Rural and remote health is an Australia's health topic

Around 7 million people – or 27% of the Australian population – live in rural and remote areas, which encompass many diverse locations and communities (ABS 2024b). These Australians face unique challenges due to their geographic location and often have poorer health outcomes than people living in metropolitan areas. Data showed that people living in rural and remote areas have higher rates of hospitalisations, deaths and injury and also have poorer access to, and use of, primary health care services, than people living in Major cities.

Profile of rural and remote Australians

More Australians live in Major cities than in regional or remote areas. As at 30 June 2023, the proportion of Australians by area of remoteness was:

  • 73% in Major cities 
  • 18% in Inner regional areas 
  • 8.0% in Outer regional areas
  • 1.1% in Remote areas
  • 0.7% in Very remote areas (ABS 2024b).

First Nations people

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) people are more likely to live in urban and regional areas compared with more remote areas. However, the proportion of the total population who are First Nations increases with increasing remoteness from 2.2% in Major cities, to 30% in Remote and very remote areas based on 2021 Census estimates. In total, around 15% of First Nations people live in Remote and very remote areas of Australia (AIHW 2024d, AIHW 2025). 

For more information, see First Nations people and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework - Summary report.

Age

On average, people living in Inner regional and Outer regional areas are older than those in Major cities. For Inner regional areas, 22% of the population were aged 65 and over in 2023 compared with 16% in Major cities, 15% in Remote and 11% in Very remote areas (ABS 2024b).

Figure 1: Proportion of Australian population, by sex, age group and remoteness area, 2023

This graph butterfly chart shows that, on average, people living in Remote and very remote areas are younger than those in Major cities. The highest proportion of older Australians aged 65+ live in Inner regional and Outer regional areas.

This graph butterfly chart shows that, on average, people living in Remote and very remote areas are younger than those in Major cities. The highest proportion of older Australians aged 65+ live in Inner regional and Outer regional areas.

Age standardisation

Health status, outcomes and service use are associated with age. This means that comparisons between population groups can be confounded by differences in their age distributions. Age-standardised rates are often used to compare outcomes for populations with different age structures, such as remoteness areas. As the purpose of this page is to make comparisons between remoteness areas, age-standardised results have been used for health risk factors and chronic conditions, where possible. Unadjusted (crude) rates are available in the supplementary data tables and are often available in the referenced and/or linked reports.

Disability 

In 2022, there were an estimated 5.5 million Australians with disability (21% of the total population). A greater proportion of those living in Inner regional (27%), and Outer regional and remote areas (26%) of Australia reported having disability when compared with those living in Major cities (19%) (ABS 2022). 

People living in more remote areas may experience greater difficulties accessing health services due to variation in health service supply and geographical distribution. However, there is some evidence that these disparities are greater among people living with disabilities (AIHW 2024c). For more information, see Access to Health Care.

Education

Increasing levels of education is shown to have an overall positive effect on an individual’s life satisfaction, particularly through the indirect effects of improved income and better health (AIHW 2025e). Young people from rural and remote areas may need to move to metropolitan areas to study, and subsequently stay after completing their studies (Mackey 2019). The education levels of people living in rural and remote areas are also influenced by factors such as decreased study options, the skill and education requirements of available jobs and the earning capacity of jobs in these communities (Lamb and Glover 2014; Regional Education Expert Advisory Group 2019).

In 2024, people aged 20–64 living in rural and remote areas were less likely than those living in Major cities to have completed Year 12 or an equivalent qualification. Around 3 in 5 people living in Inner regional (62%), Outer regional (60%) and Remote areas (64%) had completed Year 12, compared with 4 in 5 people (80%) living in Major cities (ABS 2024; Figure 2). 

Similarly, a smaller proportion of people aged 20–64 living in Inner regional (25%), Outer regional (23%) and Remote areas (24%) had completed a bachelor’s degree or above, when compared with those living in Major cities (43%) (ABS 2024). 

Figure 2: People aged 20–64 with a bachelor's degree or higher/Year 12 or equivalent qualification, by remoteness area, 2024

The proportion or people with Year 12 or equivalent or a bachelor's degree or higher is higher in Major cities when compared to other remoteness areas. The proportion is similar in Inner regional, Outer regional and Remote areas. 

