Submissions on the single joint Otago-Southland district health board proposal narrowly favour the idea, with most opposition coming from Southland responses.
A report on the consultation carried out last November and early December was released yesterday, ahead of Otago and Southland chief executive Brian Rousseau's report and recommendation to the boards, which will not be revealed until next Tuesday.
The Otago board will be the first to discuss the issue at its first meeting for the year next Thursday.
The consultation report says those supporting the single board made up 54% of responses, with 34% opposed and 12% unsure.
More than half of the 212 responses came from Southland (62%) and half of those, 66 submissions, opposed the move.
The report said the response represented a "very small percentage" of the boards' catchment of about 300,000 people.
In Otago, a similar number of submissions favoured one board, with overall support at 83%.
Responses from staff, which made up nearly half of all submissions, followed the same pattern with 56% of the 62 submissions from Southland staff against the move and 82% of Otago's 38 in favour.
As indicated in responses at public meetings, concerns about the adequacy of representation for Southland and rural communities loomed large in the common themes against the merger, with about a quarter of public and staff replies mentioning this.
Worries included that smaller populations could lose out and a district health board elected at large across both regions could mean Otago members could dominate due to the province's larger population.
Related to this was concern that Southland Hospital could become reduced to what was termed a cottage hospital.
Some staff were concerned there would be a loss of services in Invercargill if people were allowed to choose where to seek treatment.
They were not in favour of giving patients an option because they would always choose the tertiary centre.
Among them was Southland surgeon Murray Pfeifer, who has worked in Southland for 34 years.
While he supported the closer collaboration between the two boards which could lead to more clinical co-operation, he considered a full merger would act to the "very strong detriment of Southland".
He was also among those who were critical of the consultation process, describing the consultation document as shallow and superficial with little or no data to support sweeping statements.
Some respondents came up with ideas for equitable representation which included equal representation of Otago and Southland on the board and a ward system or some form of rural representation.
Among the organisations which opposed the one DHB concept were the Invercargill City Council and Environment Southland.
The Southland District Health Board's Maori Health Unit also opposed the merger, although the initial version of the released report listed it as being unsure.
This was amended after the error was pointed out by the Otago Daily Times.
The unit was concerned a merger could reduce attention to the needs of Southland Maori because the populations of both provinces would be blended and addressed overall.
Other reasons for people's opposition to the proposal were the possible impact and costof staff and patient travel, that the estimated savings of $500,000 did not justify the upheaval, and that it was not worth merging if it did not mean more funding.
Organisations included in the list of 17 supporting the single board included the New Zealand Nurses Organisation, the Gore District Council, St John Southern Region and the Dunedin School of Medicine.
Those in favour were less prolific with their comments, but included in their views were that it was time to "just get on with it", it would reduce bureaucracy, improve recruitment and retention and give the boards the opportunity to standardise and improve services.