Health

Co-AdvisorsDenise Alcock, University of OttawaMadge Applin, Newfoundland Centre for Nursing StudiesDonna Brunskill, Saskatchewan Registered Nurses AssociationElizabeth Cook, Aurora College, Northwest TerritoriesMarta Crawford, Manitoba Association of Registered NursesFran Curran, Yukon Health and Social ServicesJoyce England, Association of Nurses of Prince Edward IslandCecile Hunt, Saskatchewan North Central Health DistrictKathleen MacMillan, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareMaria MacNaughton, Health CanadaSuzanne Michaud, Québec Hospital AssociationRachel Munday, Nunavut Health and Social ServicesDebbie Phillipchuk, Alberta Association of Registered NursesFrancine Anne Roy, Canadian Institute for Health InformationMarlene Smadu, Saskatchewan HealthRoxanne Tarjan, Nurses Association of New BrunswickCathy Ulrich, British Columbia Northern Interior Regional Health BoardAdele Vukic, Dalhousie UniversityFjola Hart Wasekeesikaw, Aboriginal Nurses Association of Canada

Appendix E

Supplementary Maps

Registered Nurses Database E�1

RNs per 10,000 Population< 4040 - 6060 - 8080 - 100

100 + Sources: RNDB/CIHI and Statistics Canada

Map E-1 Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Census Division, Eastern Canada, 2000To assist interpretation, the maps presented in Appendix E are available in colour at:http://ruralnursing.unbc.ca and at www.cihi.ca

E�2 Registered Nurses Database

RNs per 10,000 Population< 4040 - 6060 - 8080 - 100

100 +


Map E-2 Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Census Division, Western Canada, 2000To assist interpretation, the maps presented in Appendix E are available in colour at:http://ruralnursing.unbc.ca and at www.cihi.ca



Sources: RNDB/CIHI and Statistics CanadaCMAs/CAs

Map E-3 Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Population by Census Division, Eastern Canada, 2000To assist interpretation, the maps presented in Appendix E are available in colour at:http://ruralnursing.unbc.ca and at www.cihi.ca




CMAs/CAs

Map E-4 Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Population by Census Division, Western Canada, 2000To assist interpretation, the maps presented in Appendix E are available in colour at:http://ruralnursing.unbc.ca and at www.cihi.ca




Map E-5 Percent Change in the Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Census Division,Eastern Canada, 1994 to 2000

To assist interpretation, the maps presented in Appendix E are available in colour at:http://ruralnursing.unbc.ca and at www.cihi.ca




Map E-6 Percent Change in the Total Number of RNs per 10,000 Population by Census Division,Western Canada, 1994 to 2000




Sources: RNDB/CIHI and Statistics CanadaCMAs/CAs

Map E-7 Percent Change in the Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Population by Census Division,Eastern Canada, 2000





CMAs/CAs

Map E-8 Percent Change in the Number of Rural RNs per 10,000 Rural Population by Census Division,Western Canada, 2000


Documents

Nursing in Rural and Small Town Canada 2000 - finalJan29-2. · Table 17 Profile of RNs Employed in Nursing in Rural and Small Town Canada, 1994 and 2000.....69. Supply and Distribution