Source: ABS 2024

Employment and income

Employment underpins the economic output of a nation and enables people to support themselves, their families and their communities. Employment is also connected to physical and mental health and is a key factor in overall wellbeing (AIHW 2023).

In 2023, the proportion of people aged 16 and over who received unemployment payments increased with increasing remoteness. Those living in Very remote areas were 5 times as likely to be receiving unemployment payments as those living in Major cities (17% and 3.4%, respectively) (AIHW 2023b). This may be due to limited opportunities and access to work outside metropolitan areas, lower levels of educational attainment, and the smaller range of employment and career opportunities (Jobs and Skills Australia 2024).

People living in rural and remote areas also generally have lower incomes but pay higher prices for a range of goods and services (NRHA 2024). In 2019–20, Australians living outside capital cities had, on average, 15% less household income per week compared with those living in capital cities, and 22% less mean household net worth (ABS 2022a).

For more information, see Employment and unemployment and Income support payments for the working age population.

Health risk factors

Health risk factors such as smoking, overweight and obesity, diet, high blood pressure, alcohol consumption and physical activity can influence health outcomes and the likelihood of developing disease or health disorders.

Alcohol and other drugs 

The AIHW National Drug Strategy Household Survey (NDSHS) collects information on tobacco smoking, alcohol consumption and illicit drug use among the general population in Australia. Data from the 2022–23 NDSHS showed the proportion of people aged 14 and over who smoked tobacco daily increased with increasing remoteness:

  • 7.0% for those living in Major cities
  • 11% for those living in Inner regional and Outer regional areas 
  • 20% for those living in Remote and very remote areas. 

Since 2019, these proportions have declined slightly in all remoteness areas, except in Remote and very remote areas (AIHW 2024b).

In 2022, based on self-reported data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ National Health Survey (NHS) and after adjusting for age, it was estimated that people living in Inner regional and Outer regional and remote areas were more likely to engage in risky behaviours when compared with people living in Major cities. These included smoking and consuming alcohol at levels that put them at increased risk of alcohol-related diseases or injuries (Table S2; Figure 3). However, the proportion of people who used e-cigarettes daily was lower in Inner regional (2.2%) and Outer regional (2.5%) areas than in Major cities (3.9%) (AIHW 2024b).

For more information, see Alcohol, tobacco & other drugs in Australia and Use of alcohol and other drugs in Major cities, regional areas, and remote areas.

Figure 3: Prevalence of health risk factors among people aged 18 and over, by remoteness area and sex, 2022

For most risk factors, prevalence was similar across all remoteness areas, except current daily smoking and excessive alcohol consumption which was higher outside of Major cities.

For most risk factors, prevalence was similar across all remoteness areas, except current daily smoking and excessive alcohol consumption which was higher outside of Major cities.

Family, domestic and sexual violence

Family, domestic and sexual violence is a major health and welfare issue in Australia. The ABS 2021–22 Personal Safety Survey estimated that 4.2 million people aged 18 years and over (21%) have experienced violence, emotional abuse, or economic abuse by a cohabiting partner since the age of 15 (ABS 2023c). People living in regional and remote areas may experience geographic and social isolation, and have limited access to services, which can restrict their ability to seek specialist support (AIHW 2025g).  

In 2016, women living outside Major cities were 1.5 times as likely to have experienced partner violence than women living in Major cities (23% compared with 15%). For men living outside of Major cities, 6.6% experienced partner violence compared with 5.9% of men living in Major cities (AIHW 2019). 

However, in the 2021–22 Personal Safety Survey, the proportion of women aged 18 and over who reported they had experienced violence by a cohabiting partner in the last two years was similar in Major cities (1.8%), Inner regional (1.6%) and Outer regional and remote areas (1.7%) (ABS 2023d).  

In 2023–24, the rate of family and domestic violence hospitalisations for people living in Very remote areas was 41 times as high when compared with people living in Major cities (841 per 100,000 hospitalisations compared with 21 per 100,000) (AIHW 2025g). 

For more information, see Factors associated with family, domestic and sexual violence.

Health status and outcomes

Chronic conditions

Chronic conditions are long-lasting and have persistent effects throughout a person’s life. They are becoming increasingly common and are influenced by a wide variety of factors (AIHW 2024f). 

In 2022, based on data from the NHS and after adjusting for age: 

  • People living outside Major cities had higher rates of arthritis, and mental and behavioural conditions compared with those living in Major cities.  
  • Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was higher in Outer regional and remote areas compared with Major cities (Table S3; ABS 2023; Figure 4).

