Search

Background: Influencing the general public response to pandemics is a public health priority. There is a prevailing view, however, that the general public is resistant to communications on pandemic influenza and that behavioural responses to the 2009/10 H1N1 pandemic were not sufficient. Using qualitative methods, this paper investigates how members of the general public respond to pandemic influenza and the hygiene, social isolation and other measures proposed by public health. Going beyond the commonly deployed notion that the general public is resistant to public health communications, this paper examines how health individualism, gender and real world constraints enable and limit individual action., Methods: In-depth interviews (n = 57) and focus groups (ten focus groups; 59 individuals) were conducted with community samples in Melbourne, Sydney and Glasgow. Participants were selected according to maximum variation sampling using purposive criteria, including: 1) pregnancy in 2009/2010; 2) chronic illness; 3) aged 70 years and over; 4) no disclosed health problems. Verbatim transcripts were subjected to inductive, thematic analysis., Results: Respondents did not express resistance to public health communications, but gave insight into how they interpreted and implemented guidance. An individualistic approach to pandemic risk predominated. The uptake of hygiene, social isolation and vaccine strategies was constrained by seeing oneself 'at risk' but not 'a risk' to others. Gender norms shape how members of the general public enact hygiene and social isolation. Other challenges pertained to over-reliance on perceived remoteness from risk, expectation of recovery from infection and practical constraints on the uptake of vaccination., Conclusions: Overall, respondents were engaged with public health advice regarding pandemic influenza, indicating that the idea of public resistance has limited explanatory power. Public communications are endorsed, but challenges persist. Individualistic approaches to pandemic risk inhibit acting for the benefit of others and may deepen divisions in the community according to health status. Public communications on pandemics are mediated by gender norms that may overburden women and limit the action of men. Social research on the public response to pandemics needs to focus on the social structures and real world settings and relationships that shape the action of individuals.

Background: Visiting services address the problem of workforce deficit and access to effective primary health care services in isolated remote and rural locations. Little is known about their impact or effectiveness and thereby the extent to which they are helping to reduce the disparity in access and health outcomes between people living in remote areas compared with people living in urban regions of Australia. The objective of this study was to answer the question "What is the impact or effectiveness when different types of primary health care services visit, rather than reside in, rural and remote communities?"Method: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature from established databases. We also searched relevant websites for 'grey' literature and contacted several key informants to identify other relevant reference material. All papers were reviewed by at least two assessors according to agreed inclusion and exclusion criteria.Results: Initially, 345 papers were identified and, from this selection, 17 papers were considered relevant for inclusion. Following full paper review, another ten papers were excluded leaving seven papers that provided some information about the impact or effectiveness of visiting services. The papers varied with regard to study design (ranging from cluster randomised controlled trials to a case study), research quality, and the strength of their conclusions. In relation to effectiveness or impact, results were mixed. There was a lack of consistent data regarding the features or characteristics of visiting services that enhance their effectiveness or impact. Almost invariably the evaluations assessed the service provided but only two papers mentioned any aspect of the visiting features within which service provision occurred such as who did the visiting and how often they visited.Conclusions: There is currently an inadequate evidence base from which to make decisions about the effectiveness of visiting services or how visiting services should be structured in order to achieve better health outcomes for people living in remote and rural areas. Given this knowledge gap, we suggest that more rigorous evaluation of visiting services in meeting community health needs is required, and that evaluation should be guided by a number of salient principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The connection between choice, control and health is well established in the literature on the social determinants of health, which includes choice and control of vital health and social services. However, even in the context of universal health and social care schemes, the ability to exercise choice and control can be distributed unequally. This paper uses the case of the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) to examine these issues. The NDIS is a major policy reform based on an international trend towards personalisation in social care. It aims to increase choice and control over services and supports for people who have or acquire a permanent disability, thereby boosting citizen empowerment and improving health and social outcomes.Methods: The research is a structured review of empirical evidence on the administration and outcomes of the NDIS to identify how social factors constrain or enable the ability of individuals to exercise choice within personalised care schemes.Results: We show how social determinants of health at the