Search

Copyright of Urban Policy & Research is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To describe patterns of use of the available Government-subsidised mental health services among people living in Australian residential aged care facilities. Methods: A retrospective population-based trend analysis was conducted, including all non-Indigenous people living in an Australian facility between 2012 and 2017. Adjusted incidence proportions and trends were estimated for four groups of mental health services. Results: The use of Medicare-subsidised mental health services was very low overall. The proportion of residents who accessed primary care mental health services increased from 1.3% in 2012/2013 to 2.4% in 2016/2017, while psychiatry service use increased from 1.9 to 2.3%. Claims for clinical psychology increased from 0.18 to 0.26%, and claims for a registered psychologist, occupational therapist or social worker rose from 0.45 to 1.2%. People with dementia were less likely than people without dementia to access all services aside from psychiatry services. Conclusions: Less than 3% of residents accessed funding subsidies for mental health services and people with dementia experienced pronounced barriers to service access. Mental health care is a pillar of the publicly-funded health system in Australia, and low use of these services among aged care residents indicates a need for organisational and policy changes to improve access. What is known about the topic? People living in residential aged care facilities report very high rates of mental health conditions, including depression and anxiety. What does this paper add? We demonstrate very low use (<3%) of Government-funded mental health services among people living in residential aged care facilities in Australia, with only small increases in use over time. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners should routinely assess the mental health needs of people living in residential aged care and refer for in-reach mental health services where needed, noting that facility staff are usually not trained for this role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Residential aged-care facilities in Australia emerged as the high-risk setting the COVID-19 outbreaks due to community transmission. The vulnerable aged-care residents of these facilities suffered due to low hospital transfers and high mortality and morbidity rates. This study aimed to monitor and report the burden of COVID-19 in residential aged-care facilities across Australia and the impact of hospital transfer policies on resident hospitalisation during the first year of the pandemic. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study by collecting data from weekly aged-care outbreak reports published by open sources and official government sources between 1st March and 20th November 2020. A comprehensive line list of outbreaks was created using open-source data. The line list included the name of the facility, location, COVID-19 cases among residents, & staff, resident hospitalisations, mode of transmission, number of resident deaths, and state policies involving resident hospitalisation. We also searched the websites of these facilities to collect data on their COVID-19 policies for the residents, staff, and visitors. Statistical analyses were performed on the data obtained. Results: 126 aged-care COVID-19 outbreaks were identified in Australia during the study period. The incidence rate of COVID-19 infections among aged-care residents in Australia was (1118.5 per 100,000 resident population) which is 10 times higher than the general population (107.6 per 100,000 population). The hospitalisation rate for aged-care residents in Australia was 0.93 per 100,000 population. The hospitalisation rate of aged-care residents in Victoria was 3.14 per 100,000 population despite having the highest COVID-19 cases. Excluding South Australia, all states followed ad-hoc case-by-case hospital transfer policies for aged-care residents. Conclusion: This study documented a higher risk of COVID-19 infection for aged-care residents and workers but found low hospitalisation rates among residents across Australia. The hospitalisation rates in Victoria were higher than the national average but low when considering the COVID-19 infection rates in the state. The hospitalisation rates could have been impacted due to the state hospital transfer policies at that time. Immediate transfer of infected residents to hospitals may improve their survival and reduce the risk of infection to the other residents, as healthcare settings have more advanced infection control measures and are well-equipped with trained staff and resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Community Health Program of the 1970s was an attempt to introduce a national community health model. However, although community-based health care is an important element of the health systems of all Australian states and territories, the definition of what constitutes a 'community health service' in Australia today is not clear. Methods: A search of government websites failed to provide information about the types and characteristics of services that would be included in the term. Therefore, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 key informants in roles with responsibility for primary and community health services from health departments in all Australian states and territories. Questions explored their understanding of community health services as they operated in their jurisdiction. The study adopted a