Prevention and delay of chronic conditions increases quality years of life and decreases costs to the health care system. People living outside Major cities have lower usage of chronic disease management services, which may be due to greater distances and drive times to services, availability of services, or the health and age of the population within an area (AIHW 2022). 

For more information, see Chronic disease, The ongoing challenge of chronic conditions in Australia and Chronic conditions.

Figure 4: Prevalence of selected chronic conditions, by remoteness area, 2022

The prevalence of most chronic conditions was similar across remoteness areas, but rates of arthritis and mental and behavioural conditions were higher outside of Major cities. 

The prevalence of most chronic conditions was similar across remoteness areas, but rates of arthritis and mental and behavioural conditions were higher outside of Major cities. 

Cancer

The age-standardised incidence rate of all cancers combined was highest in Inner regional and Outer regional areas in 2012–2016 (513 and 512 per 100,000 people, respectively), slightly lower in Major cities and Remote areas (both 487 cases per 100,000 people), and lowest in Very remote areas (422 cases per 100,000 people) (AIHW 2021a). The incidence rate for all cancers combined for Very remote areas may be influenced by lower population screening participation rates, later detection of cancer and lower life expectancy due to death from other causes (Fox and Boyce 2014). While Very remote areas had the lowest age-standardised incidence rate for all cancers combined, these areas had the highest incidence rate for cervical cancer, liver cancer, cancer of unknown primary site, uterine cancer and head and neck cancers (including lip) (AIHW 2021a).

In the period 2012–2016, people living in Major cities had the highest 5-year observed survival for all cancers combined (63%) compared with 61% in Inner regional areas, 60% in Outer regional and Remote areas and 55% in Very remote areas (AIHW 2021a).

For more information, see Cancer in Australia 2021 and Cancer statistics for small geographic areas.

Burden of disease

Burden of disease refers to the quantified impact of living with and dying prematurely from a disease or injury and is measured using disability-adjusted life years (DALY). One DALY is equivalent to one year of healthy life lost.

In 2018, after adjusting for age, the total burden of disease and injury in Australia increased with increasing remoteness (AIHW 2021). The total burden was lowest in Major cities (174 DALY per 1,000 population) rising to 200 and 204 for Inner and Outer regional areas, respectively, and 244 DALY per 1,000 population in Remote and very remote areas. This pattern was mostly driven by fatal burden (years of life lost due to premature death). 

Figure 5 shows that for some chronic conditions, the burden of disease increased with increasing remoteness, such as coronary heart disease, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, lung conditions and suicide and self-inflicted injuries. The burden of disease decreased with increasing remoteness for anxiety, back pain and dementia (Table S4; AIHW 2021). 

For more information, see Burden of disease. Burden of disease estimates by remoteness area will be revised in the Australian Burden of Disease Study 2026.

Figure 5: Health burden for major diseases and injuries, by remoteness area, 2018

The most pronounced difference is the DALY rate for coronary heart disease, which increased from 9.5 DALY per 1,000 population in Major cities to 21.3 DALY per 1,000 population in Remote and very remote areas.

Note: Directly age standardised to the 2001 Australian Standard Population.

Source: AIHW 2021; Table S4.

Deaths

People living in rural and remote areas are more likely to die at a younger age than their counterparts in Major cities. They have higher mortality rates and higher rates of potentially avoidable deaths than those living in Major cities.

In 2023, age-standardised mortality rates increased as remoteness increased for males and females (AIHW 2025h; Table 1).

Compared with all of Australia:

  • people living in Inner or Outer regional areas had a mortality rate 1.1 times as high
  • people living in Remote areas had a mortality rate 1.2 times as high
  • people living in Very remote areas had a mortality rate 1.5 times as high.

Males had a higher mortality rate than females in all remoteness areas.

For more information, see Mortality Over Regions and Time (MORT) books.

Table 1: Median age at death, mortality rate, and rate ratio (relative to all of Australia), by sex and remoteness area, 2023
MeasureMajor citiesInner regionalOuter regionalRemoteVery remote
Median age at death (Males)80.279.377.874.266.4
Age-standardised rate (deaths per 100,000) (Males)576644678695829
Rate ratio (Males)1.01.11.11.11.4
Median age at death (Females)85.284.183.177.570.0
Age-standardised rate (deaths per 100,000) (Females)411463476494665
Rate ratio (Females)1.01.11.11.11.5

Note: Rate ratios are calculated as the age-standardised rate for the geographic area of interest divided by the age-standardised rate for the reference group (all of Australia).