individual level can collide with the complexity of policy delivery systems to entrench health inequalities.Conclusion: Many social policy reforms internationally focus on improving empowerment through enabling choice and control. However, if administrative systems do not take account of existing structural inequities, then such schemes are likely to entrench or grow social inequality. Our research indicates that more attention must be given to the design of policy delivery systems for personalisation schemes to ensure health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical trials are necessary for the advancement of cancer treatment and care, however low rates of participation in such trials limit the generalisability of findings. The objective of this study was to examine the proportion of medical oncology outpatients in Australia who are invited and consent to participate in clinical trials and the factors associated with this.Methods: A sample of adult medical oncology patients was recruited from three Australian cancer treatment centres. Consenting patients completed two paper-and-pencil surveys; one at the time of consent and another approximately 1 month later. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted to explore factors associated with invitation and participation in a trial.Results: Thirty-eight percent (n = 146) of the 383 participants reported they had been invited to take part in a clinical trial. Of those invited, 93% reported consenting to participate in the trial, with the majority indicating that they did not regret their decision (89%). Treatment centre and time since diagnosis were significantly associated with being invited to take part in a clinical trial. None of the factors examined were associated with clinical trial consent rates.Conclusions: The main barrier to clinical trial participation is not being invited to do so, with the centre the patient attends being a modifiable determinant of whether or not they are invited. Increasing the resources available to treatment centres to ensure all patients are offered participation in trials they are eligible for may help to improve rates of trial participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Waiting lists for treatment are common in outpatient and community services, Existing methods for managing access and triage to these services can lead to inequities in service delivery, inefficiencies and divert resources from frontline care. Evidence from two controlled studies indicates that an alternative to the traditional "waitlist and triage" model known as STAT (Specific Timely Appointments for Triage) may be successful in reducing waiting times without adversely affecting other aspects of patient care. This trial aims to test whether the model is cost effective in reducing waiting time across multiple services, and to measure the impact on service provision, health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction.Methods/design: A stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial has been designed to evaluate the impact of the STAT model in 8 community health and outpatient services. The primary outcome will be waiting time from referral to first appointment. Secondary outcomes will be nature and quantity of service received (collected from all patients attending the service during the study period and health-related quality of life (AQOL-8D), patient satisfaction, health care utilisation and cost data (collected from a subgroup of patients at initial assessment and after 12 weeks). Data will be analysed with a multiple multi-level random-effects regression model that allows for cluster effects. An economic evaluation will be undertaken alongside the clinical trial.Discussion: This paper outlines the study protocol for a fully powered prospective stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (SWCRCT) to establish whether the STAT model of access and triage can reduce waiting times applied across multiple settings, without increasing health service costs or adversely impacting on other aspects of patient care. If successful, it will provide evidence for the effectiveness of a practical model of access that can substantially reduce waiting time for outpatient and community services with subsequent benefits for both efficiency of health systems and patient care.Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12615001016527 . Approved 15/9/2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Access to rural health services is compromised in many countries including Australia due to workforce shortages. The issues that consequently impact on equity of access and sustainability of rural and remote health services are complex.Discussion: The purpose of this paper is to describe a number of approaches from the literature that could form the basis of a more integrated approach to health workforce and rural health service enhancement that can be supported by policy. A case study is used to demonstrate how such an approach could work. Disjointed health services are common in rural areas due to the 'tyranny of distance.' Recruitment and retention of health professionals in rural areas and access to and sustainability of rural health services is therefore compromised. Strategies to address these issues tend to have a narrow focus. An integrated approach is needed to enhance rural workforce and health services; one that develops, acknowledges and accounts for social capital and social relations within the rural community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Inequity in access to palliative care and symptom relief is one of the greatest disparities in global health care. A public health approach to palliative care is underpinned by the social view of health that puts an emphasis on equity, community engagement and empowerment, a supportive policy