blended inductive and deductive orientation within a qualitative descriptive method. Results: There was little consistency in the way community health services were described across jurisdictions. The defining attributes of a 'community health centre' described by an international peak body did not apply to services in the majority of jurisdictions in Australia. Victoria was more aligned with the description than other jurisdictions, with organisations defined through legislation and a separate funding stream to support aspects of service delivery. Conclusions: Those designing and implementing national health system programs and reforms need to be aware that terms, such as 'community health', do not mean the same thing across jurisdictions; attempts to create consistency have to recognise differences that will affect new initiatives, as well as the spread of successful policies and programs from one jurisdiction to another. Without a consistent description, it is difficult to explore the current role of community-based health care across Australia in improving access to health care. 'Community health' is an important element of Australian health systems and recognised as such in national policy. Interviews with 13 key informants in roles with responsibility for primary and community health services from health departments in Australian states/ territories found little uniformity in the way community health was described. Inconsistencies in the use of the term 'community health' and the complexity of the multi-jurisdictional context need to be acknowledged when considering the design and implementation of national health system programs and reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent rapid growth in urban areas and the desire to create liveable neighbourhoods has brought about a renewed interest in planning for compact cities, with concepts like the 20-minute neighbourhood (20MN) becoming more popular. A 20MN broadly reflects a neighbourhood that allows residents to meet their daily (non-work) needs within a short, non-motorised, trip from home. The 20MN concept underpins the key planning strategy of Australia's second largest city, Melbourne, however the 20MN definition has not been operationalised. This study aimed to develop and operationalise a practical definition of the 20MN and apply this to two Australian state capital cities: Melbourne (Victoria) and Adelaide (South Australia). Methods: Using the metropolitan boundaries for Melbourne and Adelaide, data were sourced for several layers related to five domains: 1) healthy food; 2) recreational resources; 3) community resources; 4) public open space; and 5) public transport. The number of layers and the access measures required for each domain differed. For example, the recreational resources domain only required a sport and fitness centre (gym) within a 1.5-km network path distance, whereas the public open space domain required a public open space within a 400-m distance along a pedestrian network and 8 ha of public open space area within a 1-km radius. Locations that met the access requirements for each of the five domains were defined as 20MNs. Results: In Melbourne 5.5% and in Adelaide 7.6% of the population were considered to reside in a 20MN. Within areas classified as residential, the median number of people per square kilometre with a 20MN in Melbourne was 6429 and the median number of dwellings per square kilometre was 3211. In Adelaide's 20MNs, both population density (3062) and dwelling density (1440) were lower than in Melbourne. Conclusions: The challenge of operationalising a practical definition of the 20MN has been addressed by this study and applied to two Australian cities. The approach can be adapted to other contexts as a first step to assessing the presence of existing 20MNs and monitoring further implementation of this concept. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neospora caninum has been implicated as a sporadic cause of abortion and perinatal deaths in sheep flocks globally. However, its significance as a reproductive pathogen for sheep in Australia remains unknown. The aims of this study were to (i) determine the seroprevalence of N. caninum in Australian breeding ewes and (ii) examine if natural exposure to N. caninum is associated with poor reproductive performance of primiparous ewes in southern Australia. Thirty flocks of primiparous ewes (aged 1–2 years old at lambing) from 28 farms in three states (Western Australia, South Australia and Victoria) were monitored between mating and lamb marking. Blood samples were also collected from multiparous mature ewes (aged 3 years or older) at each farm. Seroprevalence for anti-N. caninum IgG using indirect ELISA was determined for a subset of primiparous ewes that were predominantly determined to be pregnant and subsequently failed to rear a lamb (n = 1279) and randomly selected mature multiparous ewes with unknown reproductive status (n = 558). Neopsora caninum apparent seroprevalence was 0.16% (95% confidence interval 0.03%, 0.5%) in primiparous ewes, with seropositivity identified in two ewes from farms located in South Australia and Victoria. There was no evidence of seropositivity in mature ewes with apparent seroprevalence 0% (0%, 0.45%). These findings suggest that N. caninum infection was not widespread in primiparous ewes or mature multiparous ewes on these farms, and exposure to N. caninum infection was unlikely to explain abortion and perinatal mortalities observed for primiparous ewes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]