Source: AIHW 2025h.

Leading causes of death 

In 2021–2023 the leading causes of death varied by remoteness area (AIHW 2025f; Figure 6).

  • Coronary (ischaemic) heart disease (CHD) was the leading cause of death for men across all remoteness areas. However, after adjusting for age, the rate of deaths due to CHD was 1.9 times higher in Very remote areas when compared with Major cities.
  • Dementia was the leading cause of death for women in Major cities, Inner regional and Outer regional areas. In Remote and Very remote areas, CHD was the leading cause of death among women. 
  • Unlike in less remote areas, land transport accidents and suicide were among the top 10 leading causes of death in Remote and Very remote areas. 

For information about leading underlying causes of death by remoteness area and sex, see Deaths in Australia.

For more information about suicide and self-harm by region, see Suicide & self-harm monitoring. For information about injury hospitalisations by remoteness, including transport injuries, see Injury in Australia.

Figure 6: Leading underlying cause of death by remoteness area, 2021–2023

In 2021–23, coronary heart disease was the most common underlying cause of death across all remoteness areas except Major cities. In Major cities, the most common cause of death was Dementia including Alzheimer's disease (9.9% of deaths).

In 2021–23, coronary heart disease was the most common underlying cause of death across all remoteness areas except Major cities. In Major cities, the most common cause of death was Dementia including Alzheimer's disease (9.9% of deaths).

Potentially avoidable deaths

The rate of potentially avoidable deaths – deaths under the age of 75 from conditions that are potentially preventable through individualised care and/or treatable through primary or hospital care – increased as remoteness increased. In 2023, 48% of deaths among those aged under 75 years were potentially avoidable (AIHW 2025f). 

In 2021–2023, the rate of potentially avoidable deaths increased with increasing remoteness for males and females (Table S6; Figure 7). After adjusting for age, and comparing with Major cities, the rates of potentially avoidable deaths were:

  • 1.3 times as high in Inner regional areas for both males and females
  • 1.5 times as high in Outer regional areas for males and females
  • 1.8 and 2 times as high in Remote areas for males and females respectively
  • 2.4 and 3.4 times as high in Very remote areas for males and females respectively (AIHW 2025f).

Across all remoteness areas, the leading cause of potentially avoidable deaths was CHD. The rate was 2.2 times as high in Remote areas and 3.6 times as high in Very remote areas when compared with Major cities (AIHW 2025f). 

The second leading cause of potentially avoidable deaths in Very remote areas was diabetes, with rates 6.7 times higher than Major cities. Among females, the rate was 4.6 times higher in Remote areas and 12 times higher in Very remote areas compared with Major cities.

For more detailed information about the leading causes of potentially avoidable deaths by remoteness area, see Deaths in Australia and Mortality Over Regions and Time (MORT) books.

For information on examples and definitions of potentially avoidable deaths, see Potentially avoidable deaths

Figure 7: Potentially avoidable deaths by sex and remoteness area, 2021–2023

Bar chart shows increasing rates of potentially avoidable deaths with increasing remoteness. This is consistent for both males and females. Within all remoteness areas, males have a higher rate of potentially avoidable deaths than females. 

Source: AIHW 2025f; Table S6

Life expectancy

Estimates of life expectancy at birth represent the average number of years that a newborn baby can expect to live, assuming current age-specific death rates are experienced through their lifetime. In 2021–2023, life expectancy at birth was between 0.5 and 8.6 years lower for those living outside of metropolitan areas (Greater capital city) (ABS 2024a; Table 2).

Table 2: Life expectancy by sex for Greater capital city and Rest of state 2021–2023
RegionMalesFemalesPersons
Greater Sydney82.386.084.1
Rest of NSW79.483.981.6
Greater Melbourne82.386.084.1
Rest of Vic.79.383.981.5
Greater Brisbane81.185.083.0
Rest of Qld80.184.682.3
Greater Adelaide81.285.383.2
Rest of SA80.184.382.1
Greater Perth82.386.384.3
Rest of WA79.483.581.4
Greater Hobart80.684.382.4
Rest of Tas.80.083.981.9
Greater Darwin79.585.082.2
Rest of NT71.975.573.6

Source: ABS 2024a.