environment, and social determinants of health. Consideration of equity in policy is critical so that it can be translated into equitable services. However, the extent to which Australian palliative care policies incorporate equity, and their translation into actual actions have not been extensively examined. This exploratory study aimed to examine the extent to which Australian federal and South Australian palliative care policies and initiatives incorporate equity, and to identify evidence gaps and research priorities that can inform equity-oriented policies and practices. Methods: We reviewed 25 federal and South Australian documents relating to palliative care published over the past five years. Documents were publicly available from the Australian Government Department of Health website. We used search filter 'Palliative care and end of life' in the Department's resource webpage to narrow down documents to those with palliative care and end of life in the document title and/or content. The initial list was discussed in the research team to ensure key documents are included. Supplementary to document review, we conducted five key informant interviews in South Australia. Interview participants were people from the policy sector, not-for-profit organisations, a funding body and a community advocacy group in South Australia who had knowledge and experience in palliative care policy, practice and research. Documents and interview transcripts were imported into the NVivo 12 software for coding. Content analysis looked at the frequencies of relevant terms, and then more detailed inductive and deductive thematic analysis was undertaken which was guided by an equity action framework. Results: Overall, we found incremental steps forward over the past few years in considering equity in Australian palliative care policies. Key themes that emerged from the study were: identifying population groups experiencing poor access to palliative care, strategies to improve access including increased awareness of palliative care, flexible models of care, building workforce capacity, and the need for greater investment in palliative care research and evaluation. Strategies to address systemic barriers as well as social, political and cultural determinants of inequity was less evident in policy documents. There was little evidence of actions to engage and empower communities. Interviews provided insight on key areas of priority for future palliative care research. Conclusions: Achieving the goal of equity in palliative care for all is complex and multifaceted. It requires strong commitment and actions at policy and government level but also in clinical practice, workforce planning and capacity building, community engagement and research investment to implement and evaluate public health approaches to palliative care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 is disproportionally affecting the poor, minorities and a broad range of vulnerable populations, due to its inequitable spread in areas of dense population and limited mitigation capacity due to high prevalence of chronic conditions or poor access to high quality public health and medical care. Moreover, the collateral effects of the pandemic due to the global economic downturn, and social isolation and movement restriction measures, are unequally affecting those in the lowest power strata of societies. To address the challenges to health equity and describe some of the approaches taken by governments and local organizations, we have compiled 13 country case studies from various regions around the world: China, Brazil, Thailand, Sub Saharan Africa, Nicaragua, Armenia, India, Guatemala, United States of America (USA), Israel, Australia, Colombia, and Belgium. This compilation is by no-means representative or all inclusive, and we encourage researchers to continue advancing global knowledge on COVID-19 health equity related issues, through rigorous research and generation of a strong evidence base of new empirical studies in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper reports on a qualitative study of lay knowledge about health inequalities and solutions to address them. Social determinants of health are responsible for a large proportion of health inequalities (unequal levels of health status) and inequities (unfair access to health services and resources) within and between countries. Despite an expanding evidence base supporting action on social determinants, understanding of the impact of these determinants is not widespread and political will appears to be lacking. A small but growing body of research has explored how ordinary people theorise health inequalities and the implications for taking action. The findings are variable, however, in terms of an emphasis on structure versus individual agency and the relationship between being 'at risk' and acceptance of social/structural explanations.Methods: This paper draws on findings from a qualitative study conducted in Adelaide, South Australia, to examine these questions. The study was an integral part of mixed-methods research on the links between urban location, social capital and health. It comprised 80 in-depth interviews with residents in four locations with contrasting socio-economic status. The respondents were asked about the cause of inequalities and actions that could be taken by governments to address them.Results: Although generally willing to discuss health inequalities, many study participants tended to explain the latter in terms of individual behaviours and attitudes rather than social/structural conditions. Moreover, those who identified social/structural causes tended to emphasise individualized factors when describing typical pathways to health outcomes. This pattern appeared largely independent of participants' own experience of advantage or disadvantage, and was