Access to health care

People living in remote and very remote areas can face barriers to accessing care, due to challenges such as distance and drive time to services, limited infrastructure, fewer specialist services and greater costs associated with accessing services, such as accommodation and lost income. The additional time and transportation costs to access health care services also means people in remote and very remote areas may delay access to preventive and primary health care and rely on hospital care to have their needs met (NRHA 2023).

Primary health care

Primary care is often a person’s first contact with the health system and plays a key role in preventing, detecting, diagnosing and managing chronic conditions (AIHW 2024f). However, the general practitioner (GP) services attendance rate varies significantly by remoteness area in Australia (AIHW 2023a). 

Medicare claims data from 2023–24 showed that the number of non-hospital non-referred attendances per person, such as GP visits, were lowest in Remote communities (MM 6) and Very remote communities (MM 7) (4.1 and 3.3 per person respectively) (Table 3). However, bulk-billing rates were highest in Very remote communities (MM 7) (88%), lowest in Regional centres (MM 2) (74%) and similar across all other MMM areas (Table 3).

Table 3: Medicare GP Non-Referred Attendances by Modified Monash (MM) category, 2023–24
Modified Monash (MM) categoryTotal number of GP Non-referred AttendancesNumber of GP Non-referred Attendances per personNumber of Bulk-billed GP Non-referred AttendancesPer cent Bulk-billed GP Non-referred Attendances
Metropolitan areas (MM 1)120.1 million6.392.6 million77%
Regional centres (MM 2)14.7 million6.010.9 million74%
Large rural towns (MM 3)10.4 million6.28.1 million78%
Medium rural towns (MM 4)6.5 million6.45.2 million80%
Small rural towns (MM 5)10.9 million6.08.7 million80%
Remote communities (MM 6)1.2 million4.1943,00078%
Very remote communities (MM 7)698,0003.3615,00088%

Note: The number of GP non-referred attendances per person was calculated using the Estimated Resident Population at 30 June 2023.

Source: Department of Health, Disability and Ageing 2024.

Cancer screening

Participation in bowel, breast and cervical cancer screening varies with remoteness and is consistently lower for people living in Very remote areas.

  • In 2022–2023, the bowel cancer screening participation rate for people aged 50–74 was highest for people living in Inner regional areas (44%) and lowest for people living in Very remote areas (25%) (AIHW 2025i). In 2023, the proportion of positive screening results increased with remoteness, from 5.7% in Major cities to 8.2% in Very remote areas.
  • In 2022–2023, the breast cancer screening participation rate for females aged 50–74 was highest in Outer regional (54%) and Inner regional areas (55%), and lowest for participants living in Very remote areas (36%) (AIHW 2025d).
  • In 2019–2023, after adjusting for age, the cervical screening participation rate for females aged 25–74 years declined across remoteness areas, from 64% in Major cities to 61% in Outer regional areas and 56% in Very remote areas (AIHW 2024a).

For more information, see Cancer screening.

Telehealth

Telehealth means patients see their doctor by video conference or talk to them by telephone. Use of telehealth can improve access to timely health care services among Australians living in rural and remote areas, who otherwise may need to travel long distances to access care. Telehealth services can be used for diagnosis, treatment and prevention (Department of Health, Disability and Ageing 2025c).

Telehealth programs were introduced in Australia to improve access to medical specialists for people living in Remote and Very remote locations. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Australian Government added several Medicare-subsidised items to help deliver telehealth services via phone or video call across all areas of Australia.

At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021–22, people in Major cities had the highest rate of telehealth attendances with referred medical specialists, with 22.9 attendances per 100 people. In 2022–23, the number of services was substantially lower (12.9 services per 100 people). Outer regional, Remote and Very remote areas experienced a much shallower decline in the rate of telehealth services for specialist attendances over this period, and use of video services has increased over this period (Table S7; Figure 8). This indicates the ongoing benefit of these services to people in regional and remote areas (AIHW 2024e). 

For more information about use of telehealth for specialist attendances, see Referred medical specialist attendances. 

For information about Digital Health, including telehealth, see Digital Health.

Figure 8: Rate of telehealth services for referred medical specialist attendances, by remoteness area, 2019–20 to 2022–23

Telehealth use was highest in 2021–22 across all remoteness areas. The rate of telehealth services for referred medical specialist attendances declined most steeply in 2022-23 in Major cities. 

Total

Notes

  1. Total includes video conference and telephone appointments.
  2. Specialist attendances delivered via telehealth to patients who had a Medicare-subsidised referred medical specialist consultation. 
  3. Excludes attendances without a referral in place, or where the patient receives the attendance outside Medicare and does not claim any Medicare benefit. In addition, services to admitted public patients in hospitals are not eligible for any Medicare benefits and are not captured. 
  4. Remoteness area of usual residence is based on the patient's area of residence (provided at Statistical Area Level 2).   

Source: AIHW analysis of MBS data maintained by the Australia Government Department of Health, Disability and Aged Care; ABS 2011; ABS 2023b; Table S7

Health workforce

Australians living in rural, Remote and Very remote communities generally have poorer access to health care than people in Regional centres and Metropolitan areas and may need to travel long distances or relocate to attend health services or receive specialised treatment (AIHW 2024). 

The clinical FTE rate indicates the full-time equivalent number of health professionals working clinical hours relative to the population. In 2023 the clinical FTE per 100,000 population was:

  • highest in Metropolitan areas (MM 1) for many health professionals including specialists (all doctors other than GPs who require a referral from another doctor), occupational therapists, dentists, pharmacists, physiotherapists, psychologists
  • higher in Large rural towns (MM 3) compared with Metropolitan areas (MM 1) for GPs, optometrists, podiatrists and nurses and midwives
  • highest in Medium rural towns (MM 4), Remote (MM 6) and Very remote (MM 7) communities for GPs
  • lowest for GPs and specialists in Small rural towns (MM 5) (Department of Health, Disability and Ageing 2025) (Figure 9).

For clinical FTE rates for health professionals by area for 2016–2023, see Table S8.

Although the FTE rate for GPs is highest in Very remote communities, care should be taken in interpreting the data, as work arrangements in these areas have the potential to be more complicated. For example, there may be poor differentiation between general practice for on-call hours, and GPs may fill roles that would be taken by specialists or hospital doctors in more metropolitan and regional locations. This may impact the accuracy of statistics on GP supply and distribution (Department of Health, Disability and Ageing 2025a; Walters et al. 2017). 

For more information, see Health workforce.

Figure 9: Employed health professionals, clinical full-time equivalent (FTE) rate, by Modified Monash (MM) category, 2016–2023

In 2023, Small rural towns (MM5) had the lowest clinical FTE rate across most health professions. This was consistent from 2016 to 2023.

In 2023, Small rural towns (MM5) had the lowest clinical FTE rate across most health professions. This was consistent from 2016 to 2023.

Hospitalisations

In 2023–24, the number of hospital separations per 1,000 people was similar for Major cities and regional areas. Hospital separation rates in Remote and Very remote areas were higher, with people living in Very remote areas hospitalised at almost twice the rate as people living in Major cities and those in Remote areas at 1.3 times the rate, with no improvement since 2013–14 (AIHW 2025a; Figure 10).

Figure 10: Hospitalisations in public and private hospitals, by remoteness area of usual residence, 2013–14 to 2023–24

Line chart displays the number of hospital separations per 1,000 population from 2013–14 to 2023–24, by remoteness area. The rate of separations was consistently highest among those living in Very remote areas. The rate in Major cities, Inner and Outer regional areas was comparable.

Notes 

  1. Separations per 1,000 population are reported as directly age-standardised rates based on Australian population as at 30 June of the year of interest, the Australian population as at 30 June 2001 was used as the reference population.
  2. Remoteness of area of usual residence is based on the patient's area of residence (provided at Statistical Area level 2)

Source: AIHW 2025a; Table S9

People in Major cities have higher rates of rehabilitation care hospital separations compared with people living in other remoteness areas (AIHW 2025b; Table S10; Figure 11). In 2023–24, there were 17 separations per 1,000 population living in Major cities compared with 8.9 for Inner regional areas, 5.9 for Outer regional areas, 3.2 for Remote areas and 3.5 for Very remote areas. In part, this may reflect the distribution of private hospitals across remoteness areas, as private hospitals accounted for 82% of rehabilitation care separations (AIHW 2025b).

For more information, see Hospitals.