reinforced in discussion of strategies to address health inequalities.Conclusions: Despite the explicit emphasis on social/structural issues expressed in the study focus and framing of the research questions, participants did not display a high level of knowledge about the nature and causes of place-based health inequalities. By extending the scope of lay theorizing to include a focus on solutions, this study offers additional insights for public health. Specifically it suggests that a popular constituency for action on the social determinants of health is unlikely to eventuate from the current popular understandings of possible policy levers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Asthma remains a leading cause of illness, where primary care can assist to reduce hospitalisations through prevention, controlling acute episodes, and overall management of asthma. In Victoria, Asthma hospitalisations were as high as 3.1 hospitalisations per 1000 population in 1993-94. The primary aims of this study are to: determine if changes in asthma hospitalisations have occurred between 2010 and 2015; determine the key factors that impact asthma hospitalisation over time; and verify whether rural and urban asthma hospitalisations are disparate. A secondary aim of the study is to compare 2010-2015 results with asthma data prior to 2010.Methods: Hospital separation data from 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2015 were obtained through the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset and other agencies. Data included sex, age, Local Government Area, private or public patient, length of stay, and type of discharge. Asthma and predictor variables were analysed according to hospital separation rates after adjusting for smoking and sex. Hierarchical multiple regression examined the association between asthma and predictor variables.Results: During the study period, 49,529 asthma hospital separations occurred, of which 77.5% were in metropolitan hospitals, 55.4% hospital separations were aged 0-14 years, and 21.7% were privately funded. State-wide hospital separations were 1.85 per 1000 population and were consistently higher in metropolitan compared to rural areas (1.93 vs 1.64 per 1000 population). When data among metropolitan adults aged 15 and over were analysed, an increase in the proportion of smokers in the population was reflected by an increase in the number of hospital separations (Adj OR 1.035). Further, among rural and metropolitan children aged 0-14 the only predictor of asthma hospital separations was sex, where metropolitan male children had higher odds of separation than metropolitan females of the same age (Adj OR 4.297). There was no statistically meaningful difference for separation rates between males and females in rural areas.Conclusions: We demonstrated a higher overall hospital separation rate in metropolitan Victoria. For children in metropolitan areas, males were hospitalised at higher rates than females, while the inverse was demonstrated for children residing in rural areas. Therefore, optimising asthma management requires consideration of the patient's age, gender and residential context. Primary health care may play a leading role in increasing health literacy for patients in order to improve self-management and health-seeking behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Refugees have significant unmet health needs. Delivering services to refugees continues to be problematic in the Australian healthcare system. A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the literature exploring refugee perceptions of the Australian healthcare system was performed. Methods: Titles and abstracts of 1610 articles published between 2006 and 2019 were screened, and 147 articles were read in full text. Depending on the type of study, articles were appraised using the Modified Critical Appraisal Tool (developed by authors), the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, or the JBI Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews. Using QSR NVivo 11, articles were coded into descriptive themes and synthesised into analytical themes. An explanatory model was used to synthesise these findings. Confidence in the review findings were assessed with GRADE-CERQual approach. Results: The final synthesis included 35 articles consisting of one systematic review, 7 mixed methods studies, and 27 qualitative studies. Only one study was from a regional or rural area. A model incorporating aspects of engagement, access, trust, and privacy can be used to explain the experiences of refugees in using the Australian healthcare system. Refugees struggled to engage with health services due to their unfamiliarity with the health system. Information sharing is needed but this is not always delivered effectively, resulting in disempowerment and loss of autonomy. In response, refugees resorted to familiar means, such as family members and their pre-existing cultural knowledge. At times, this perpetuated their unfamiliarity with the broader health system. Access barriers were also encountered. Trust and privacy are pervasive issues that influenced access and engagement. Conclusions: Refugees face significant barriers in accessing and engaging with healthcare services and often resorted to familiar means to overcome what is unfamiliar. This has implications across all areas of service provision. Health administrators and educators need to consider improving the cultural competency of staff and students. Policymakers need to consider engaging communities and upscale the availability and accessibility of professional language and cultural supports. Research is needed on how these measures can be effectively delivered. There is limited research in remote areas and further evidence is needed in these settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]