Figure 11: Hospitalisations for rehabilitation care in public and private hospitals, by remoteness area of usual residence, 2013–14 to 2023–24

Line chart displays the number of hospital separations for rehabilitation care per 1,000 population from 2013–14 to 2023–24, by remoteness area. The rate of separations decreased with increasing remoteness and was similar in Remote and Very remote areas. 

Notes

  1. Separations per 1,000 population are reported as directly age-standardised rates based on the Australian population as at 30 June of the year of interest. The Australian population as at 30 June 2001 was used as the reference population.
  2. Separations for which care type was reported as Rehabilitation.
  3. Remoteness of area of usual residence is based on patient's area of usual residence (provided as Statistical Area level 2).

Source: AIHW 2025b; Table S10

Potentially preventable hospitalisations

Potentially preventable hospitalisations (PPH) are for conditions where hospitalisation could have potentially been prevented through the provision of appropriate individualised preventative health interventions and early disease management, usually delivered in primary care and community-based settings. The rate of PPH increases with increasing remoteness and is highest in Very remote and Remote areas (AIHW 2025c; Table S11; Figure 12).

When compared with Major cities, the rate of PPH in 2023–24 was:

  • slightly higher in Inner regional and Outer regional areas (1.1 and 1.2 times as high, respectively)
  • 1.8 times as high for people living in Remote areas
  • 2.8 times as high in Very remote areas (AIHW 2025c).

Figure 12: Potentially preventable hospitalisations, by remoteness area of usual residence, 2013–14 to 2023–24

The rate of separations for potentially preventable hospitalisations was consistently highest among those living in Very remote areas and declined with decreasing remoteness. 

Notes

  1. Separations per 1,000 population are reported as directly age-standardised rates based on the Australian population as at 30 June of the year of interest. The Australian population as at 30 June 2001 was used as the reference population.
  2. Remoteness of area of usual residence is based on the patient's area of residence (provided as Statistical Area level 2 for most jurisdictions)

Source: AIHW 2025c; Table S11

Key data gaps and data improvement activities

Data gaps

Significant data gaps persist in rural and remote health reporting. This includes: 

  • Limited reporting for smaller geographic areas. Where geographic data are available, it may not be published at lower levels of geography due to concerns about confidentiality and statistical validity. This obscures the significant variation in factors such as health status, access to and use of health services, and health workforce gaps within remoteness areas.
  • Survey data, such as the National Health Survey and Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers, which are used to monitor key population health statistics, are conducted infrequently, exclude very remote areas, and lack sufficient sample to report at small levels of geography. 
  • Limited information about priority populations living in regional, rural and remote areas. Priority populations include First Nations Australians, people with disability, culturally and linguistically diverse populations, children and youth, and older Australians.
  • A lack of national, standardised primary health care data. Primary health care is usually the first point of contact in the health system. The lack of standardised primary health care data limits our ability to examine health status, community-based service use and models of care, and how these vary between geographic areas. 
  • National person-centred linked data. The AIHW is working with data custodians to include additional datasets into the National Health Data Hub and expand its geographic coverage. However, it does not currently include hospitalisation data from the Northern Territory or Western Australia, which is a significant gap in understanding health and health care in remote and very remote Australia.  

Data improvement activities

Emerging data initiatives present valuable opportunities to enhance rural and remote health reporting to improve understanding of health status, support more targeted health planning and assist in policy development. For example: 

  • Leveraging existing AIHW reporting by incorporating more detailed geographic breakdowns.
  • Where possible, adopting appropriate sampling techniques to ensure survey data can more accurately represent smaller geographies and population groups. Where this is not possible, or cost prohibitive, there may be opportunities to make use of linked data to capture health information for these populations.
  • The development of the National Primary Health Care Data Collection (NPHCDC), which will initially capture general practice data with plans to expand to include nursing and allied health in the future. This national, standardised dataset will provide insight into community-based care across Australia, and a greater understanding of variation within regional, rural and remote areas. 
  • Increasing access to enduring, person-centred, linked administrative datasets, such as the National Health Data Hub and Person Level Integrated Data Asset (PLIDA). These data assets bring together multiple health and welfare data sources and provide a more comprehensive understanding of health outcomes and health service use across the life course.

Where do I go for more information?

For more information on rural and remote health, see:

For more on this topic, see Rural and remote Australians.

Data